Put it as your linkedin banner and see what happens

Looks like a truewagner bit, in which case it’s probably just nonsense

edit: yep, posted Jan 30 2024

So did you just miss all the material conditions for that famine you’re so concerned about, and the recovery from those conditions creating hope for NK’s future in contrast to SK, or are you just ignoring those parts so you can feel justified in your browbeating and characterization of the DPRK as a failed authoritarian state that is actually deserving of the previously mentioned conditions that caused the famine.

I don’t see how 34K people “defecting” in only one direction proves anything beyond the fact that economic conditions were pretty tough, which isn’t in dispute. Honestly that 0.13% is a pretty low figure if we’re supposed to believe that, on top of the economic hardship, their “authoritarian state” is so brutal as to be “worse than the disease” that has more and more resulted in south koreans having so little hope for the future that they’re ceasing to bring children into the world.

I wonder… do we have any kind of cablegore or tech gore community around here?

I wouldn’t call it a coincidence that western capitalist states, especially the US, would do some pretty heavy lifting to convince all of their people that any actually existing socialist state is, or would invariably become, a dictatorship and horrible to live under. Socialism and capitalism are fundamentally opposed to one another; pretty much every aspect of US governance and recognized media is fully controlled by, rabidly anti-communist, capitalists. They made absolutely sure of that in the red scare when they literally purged people from any position of influence simply for having any affinity for communism.

Idk I was 16 when that came out so actually high school level. Feel free to read the study yourself and correct me? Not sure what you’re skeptical about tbh but the belittling is really uncalled for. You asked for a source and I gave one.

The point of sources is so you can see where the person got their information and personally verify what was said, not to unequivocally prove things true or false based on there being a credible source at all.

They’re referring to this one back in 2016, where the caveat was that it had the same side effects as women’s birth control. Since the patient being prescribed isn’t the one who will experience negative health outcomes without the medications, the harm of those side effects was deemed by researchers (not the patients themselves) to be greater than the risk of impregnating someone else.

Other hornonal options have come out since then, though not on the consumer market afaik, like this hormonal gel and this pill.

More recently (like earlier this year) its been done without hormones by blocking a vitamin A metabolite that signals the production of sperm.

Uh, it’s been done. Multiple times.

First was this one back in 2016, but the caveat was that it had the same side effects as women’s birth control. Since the patient being prescribed isn’t the one who will experience negative health outcomes without the medications, the harm of those side effects was deemed by researchers (not the patients themselves) to be greater than the risk of impregnating someone else.

Other hornonal options have come out since then, though not on the consumer market, like this hormonal gel and this pill.

More recently its been done without hormones by blocking a vitamin A metabolite that signals the production of sperm.

You’re the one “politicising biology” by using it to dismiss this out of hand without even the most basic level of research or respect for the complexity of the topic.

Well technically you’re burning the same number of calories regardless of the time of day they were consumed, and two meals per day is a lot easier to keep at 2000 calories (as a rule of thumb - different for everybody) than three meals per day.

Personally I like to keep the digestive process dormant for as long as possible. Eating breakfast makes me hungrier throughout the day, so I end up snacking more than I otherwise would. I’ve never been a breakfast eater though so I’m pretty well wired not to break fast until lunch.

Edit: also heavy foods require rest and digestion that I do not have time for most mornings

aha, hence why I said optional. If you want/need it, have it. If you don’t want or need it, it doesn’t actually harm you in any universally applicable way to just wait until lunch.

No, actually. I think it would unironically be better to get all your calories and nutrition from bread, cheese, and sausage than to have a diet consisting of any variety of high-sugar, ultra-processed food.

Also breakfast is completely optional and its promotion as “the most important meal of the day” is a scam to sell more cereal, milk, and eggs. I will die on that hill.

No I’m serious! I’ve asked german friends and they just say it’s a hissing sound, which doesn’t tell me anything about mouth placement like it does to directly relate it to a more specific sound that I do know how to make. I’ve been casually learning for a few years though, so I probably wasn’t too far off in the first place.

I’m talking only about the ‘ch’ consonant in words like ich, milch, brauchen, that isn’t present in English. I realize there’s others that are exceptional, regional, case-by-case, and so on.

Videos don’t help me much but I appreciate the suggestion! My attention and comprehension is better when I can read at my own pace, formats with audio only add benefit when it comes with live feedback on what I’m doing. Unless I’m just getting the flow of the language of course, but that would just be a normal video on any topic.

“gross” and “grosser” are also both great compliments in the bedroom

Omg. Nobody’s ever been able to explain this properly to me. Also vielen Dank, du hast mir mein deutscher ch-Laut endlich freigeschaltet 😄

I’ll also need a fanny pack labeled “kockin pussi” to wear with it.

