pastacacioepepe

9 ms·

31.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Wait, you guys manage your finances?
32.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
> people who are happy to work for less I wonder where are these people. Do you know any? Would you be "happy" to work for less than minimum wage? > it creates an effect similar to communism Sure, gommunism is when minimum w
33.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
You can just buy powerups every 5 points you earn. The challenge is picking up the right combination of distance and speed. I don't know what power is for.
34.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Don't try to change history, learn from it. That's why it's important to stop the censorship of old media that doesn't fit modern standards.
35.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
kawaii
36.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
This kind of take is responsible for most geopolitical problems in the world.
37.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
What has also dramatically increased in the past 50 years is our productivity. Strangely, there has been a negative correlation between increased worker productivity and the amount of work required to support a family. I wonder where did al
38.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
I disagree. A family could be supported by a single income up until a few decades ago, not just in the US but in many countries. Today, often two incomes aren't enough for a family, even with families getting smaller since people tend
39.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
That would be <DoStuff args={...}><DoMoreStuff args={...} /></DoStuff> Still more readable than brackets hell like: DoStuff(DoMoreStuff(DoEvenMoreStuff()))
40.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
More like: <DoStuff args={...} />
41.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
I just spent the last few days building parts of a SPA with vanilla js. It was a great reminder of why React exists.
42.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
It's funny how nobody ever asks this question when the topic is military spending.
43.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
You don't need ads for that, it could just be art. You could enjoy vibrant artistic billboards without anyone trying to shove products down your throat. Ever thought of that?
44.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Germany is literally failing by its own hand. It killed its own industrial vocation and now it has to find alternatives. If that can be done it's still to be seen.
45.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Peak free democratic society is when scholars are afraid to speak truths inconvenient to the military complex & co.
46.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
"Cross-platform" Doesn't support Windows...
47.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
No. Given the current situation, as explained by the article, the moral thing to do is piracy, as a form of resistance at the very least.
48.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
> People should know that with open source software, they can rely on it not to disappear overnight if a company behind it vanishes. I've seen so many OSS projects abandoned because the maintainers couldn't find the time, given
49.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Yes I basically took verbatim what George Carlin said because it's one of the best points of view on "conspiracies" I've ever heard. I don't understand how did you get the impression that I was trying to be funny? I
50.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
You don't need a formal conspiracy when you have an elite with converging interests.
51.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Well why shouldn't China aspire to it? The US are the regional hegemon of the americas anyway, and we all know how much blood was spilled to accomplish that. Latin americans had to be subjugated with brutal anti-communist dictatorships
52.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Well we have so many wars going on anyway that I start to think the US are a pretty bad hegemon after all, if the goal of hegemony is to prevent conflicts. So I'll gladly keep some conflict but without Uncle Sam's oppression, than
53.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
I get your point of view, but I believe in a multipolar world where no single country can set the rules unilaterally. China has shown us that you can modernize a country and make it a global actor without imposing yourself as a hegemon, and
54.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
> There is absolutely nothing insinuating this perception in his comment. From OP: > Nukes mean that no nation-state will attack us openly. The Navy means that fucking with the US is a personal death sentence.
55.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
So how could China develop so much without that huge network of navy imposing their power globally? Why does China invest in peaceful commercial agreements (like Belt and road, which is still active btw) while the US invests in global milit
56.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
I wonder why do you have the perception that half the world would attack the US if they didn't have the largest military force. Why doesn't that happen to Austria, for example, or China? Perhaps "fucking" with the world
57.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Aren't the US in a safe region as well? They choose to spend a lot in military to project their force globally, not because they need to protect themselves.
58.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Austria, for one.
59.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
The arbitration was rigged in favor of the brits, then nullified after the truth came out in 1949.
60.
by pastacacioepepe 3y ago
Who decides if it's justified or not? The same countries that stole the land? The countries that waged countless unjustified wars of oppression based on lies? The countries who would now like to exploit that land?

More ›