<midfavila>
if food prices are so high people can't afford to eat then nobody is going to be able to work on account of starving
<midfavila>
and merchants will abso-fucking-lutely raise prices as high as they can possibly get away with even if it results in that, given, you know, human history
<midfavila>
anyway, "productivity" isn't even inherently good, in a vacuum
<midfavila>
rationing is a much better system than the market, despite its imperfections.
<midfavila>
like the american healthcare system is very productive when it comes to raising the GDP
<midfavila>
which is great if you're a united health shareholder or whatever
<midfavila>
but it's pretty fucking bad by any other metric
<midfavila>
i could go on
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: It is true that the market is sometimes not completely rational, I don't think this is the case most of the time though.
<midfavila>
i fail to see where rationing could not achieve the same result as the market, or better
<midfavila>
if the market was so good the militaries of the world would operate using internal markets
<midfavila>
there's a reason that individual squadrons don't bid for equipment from the quartermaster
<GalaxyNova>
yes, just like businesses don't apply free market principles within their own subdivisions. this is because the market tends to scale better across sectors than more central planning
<midfavila>
there are plenty of megacorps that do everything that would benefit from the market, if that was the case
<midfavila>
sears for example
<midfavila>
they actually *did* switch to using internal markets
<midfavila>
and promptly fuckin went bankrupt :V
<midfavila>
and anyway, again, there's no definition of what the goal is, here
<GalaxyNova>
that is true
<midfavila>
equitable distribution of resources is what *i* would consider ideal
<midfavila>
such that inequality is minimised and as many as possible can meet their needs
<midfavila>
the market inherently cannot provide this
<GalaxyNova>
yeah, that's because the market generally prioritizes future growth
<midfavila>
okay, but why is that good?
<midfavila>
what's the point of 'growth'?
<GalaxyNova>
so we can have better lives over time, and it has historically helped us massively
<raytc3>
growth is required so we get better processers, better gpus, better stuff
<GalaxyNova>
we live lives many times better than those of our forefathers from the 19th or 20th centuries
<midfavila>
growth of the GDP doesn't magically produce better commodities
<raytc3>
mid sounds like some communist
<midfavila>
it's almost like i am a commie
<midfavila>
crazy
<midfavila>
lmao
<GalaxyNova>
lol
<raytc3>
dude im from india
<raytc3>
here everybody is a commie "almost"
<midfavila>
and which state has the highest level of development in india?
<raytc3>
none
<raytc3>
mumbai
<raytc3>
delhi
<raytc3>
the bigger cities
<midfavila>
as far as i understand it, kerala is considered the most developed state according the U.N.'s HDI
<midfavila>
according to the, even
<raytc3>
thats cause of literacy rate is high there
<midfavila>
that generally tends to be pretty important to quality of life
<raytc3>
kerala is not same as north india
<midfavila>
tbf
<raytc3>
not really
<midfavila>
...yes, really?
<raytc3>
kerala people especially the city folks are brainwashed westernized
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: GDP is a metric meant to measure growth and it is a problem when that metric gets detached from reality but it's not arbitrary
<midfavila>
if you can't read and write then how the hell are you supposed to learn advanced concepts?
<midfavila>
or pass knowledge on?
<raytc3>
reading and writing doesnt determine happiness
<midfavila>
reading and writing does determine if you can develop major technologies and make effective use of them
<midfavila>
and that can dramatically improve quality of life
<raytc3>
dude i have friends who didnt go to school(techically illiterate) and still read
<raytc3>
no it doesnt
<midfavila>
if they "didn't go to school", that doesn't make them automatically illiterate...
