As long as it is open source, it doesn’t matter. Forks like Librewolf will disable it.

Either is fucking annoying. I don’t want to listen to your religious bullshit. Keep it inside the building.

The other kids with socials will be more likely to have mental health issues than the kid who doesn’t even if they get excluded from that group. There will be other group of kids with no socials as well. They will always find a tribe.

I don’t know about the west, but Indian schools don’t allow phones to be carried at all in their backpacks or pockets so maybe that’s why I might not know how serious this issue of isolation is in the west but in India it won’t be an issue because schools are 4-7 hrs long and after that parents usually send the kids to daycare, private tuitions, sports group, or any other hobby coaching that the kid is interested in. But some parents are absolutely stupid — they just give toddlers a phone or a pad just so they won’t have the hear the toddler crying.

You are assuming that kids read stuff on the Internet. They don’t (and even if they do, it is very little). Most of their screen time is social media or games.

you don’t like your kids spending too much time reading books?

Tue to some extent. Doing just one activity for a long time even if you love it is not good for developing your brain and the body as a kid. Even though they might not want to, I would encourage them to do more stuff as a parent.

Pretty vague but let me make the best out of it. I’d rather prefer my kids to physically explore the world and socialize rather than forming opinions of it and the society through an echo chamber on a 6 inch screen. It is more setting up to be a better human being (if not successful) than a failure. Most of social media is nothing more than following your favorite creators. Staying in contact with your friends is as easy as asking for their number or their home address so they can actually talk and socialize — you absolutely don’t need social media for it (you will only need, at most, Instant Messaging apps).

I mean there are other social activities — Sports, Reading clubs, etc. It is not as if the world didn’t socialize before social media. Bullying is not a new problem. Kids should be comfortable enough with their parents to share (which social media addiction doesn’t allow) that they are being bullied and not with random stranger online who doesn’t give a fuck anyways.

Although I agree that children should not be using social media at all, banning is not the solution. It should be for the parents to let their children use social media or not and if they should be using smartphones at all. If I were a parent I would give my kid a dumb phone just to call and sms (and maybe play snake). If they were to go on a trip, I would give a smartphone without any Appstore — just a dumb phone with parental restrictions, secure messenger like Signal (even Whatsapp if needed) to allow keep in touch with us and friends and any coordinators on that trip. If they were to use social media, it would only be on a Linux PC/Laptop.

Ikr I was in a similar debate. I just gave up. I was going to type this — usually said when a person just doesn’t like to find a middle ground and keeps screaming that they are right:

“ठीके बाबा. तूम्ही महान, आम्ही लहान. तुम्हाला चार पाय, आम्हाला दोन पाय. तुम्ही गाढव आम्ही माणूस.”

Translation: Ok bro. You are great, I am not. You have 4 legs, I have 2. You are a donkey, I am a human.

and yet people romanticise and justify that shit

Wait DLSS is about upscaling right? The “features” mentioned in OP’s post are about motion interpolation that makes the video seem to be playing at higher fps than the standard 24fps used in movies and shows.

Yeah cool I am stupid and useless. Now go take your solution and start a revolution. I will grab a popcorn. I have a life to live. 🤡

Sure capitalism has blood on its hands. But pointing to capitalist deaths doesn’t erase the catastrophic death tolls under communist regimes. It’s not a competition of “which ideology killed more,” it’s about which system actually functions without collapsing or requiring authoritarian control.

You can control capitalism with regulations. Communism historically only survives through force and collapses when markets are removed.

Yes, capitalism as a formal economic system is recent but the behaviours it’s built on aren’t. Competition, territorial control, hoarding for security, unequal outcomes all of these exist across nature (including humans). Lions fight for dominance, trees compete for sunlight, squirrels hoard food. Resource competition is older than any ideology.

Communism, on the other hand, assumes sustained large scale human cooperation without hierarchy, which has never existed stably either outside small tribes where scarcity was low and populations small. Scaling that to millions is where it collapses.

I’m not defending status quo. I support regulated capitalism with social welfare (centre-left). Capitalism needs checks, not abolition. Meanwhile Communism needs human behaviour to fundamentally change.

One system builds on instinct and incentives and the other demands we override them entirely.

That’s the difference in feasibility.

Praising few successes shouldn’t mean ignoring the other side i.e repression, shortages, lack of political freedom, stagnation, mass emigration and the fact that the USSR collapsed under its own economic structure.

We don’t have to choose between “uncritical communism” and “unchecked capitalism.” I’m centre left. I believe in a regulated market, social safety nets, labour rights, universal healthcare/education and checks on corporate power without abolishing private enterprise, scientific development or democracy. Capitalism with strong regulation has lifted millions from poverty too.

I’d rather live in a system that mixes market efficiency with social protection not one that sacrifices freedom and innovation for state control.

That’s my final comment and I won’t be reading anything further. Thanks.

Ok the USSR did pursue collective security through Litvinov, helped the Spanish Republic when most democracies stayed neutral, and tried several times to form an anti Nazi front before the West shut the door.

But at the same time, it’s hard to overlook that Molotov-Ribbentrop included a secret protocol dividing Eastern Europe and the Red Army did enter Poland in 1939 and annex those territories, followed by mass arrests and deportations. Even if those regions had large non Polish populations, the incorporation wasn’t a liberation but a was state occupation under Moscow.

So I think both things can be true: the USSR was strongly anti fascist in the 30s and tried to prevent war, and also, once diplomacy failed, it chose realpolitik by cutting a deal with Hitler, partitioning Poland, and expanding westward until 1941. The switch to the Allied side happened only after Barbarossa, not out of ideological unity but because Germany attacked.

I gave up on the comments below. I saw a lot of them with myopic vision and simplification of ideas. Their general idea is “Billionaires bad — Capitalism bad”. “Communism good — No Billionaires” while completely ignoring the fact it results in poor qualify of life lack of technological advancements, lack of freedom, doesn’t allow democracy to exist, and is just a utopian vision.

A pure left or a pure right ideology cannot exist when there are differences in opinions and ideals. We will always get something in between.

Whose space program caused significant dent in their already broken economy just to compete with the US. Won’t call that thriving.

Also China is not socialist. It is state a owned authoritarian capitalist country at best. It just calls itself is socialist but ranks no. 2 in total number of billionaires after the US.

And during both regimes’ socialist/communist eras, each country’s individual death toll, as a result of the economic policies and the authoritarian regimes, was more than the Nazi holocaust. I won’t even call that a thriving civilization let alone thriving of science.

Great job editing your comment after I post my reply.

I know more about nature than you clearly do. I was a professional wildlife photographer for a long time and have travelled to various places, studied a lot of animal behaviour and have been around people who are professionals in this field. So yeah… I won’t be taking shit from a person banging a keyboard in their mother’s basement.

Did I ever say capitalism is good? I am saying extreme ends of both economic systems are impossible if you want a free and thriving society.

I am not saying capitalism is great.

You guys ignore the very fact that socialism and communism is a failed system because they are so extreme in its nature. You have to make people believe that the opposite is worse. Capitalism is failing today because it is going towards an extreme, both are the 2 sides of the same coin. Having the best of both worlds is what will create balance. The capitalism from 50 years ago and capitalism today are vastly different. Because earlier we were either centre-right or centre-left.

technology and science would thrive and prosper in a cutthroat society where people kill and steal from each other over any tiny advantage they can get?

It definitely didn’t thrive under socialism.