thiagoharry

10 ms·

91.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Nice. I know that Brazil also built its first computer in 1972,it was called "Patinho Feio" ("ugly duckling"), had 4KB of memory and can be seen in this picture: https://gizmodo.uol.com.br/wp-content&#x2F
92.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
METAFONT is another macro language where everything is context sensitive because macros redefine everything. But METAFONT has a BNF grammar that describes the language after the macro expansion. Perhaps the problem with TeX are the catcodes
93.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
This is what I thought reading the article. To be fair, before reading the article I was expecting to find zero disrupted activities related with the west and its allies, but the fact that they disrupted that AI usage by Israel was a good s
94.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Isn't it what every country do? They produce commodities and export them. Western countries always did this. And as historically they had production capacity bigger than the rest of the world, they always produced more than could be pr
95.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
> But under capitalism any worker can start a company and own 100% of the stock in that company. You confuse legal possibility with real possibility. By the law and social norms, nothing forbids me from levitating in the street. Likewise
96.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
This is not true in Brazil. In Brazil, this is just an urban legend that several sites with ROMs spread in the 90s. By Brazilian law, you cannot download a ROM if you do not own a copy. It is possible that this rumor of 24hs is based in s
97.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Bullshit. A full share of an equity stock is much more than what a regular worker can afford. Here where I live a supermarket worker earns around 1500$, a full share of wallmart stock is around 2000$ (in local currency). Sure, there are inc
98.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Brazilian here that welcome a multi polar world. Here we had much worse experience dealing with Europe and USA than with China, which at least did not colonized our country, did not implanted a dictatorship, nor enslaved or tortured people
99.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Which is plainful wrong. Why the supermarket employers work as employers if they could own their own supermarket? Most people cannot own the relevant means of production, otherwise salaried work would be impossible and capitalism would not
100.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Workers do not own the fruits of their labor, in capitalism the fruits go to who owns the means of production.
101.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
If there is demand for house construction, people will build houses as a service. No land ownership, or even no housing ownership does not change this fact.
102.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Here in Brazil, we care, and we try to make amends: there are quotas for black people in universities, and our law is rigorous against manifestation of racism in social media, or in real life. I think it is expected that any place that ensl
103.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
Impressive, countries that are not capitalist, or not entirely capitalist, do not perform well on capitalist metrics, like "market freedom", or "economic freedom". Who could have guessed...?
104.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
> The labor theory of value leads to obvious problems theoretically and in practice. One critique is that it is possible to expend a large quantity of labor time on producing a good that ends up having little or no value. However, a clos
105.
by thiagoharry 2y ago
I agree that the solution is unrealistical. But not for this reason: the "no limit" is also arbitrary and people do not agree if this is right. Moreover, lots of people do not agree with regulations and norms in society, but socie
106.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
I agree that the term has a meaning in the dictionary, and colloquially people attribute a distinct and stronger meaning to it. But I think it becomes meaningless when we try to establish a more serious discussion about it. The origin of th
107.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
Your main objective appears to be inserting McCarthist ideology in the discussion. No, you do not censor Christianity because inquisition killed in the past. Nor do you censor capitalism because capitalists did mass killings in Indonesia. Y
108.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
The term IS meaningless, there is no clear distinction between "brainwashing", "education", "marketing", "propaganda" and "convincing". Except that the first term was coined as war propagand
109.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
> I use the fact that the constitution says something, and that lesser laws say other things that are in complete opposition to it. It is not an opposition! It is a way to handle conflicts between different rights! You are right: it is n
110.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
Flagged. Propaganda from far right extremists groups in Brazil. They are trying to create this narrative because they are being criminally prosecuted for crimes related with Bolsonaro's coup attempt. Several of them had social media co
111.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
> If a crime was committed, why wasn't it disclosed? It IS disclosed for the involved and accused parties. It is NOT disclosed to Twitter, who is not an involved party. Therefore, the information do not concern Twitter. > They ev
112.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
Sure, a law is unconstitutional because you say so. You are the appointed authority to interpret the law... All your comments show that you do not understand nothing about law, as you try to interpret it as some sort of formal algorithm or
113.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
That's not how our laws work...
114.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
> The law allows that under certain conditions, yes. Are these conditions being met? No. It’s being used as a political weapon in a crusade of the Supreme Court against certain political beliefs. Ok, now you need to prove that the condit
115.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional, because according with Brazilian laws, making apology to Nazism is illegal. Law 7.716/89, article 20. Nobody will previously censor you or check if you are commiting these crimes. But if yo
116.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
Unbased defamation, threats, and spread disinformation against elections and candidates, specially during elections always was illegal and subject to removal of content in Brazil. This even benefited Bolsonaro, when a person who posted a th
117.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
If you say that Lula is communist, you do not know what is communism. All your replies goes in this direction. I doubt a lot that someone was banned because just posted "he is socialist" (even if in fact he is more an adept of the
118.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
Nobody is being "censored". But brazilian law allows the removal of content in several circumstances. You just ignore the context that there was a network of coordinated accounts trying to disrespect electoral rules haring disinfo
119.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
No censoring is happening. Brazilian law allows content to be removed in case of hate speech, for criminal investigations, when it disrespect electoral rules, and so on.
120.
by thiagoharry 3y ago
"Silencing" in this case means following the law. Brazilian law allows content to be removed from Internet in case of crimes, hate speech, unbased defamation and for benefit of ongoing criminal investigation. Given that recently B

More ›