<GalaxyNova>
I've been thinking recently that humanity could enter an era of post-literacy in the future
<raytc3>
kerala is more of a order follower obidient state
<GalaxyNova>
now knowledge can be encoded in video or audio form easier than ever
<midfavila>
i'd fucking shoot myself
<midfavila>
that sounds dystopian
<raytc3>
ai llms are the next
<midfavila>
oh, you're one of those people
<raytc3>
these are the best
<midfavila>
okay, opinion discarded
<midfavila>
lmao
<midfavila>
llmshitters can fuck off
<raytc3>
they remove the nuisance teachers
<raytc3>
useless commie teachers and professors
<midfavila>
zero respect for the opinion of anyone who uses llms
<midfavila>
i bet you're a fan of bjp :D
<raytc3>
you are a luddite
<raytc3>
nope
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: yeah on one hand writing is just another tool and if we find a more efficient tool then I think we should take advantage of it, on the other it is also a massive cultural artefact
<raytc3>
i hate politicians, police , doctors
<midfavila>
writing isn't just "another tool"
<midfavila>
writing is *the* tool
<raytc3>
writing is not everythinh
<midfavila>
that's like saying fuckin fire is just "another tool" when combustion technology is one of the most critical developments in human history
<raytc3>
money is everythinh
<midfavila>
lmao i'm done arguing with llm apologists
<GalaxyNova>
Writing is a way we store knowledge and it was historically the only way, it is valuable in that it is culturally significant and it is also interesting but it is not an end in and of itself
<GalaxyNova>
raytc3: LLMs are cringe
<GalaxyNova>
calling people luddites is also cringe
<midfavila>
nah
<midfavila>
thinking luddites are cringe is what's cringe
<raytc3>
why are llms cringe
<midfavila>
the luddites had a fucking point
<midfavila>
they weren't mindlessly opposed to development
<GalaxyNova>
using AI is just not fun or interesting most of the time
<raytc3>
llms saved me a lotta time
<midfavila>
they were opposed to the displacement of human beings and their livelihoods in order for business owners to make more profit, and nothing else
<raytc3>
GalaxyNova Wrong!!
<midfavila>
they were also opposed to the degradation of quality and skills compared to traditional approaches
<midfavila>
anyway, writing might not necessarily be an end unto itself, but mass literacy is what enabled modern society to develop
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: they were displaced because mechanized looms were simply more efficient, it does not make sense to do something less efficient just to keep someone employed unless there is another goal in mind (cultural preservation or entertainment, etc)
<raytc3>
llms are replacing useless stuff so people can enjoy their lives
<raytc3>
llms are way better to learn something new
<midfavila>
the democratisation of technology is usually more important than the tech itself.
<midfavila>
GalaxyNova: more efficient doesn't mean better
<GalaxyNova>
what does better mean for you?
<midfavila>
it depends on the circumstance.
<midfavila>
here's an example
<midfavila>
i have two wool blankets in my flat right now
<raytc3>
exactly mechanized looms were faster, more efficient
<midfavila>
one is made on a mechanised loom in some factory
<midfavila>
the other was made on a handloom in a family's shop in PEI
<midfavila>
both cost me about the same more or less and they have the same usecases, etcetera
<raytc3>
useless people were the ones protesting cause they felt threatened some machine is gonna take their jobs
<midfavila>
like it's not as though one is a winter blanket and one is a summer blanket
<raytc3>
jobs are useless anyway
<midfavila>
both are effectively the same
<GalaxyNova>
raytc3: I think as long as someone actively wants to do something for fun or for learning it is not "useless"
<midfavila>
but the wool blanket from PEI was woven by people who *care* about the process. they've taken deliberate steps to maintain their methods and preserve the process.
<midfavila>
it's substantially heavier, softer, and warmer than the other blanket i have
<midfavila>
i had to wait four months for this blanket, but i would gladly do it again
<raytc3>
those people can mechanize their custom "method" also
<raytc3>
but they dont
<midfavila>
the other blanket cost me about the same, as mentioned, and it's inferior in basically every aspect aside from time-efficiency
<midfavila>
the weave is looser, the fabric is thinner, it's scratchier and less comfortable, and the stitching is lower quality. if there's ever a serious tear it will be much harder to repair that blanket than the one made by hand using regular tools.