Less likely to slide around. That’s a lot of downward force (about 30g/oz) to have the base be larger than the surface it sits on.

It’s unshielded street lights for me. If you absolutely have to have a lit street/front yard/parking lot, fine, but the light should cover exactly that area and nothing more.

Well, we should be within our rights to ask our neighbors not to shine their lights directly through our bedroom windows at night, but unfortunately I realize that’s not the world we currently live in.

Astonishing, I could say this word for word to you, and it would be no less correct.

Bullshit. First of all, I haven’t asked you any questions dumbass, nor have i picked apart every last sentence and feigned ignorance on your meaning. Especially not on anything having to do with semantics. I would rather take you in good faith than debate the meanings of words.

In case you need me to define my terms, “good faith” and “understanding things” means comprehending what was said in aggregate and being able respond to the argument’s essential points, as the writer clearly intended them, rather than taking issue with individual sentences and words used. The latter is what’s known as “looking for an argument” and generally indicates you’re just going to waste time and be contrarian about anything I say.

Like I could say the sky is blue and you’ll find a way to disagree. Good faith is assuming that yes, I must know that the sky simply appears blue only in certain weather and times of day and I must be using a shorthand for the sake of the format. We’re not writing policy here, we’re conversing on Lemmy. Well, more like trading insults at this point.

I also wanted to let you know I’ve stopped reading your diatribes so you can stop writing them. I’ll read it later. I’m not a morning person and I have a lot of other things I’m doing with my time.

You keep saying that, but what does that even mean?

You don’t know what legitimacy is? Our political system rests on the consent of the people, because the people have the power of collective action when they are organized and/or believe en masse that the pathways by which the system claims to represent them are illegitimate (re: not actually representing them). The ruling class wouldn’t work so hard to obscure their undemocratic nature if that wasn’t the case. People don’t just accept those kinds of things, they resist and build power that does represent them. That is demonstrable throughout history.

Voting is not only going out to vote on the day of, its all the time you and I are spending now debating it, it’s workers canvassing for bourgeois candidates and 24/7 campaign ads planting establishment narratives into the public, its people participating in democratic offices when they could be doing grassroots organizing, it’s minimizing anything that doesn’t help your candidate like the economic conditions of the working class or the fact the candidate is massively aiding a genocide, it’s throwing your hands up when your team doesn’t win and callously telling your class members “FAFO” when you could be rallying on a shared struggle. It’s fucking toxic, and don’t you dare pretend you don’t know what I’m talking about with your “no u” ass arguments.

I don’t refuse to understand anything.

lmfao…

You know what, I was pretty clear and concise with my language. I said what I wanted to say. I’m not going to play point-for-point semantics with you because it would take me writing a several-pages-long essay to fully get my meaning across to someone who is clearly digging in their heels and not willing to take me in good faith. There’s also theorists out there who have already done a far better job than I would at that but I doubt you would care to read them.

In short; try putting your ego aside, re-reading what I said, and thinking super hard about it. I’ve already answered all of your questions, you’re just blocking them out at this point.

The point is I’m not going to lend you any legitimacy by picking up the shit and eating it myself, then turning at the people around me and asking why they aren’t eating it yet. I’m going to make it impossible for the shit peddler to hide their willingness and ability to abuse their power. If I’m eating shit either way, why would I do it in a way that makes it apparent to outsiders that I’m choosing to eat shit?

And no, when you scold people for not participating in a system, you are not just not “refusing to acknowledge its legitimacy”. You are promoting it, whether you care to or not. You are promoting the idea that everyone is choosing these options out of complete and true support of complete and unbiased information. This is especially true when people like you misrepresent and refuse to understand the arguments of those who choose to abstain or vote third party.

You are saying, “if you participate in this system, you could change the way things are going; and if you don’t, then you implicitly consent to it”, which is simply not true. Interestingly enough, you know how little power a person has when acting as an individual, which is why you minimize the reach of individuals when it comes to forms of political action other than voting, but you never apply it to the situation of voting where the ruling class has vast numbers of ways to influence people’s behaviors in whatever direction they want.

The change can only come when we have built the ability to move cohesively as a class, or a voting bloc if you will, that can either take power for itself or force our leaders to come to our table if they want our compliance. We can only build this by overcoming the resentment we hold for other members of our class, and putting one foot in front of the other; turning one person at a time towards the inner workings of the machine that the ruling class works so hard to hide. Not by stoking resentment and wasting our energy trying to manipulate an illegitimate system while we wait around for the movement to build itself.