I think a fundamental part of the reasons that Russia and the West cannot seem to escape a death-march to war is that Russia is so often conflated with the USSR. They are ideologically and politically distinct entities, even as much as some in the current state of Russia might wish for the old days.
> Russia and the West cannot seem to escape a death-march to war is that Russia is so often conflated with the USSR.
Do you think that invading your neighbours might be a contributing factor? We are in a thread about Russia shooting down an airliner, again. It’s pretty amazing to claim equal culpability here.
Russia legally declared itself a successor to USSR, took the UN seat, nuclear weapons, assumed debt and foreign assets, kept contacts with former communist allies like Cuba, so it’s not completely wrong. The topic of admission of Russia to NATO demonstrates this very well: Putin thought that Moscow is peer to Washington D.C. and needed special invitation (as if USSR resolved hostilities and wanted to partner with the Western bloc). NATO was treating him like any other country in Eastern Europe: apply and we will think about it — didn’t even bother to formally invite (IIRC Stoltenberg basically said in one of the interviews that even if the door was closed, the doorbell was working).
I‘d reserve the word „colony“ for its original meaning. USSR was a dictatorship, but not a colonial state. As a matter of fact it even prioritized the reduction of inequality between the republics of the union for several decades.
I‘d reserve the word „colony“ for its original meaning.
Which per Wikipedia is simply:
A colony is a territory subject to a form of foreign rule.
And which was a perfectly reasonable description of the situation in all the peripheral republics, as well as many constituent parts of the RSFSR itself.
The fact that it might have also provided subsidies to some of the republics at various times (when not withholding food and/or engaging in massive, violent repressive actions against them) is entirely irrelevant to this definition. Recall that the Western colonial powers always bragged about all the infrastructure they built in their colonies, and South Africa always tried to point out the subsidies it provided its Bantustans, etc.
It is not a reasonable description, because there was no „foreign“ rule in USSR. E.g. Russia was not ruling over Ukraine, both were equal parts of the union and both Russian and Ukrainian republican governments were subjects to the rule of the communist party and union government. Same as Germany not being a colony of EU or contemporary Australia not being a colony of the Commonwealth. Russian colonial empire has fallen in 1917-1922 during the civil war.
I think this is highly debatable, as even the European part of Russia hosted no less than dozens of different ethnicities. What you say makes little sense in the context of Russian and generally eastern European history.
Russia created the USSR as a legal framework to exert power over its neighbors. This was engineered by Stalin himself.
The most important feature of Russian culture is the sentiment that Russia is great but the world is conspiring to put it down. That's 100% the same in present day Russia as it was in the USSR. They're the same.
TBH, Porn is very clearly one of those things that there's basically no intrinsic added value to your life by consuming. Think cigarettes or fentanyl. Something, that, if most people could press a button to make themselves never ever use it again, they would.
> I wonder if we will start having people demand we go back to real human porn like in the good old days because it's just not natural to jack it to photo realistic catgirl dominatrices.
All that to say that, in the future, I think the more likely option is that people begin to treat it as a harmful, addictive substance and, that, hopefully, it becomes much more acceptable to seek out public treatment and support for using it.
I can make the case much more convincingly that food gives basically no intrinsic added value to your life and if most people could press a button to make themselves never eat again, they would.
Or to quote someone who said it much better than I:
If only it were as easy to banish hunger by rubbing my belly.
-Diogenes on public masturbation.
> I can make the case much more convincingly that food has basically no intrinsic added value to your life and if most people could press a button to make themselves never eat again, they would.
What nonsense is this? Do you only eat beans? Eating good food feels fantastic. Why would you want to give it up? Give me a button that lets me eat unlimited amounts of it without consequences, and I'll press that one instantly.
Good-tasting food is one of the most addictive things we have (also evidenced by the ever increasing percentage of people that are obese...)
> Eating good food feels fantastic. Why would you want to give it up?
That's exactly what self pleasuring mentioned above is though?
One could argue the same thing about food, if it was possible to eat a pill that would give you all the nutrients you need and would take your appetite they probably in theory should want to take that pill if they would press a button to stop wanting to self pleasure.
In fact, I think more people would likely want to get their food habits under control since this makes you gain weight and increases risks of certain illnesses. While self pleasuring can be potentially harmful in excess, I don't think it can be exactly as harmful as being addicted to food can be.
I could make the same argument for every form of entertainment. Sure, we should all be hunter gatherers and only have sex to procreate. It's not realistic.
I think what he says is we should be perfect users of our time, leading to some certain goal. Kind of like what AI could potentially be. So I think maybe we transition progressively from humans to AI to reach that perfectness. I'm sure it's possible to have AI that doesn't fall victim to those vices.
I think it's certainly an effective marketing campaign. I don't think it's an ARG. Too many things pass the smell test (referencing real companies, reposting real announcements from random accounts, etc). I bet you the countdown is when they come out of stealth. They're not going to use Black Mesa for their business (they're probably even called something else internally). It's all just a ploy to drum up attention.
Living life on auto pilot for certain points and moments actually is not the default way of existence, it's just the one many of us are most used to. I would highly recommend considering some mindfulness exercises or meditation. You'll begin to appreciate how much of the day you can live fully and attentively.
I highly disagree. Living life on auto pilot seem to be default. Its all over our biology on every level because 'mindfulness' takes a lot of scarce energy.
If I wanted to learn more about rigorous, non-elementary logic, do you have a recommended resource? I've taken a course in intro level probability theory which covered it generally and another course that built on it lightly but nothing rigorous and I am wooed by how concise things become in a logical form.
A Tour Through Mathematical Logic. You don't have to do any proofs. If you learn Propositional Logic and First Order Logic you'll already have most of the tools to invent the rest.
Not to be daft, but I can't imagine a single reason this is better for you career or labor organization-wise. If anything, it strikes me like that old quote:
Benjamin Franklin said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Not knowing the wages of those around you makes collective organization and bartering harder which is bad for workers in aggregate.