<raytc3>
are you a boomer
<midfavila>
you wish i was, bucko
<raytc3>
i get it you are old in thinking also
<raytc3>
llms are being used by our generation all the time
<raytc3>
in academics also
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: the cost is transfered to the person in PEI weaving it, likely they cannot make a living purely out of weaving
<GalaxyNova>
though I do agree that it is a good thing to support local businesses and traditional culture
<midfavila>
raytc3: and those people will never develop to a higher level
<midfavila>
constant convenience and instant gratification, and accepting the lowest-possible quality, is no way to live life
<raytc3>
most not all. some of them will be ultra level
<GalaxyNova>
raytc3: llms make you disengaged with whatever you are using them for unless you interact with them in a very specific way
<midfavila>
if i followed the advice of LLMs at my job people would die lmao
<GalaxyNova>
and even then, you have to be extremely careful about hallcinations and basically never trust it 100%
<raytc3>
agree Galaxy
<midfavila>
because the number of times they're flat-out, objectively incorrect is unbelievable
<raytc3>
llms do hallucainate
<midfavila>
no, LLMs are just shit
<midfavila>
it's like uhhhhh
<midfavila>
the journalist effect
<midfavila>
or whatever
<midfavila>
people will see an article written by a journalist and assume they're experts because they write very professionally about it
<midfavila>
unless it's a topic that the reader is familiar with
<midfavila>
in which case they can basically instantly tell that the journo is totally fucking clueless
<raytc3>
i cant wait to see almost all jobs getting replaced by ai
<raytc3>
then they can die
<midfavila>
LLMs sound very authoritative unless you're not totally ignorant
<raytc3>
not all llms
<midfavila>
sure, pal
<midfavila>
lol
<midfavila>
llm apologia in the big 26
<raytc3>
watever
<GalaxyNova>
xd
<raytc3>
you should not have a job in the first place
<midfavila>
you're right, but not for the reasons you think :D
<raytc3>
you should be doing something you enjoy or just enjoy
<GalaxyNova>
heh
<midfavila>
anyway, i enjoy my job, i just don't enjoy the coercive economic structure i live under, lol
<raytc3>
and llms/ai have the potential to solve this
<midfavila>
no, they don't
<midfavila>
they aren't capable of meaningful labour, first off.
<raytc3>
no one enjoys doing a thing they love as a "job"
<midfavila>
second off, even if they were, the gains would be privatised.
<raytc3>
its takes the spirit away
<midfavila>
you're right, because jobs are fundamentally violent
<midfavila>
that said, the actions involved can still be enjoyable
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: it is either coercive economic structure, coercive wilderness environment, coervive communical structure
<GalaxyNova>
communal*
<midfavila>
i would much rather a communal structure in which gains and losses and decisions are handled collectively than an individualist one where people who start with more can use that to control other people and act like little hitlers
<midfavila>
:v
<raytc3>
lol
<raytc3>
that it exactly the problem
<midfavila>
and LLMs will do nothing about it
<midfavila>
the infra they're building out to support LLM research will be great for mass surveillance and data storage though
<midfavila>
which is already an issue, at least here
<raytc3>
pure commie old mindset
<midfavila>
calling someone a commie isn't a very good insult in 2026
<raytc3>
true i agree about the dystopian mass surveil
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: historically those structures have struggled to provide accountability
<GalaxyNova>
I think it's still an unanswered question
<raytc3>
mid what you think of luigi mangioney
<midfavila>
historically those structures have provided the only means by which consumers and workers can hold economic structures even marginally accountable, GalaxyNova
<midfavila>
raytc3: i'm not exactly crying over thompson's death lol
<raytc3>
me too
<GalaxyNova>
if you consensually offer someone a service in good faith and do not lie, then there is no responsability to be accountable to consumers
<midfavila>
there very much is. the provision of necessary goods and services establishes a principle of care.
<midfavila>
er, duty of care.
<midfavila>
fucking brain isn't working at like 1am
<GalaxyNova>
ah I forget you are on the East coast
<raytc3>
the point is to become self sufficient enough so there is less dependence on others
<midfavila>
that's not feasible.
<midfavila>
we aren't hunter-gatherers.
<midfavila>
modern society requires specialisation and co-operation.
<raytc3>
cities are the worst. there are cab drivers strike , some random group strikes
<GalaxyNova>
unless you build everything from scratch or fuck off to the forest you will never be fully self sufficient
<raytc3>
well reject modernism
<midfavila>
who's the "luddite" now?
<raytc3>
embrave tradition
<midfavila>
you aren't beating the BJP allegation by repeating fascist slogans
<raytc3>
not all modernism
<raytc3>
bro fuck bjp
<GalaxyNova>
real chads are metamodernists ;)
<raytc3>
we should be like lunarpunks
<raytc3>
yeap galaxy
<midfavila>
you can't just put -punk on the end of something and act like it's an actual ideology.
<raytc3>
well individualism is the most important and next comes society
<midfavila>
the individual is a product *of* society.
<midfavila>
nobody exists in a vacuum, not even ancient humans.
<GalaxyNova>
my hope for the future is that we can learn more about the universe and improve our technology to increase our standard of living and general lifespan
<midfavila>
individualism is a cancerous and ironically very western principle.
