Delph

(I agree with the sentiment, but probably not a good idea to try and reclaim "degenerates" as a genuine insult from the fascists; it still has some pretty bad connotations)

But that's fair enough that it'll make things worse. I mean I haven't read the article, hopefully the resources would go to having smaller classes and more teachers or something, which also helps

Nah I don't disagree I guess. maybe it's just cause of where I did school in Europe; we had three different programs for the three years before high school, ostensibly by "intelligence" and expected career path but obviously it just segregated people by race and class. And I still hated being there

Our problem isn't a lack of competent folks. And unless they actually manage to fuck up the internet for good, education is free. How bad the policy is should be judged on how much unhappier to even be there will it make the kids, and intuitively I'd say "not much unhappier".

I'm surprised you would care about this. I don't think it's a good thing to be clear, like it does indicate something ideologically bad, but. School is still oppressive bullshit, no matter how personalized it is. What are we losing here ? Slightly more competent people in ten years ?

I didn't know that so thanks, but wouldn't it be pretty trivial to like, associate them back to roman characters and read them as such ? To be clear I'm not saying disabled people have it easy, I'm saying it really wouldn't be hard to make it a lot easier for them and people just don't

That's really fair enough. I kinda feel like it's the software's fault though to be honest. How complicated would it be to automate that stuff so that it wouldn't be awful for folks who can't see well ? I'm no programmer, but I have some idea of how it works and I'm guessing, relatively simple.

It's 𝓌𝑒𝒾𝓇𝒹 𝓉𝒽𝒶𝓉 𝓅𝑒𝑜𝓅𝓁𝑒 𝒹𝑜𝓃'𝓉 𝒹𝑜 𝓉𝒽𝒶𝓉 𝒶𝓁𝓁 𝓉𝒽𝑒 𝓉𝒾𝓂𝑒, but I guess I'm too used to tumblr

ⓘ 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘸𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 and 𝘢 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵 love𝘳. 𝘗𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘳

The automated moderation that goes "this is misleading" based on, presumably, random keywords, is real tho.

Not really. I mean yeah the bluesky mods are shitty fascist assholes, that's established from how they treat Palestinians, but the "antifa terrorist" stuff was just written out by the guy, it's not actually a thing.

Okay so it's a bit. I'm somewhat reassured

The terrorist organisation shit has to be a bit. I'm honestly confused. If it isn't a bit from you, I wish so much harm upon everyone at bluesky; that would be like, straight up fascist collaboration, not that they haven't done it before but this would be another level, or at least another type

I am betting on the fierce little horrible goose every time

I have something close to, possibly that exact shirt and it might be too big but it is somewhat of an aesthetic. Dunno that it's your aesthetic, but it does look neat on me

This is pretty fucking cool and I like it

I didn't know about *that*. Holy shit is US christianity horrible.

Lmao dude yeah maybe but if you wanna take bets on which is going to come first I'll put it any amount of money on "general strike" against "religious rapture".

Ad hominem

Haha ! This is like that thing where you tell people "you're now breathing and blinking consciously" but for bad thoughts

I'm not sure what you mean, like obviously there was organized entertainment and religious things in the 19th century, occasional festivals and such, as far as I know. In Europe at least and presumably almost everywhere else ? I mean, you don't need a surplus of goods to party.

(but obviously that's because the metric isn't what I think it is, I know, but hopefully you get what I'm trying to mean by "this seems impossibly low for what we're describing")

Yeah individuals, but an entire society in 1800 ? If you told me that the average homo erectus lived off 3$ of value a day, it would still seem *very low* to me.

3$ a day thing is also confusing wrt how you value someone's time, but I guess then we'd get into stuff I'm not quite educated about enough to make a coherent objection I suspect

Wrt how to imagine things I would say tentatively there's another obvious difference in like, the price of labor for stuff like "services" ? If like musicians, actors, priests, doulas, etc (were doulas common throughout history ?) are also very "poor" then they'd also be cheap, the

Thanks for the answers ! Haven't gotten to that series yet but I will at some point !

But maybe I'm wrong but in any case, I don't think my point hinges on assuming a higher quality of life than they had, it's more of a value theory thing

Oh of course ! I assumed something like that, but presumably if you have only one set of clothes and shoes you'd still need materials and tools and ideally someone competent to repair them occasionally, that type of things that, assuming you'd have to purchase, would be tough on 3$ a day

I dunno, I have trouble sussing out what liberal economists actually *mean* when they give these numbers that seem to indicate that everyone in the past or elsewhere was or are, like, literally *impossibly* poor

the average person in 1800 wasn't living like a particularly unlucky homeless person, right ? They had a place to live, they could pay for some basic services, they had clothes they could replace, and these things alone would probably cost you like a grand a month alone in today money, so

Isn't that a bit of a misleading metric though ? Cause I'm no economist or historian, but in my head like 90$ a month is barely enough for food. It's not enough for a place to cook the food in or sleep, it's not enough to buy anyone's labor for anything, etc. It's... just food. But like,