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: yeah we literally evolved in groups
<raytc3>
how so
<raytc3>
small groups are ok
<raytc3>
but big groups like states
<raytc3>
nuke em
<midfavila>
individualism promotes behaviour that's harmful to both the broader group and to the individual in the long term
<raytc3>
thats why we need small group not big group.
<midfavila>
if it's beneficial to me to screw over my neighbour and steal his shit then why shouldn't i, if i think i can get away with it, from an individualist point of view?
<raytc3>
big group is a cancerous tumour
<raytc3>
then the neighbour will retaliate
<midfavila>
and if i weigh the risk and decide it's worth it?
<raytc3>
if you are prepared it all comes down to survival of the fittest anyway
<midfavila>
it really doesn't...
<midfavila>
species that evolved to be social or eusocial *need* to co-operate to survive.
<midfavila>
a single human or even a small group of humans won't survive.
<raytc3>
yeah i will cooperate when i need
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: there's a difficult line to draw though because I believe if you reject individualism you will reach the conclusion that things like making people have children or other coercive things is beneficial to society as a whole
<midfavila>
even ancient pre-history societies had like hundreds of active members going off of archaeological finds
<raytc3>
thats why we have tools, machines to help us. thats why we need growth
<GalaxyNova>
^^
<midfavila>
GalaxyNova: there will always be people who want to perpetuate the species of their own free will. you just need to provide the conditions necessary to nurture families. anyway, even if humanity dies out, like, whatever?
<midfavila>
humans aren't exactly special
<midfavila>
we're kind of just humaning around
<midfavila>
no different than any other species that's been around for hundreds of thousands of years
<GalaxyNova>
then nothing is really special
<raytc3>
humans are special bruh
<midfavila>
GalaxyNova: yes, precisely
<GalaxyNova>
why must we care about the environment or species going extinct then
<raytc3>
we need them
<midfavila>
well, strictly speaking, you shouldn't, lol
<midfavila>
but from a realistic perspective, shitty environments being hostile to life is like
<midfavila>
uncomfortable at the least
<midfavila>
i would presume everyone would prefer a baseline level of comfort e.g. air that's breathable
<raytc3>
we dont have to be hostile
<GalaxyNova>
midfavila: yeah makes sense
<raytc3>
we wont gain more being hostile always
<GalaxyNova>
I personally believe we have a duty to continue our lineage and culture and uphold the diversity and beauty of Earth
<midfavila>
and considering other species are generally necessary to maintain the biosphere that kind of follows
<midfavila>
GalaxyNova: then i have bad news for you about capitalism
<raytc3>
dont tell me you are a vegetarian also
<midfavila>
no but i don't have an issue with vegetarians or vegans
<GalaxyNova>
Yeah but it was not really possible to have growth without pollution at least initially.
<midfavila>
aside from the ones who strictly moralise about it
<GalaxyNova>
We had to bootstrap the technology we have today
<GalaxyNova>
raytc3: I am not
<midfavila>
arguing that consumption of animal products is inherently bad is stupid. arguing that participation in the commodification of life is, however, entirely correct
<midfavila>
to that extent i minimise my consumption of animal products, although i don't refrain entirely.
<midfavila>
that said, i'm not going to judge someone for eating the food they can afford.
<midfavila>
i will however judge people who turn their nose up at vegetables or meat alternatives lmao
<midfavila>
because that's childish and very silly
<raytc3>
you are using a computer made possible by capitalism
<midfavila>
i live under capitalism and as a worker i have no choice but to exchange my labour for the commodities i need or die
<midfavila>
that's like saying a peasant eats food grown on the land their lord rents to them
<GalaxyNova>
some meat alternatives are not very healthy and contain very high amounts of things like titanium dioxide which while non toxic are not exactly good to ingest in large quantities
<midfavila>
GalaxyNova: i'm not referring to BeyondMeat:tm: Product:r:
<midfavila>
i'm referring to like
<midfavila>
tofu
<midfavila>
or seitan
<GalaxyNova>
ah
<GalaxyNova>
yeah
<midfavila>
or fuckin uhhhhhhh
<midfavila>
paneer???
<raytc3>
well computers wouldnt exists without cap but food exists
<midfavila>
raytc3: most early computer technology was funded by the public sector because it was too much of a risk for the private sector.
<raytc3>
paneer is cheese bruh
<midfavila>
it's a meat alternative.
<raytc3>
nope
<raytc3>
paneer is not meat
<midfavila>
neither is seitan
<midfavila>
it's still a non-meat protein
<raytc3>
everything public sector sucks if you have money
<midfavila>
really doesn't
<midfavila>
public sector is generally superior.
<raytc3>
but meat has more constituents than paneer
<midfavila>
and?
<raytc3>
no it isnt
<midfavila>
if you eat a balanced diet, as you should, that doesn't matter
<raytc3>
did you see india
<raytc3>
it matters
<midfavila>
also, re: public sector, yes, it is. that doesn't mean it can't be mismanaged or underfunded etcetera
<midfavila>
but when all else is equal, the public sector is inherently better, because the elimination of profit allows for more affordable and accessible service
<raytc3>
in public sector who profits?
<raytc3>
the public workers
<midfavila>
nobody :D
<raytc3>
bro
<GalaxyNova>
it also means that in order to have growth in that sector you need to take money from somewhere else where it could have been used to its full extent
<midfavila>
the profits go into the public purse and are used to fund public works or make up shortfalls elsewhere
<raytc3>
the government workers profits
<midfavila>
workers don't profit
<midfavila>
workers, by their nature, exchange labour for wages
<midfavila>
only capital owners are able to profit
<midfavila>
GalaxyNova: i don't care about Growth:tm:, i care about whether or not my parcel arrives on time or i have telecommunications service
<raytc3>
useless labours like those can be replaced by ai and it might be better
<raytc3>
those are lazy people
<midfavila>
if it wasn't for public ownership, canada would have neither postal service nor telecommunications in most of the country
<raytc3>
so inefficiency always exists in public sectoes
<midfavila>
you're very narrow-minded
<raytc3>
look at the state of canada now
<midfavila>
yes, and look at how its publically owned assets have been systematically defunded and sold to the americans for pennies
<raytc3>
what about the influx of indians there? whatya think about that ?
<raytc3>
is it also because of capitalism
<midfavila>
look at how the transition from keynesian "welfare capitalism", which prioritised low unemployment over low inflation and government intervention in markets, to reagan/thatcher style neoliberalism, has destroyed the economy
<raytc3>
hmmm
<midfavila>
and yes, it is, lol. temporary foreign workers are super-exploited in comparison to domestic workers, whether they're from india or elsewhere
<midfavila>
an oversupply of labour drives wages down and profits up
<GalaxyNova>
yes it is pretty bad
<midfavila>
it also makes tenants more exploitable by increasing demand for housing, and the increased demand for housing raises property values, which pleases home owners
<midfavila>
additionally, since TFWs cannot effectively unionise or exercise other rights, they have no choice but to accept subpar working conditions, and tend to take on more debt than PRs or citizens
<midfavila>
that pleases creditors
<midfavila>
and insurers
<midfavila>
all of this is at the expense of new arrivals to the country and is deeply unfair
<midfavila>
it's also true that the federal government paints a false picture of what canada is like, and domestic politicians scapegoat new arrivals, which has resulted in a surge of crime, particularly hate crime, against new arrivals, which is unjust
<midfavila>
the TFW programme ought to be scrapped and instead requirements for permanent residency permanently lowered
<midfavila>
ideally borders would be abolished entirely, everywhere, but that's not possible under capitalism
<raytc3>
why u want borders to be abolished
<raytc3>
it would be chaos
<midfavila>
because they're a form of violence
<raytc3>
not really
<midfavila>
yes, really
<midfavila>
if you're confined somewhere against your will, is that not a violent act?
<raytc3>
borders are there to safeguard a culture from external exploitation
<midfavila>
every day i wake up and want to leave this country and every day i'm forbidden from doing so
<midfavila>
for no reason other than the circumstance of my birth
<GalaxyNova>
I think the people of a land have a right to decide who will become part of their society
<raytc3>
which country u live in man
<midfavila>
the same is true of billions who are in much worse situations than i
<raytc3>
in india all public sectors sucks ass
<midfavila>
anyway, borders are incompatible with capitalism
<midfavila>
if the ideal is a free market, then that includes a free labour market
<GalaxyNova>
that is probably true
<midfavila>
labour ought to be able to move just as freely as capital if we're going to do the whole capitalism thing
<midfavila>
there's no probably about it
<midfavila>
capitalism commodifies everything, including labour
<GalaxyNova>
I don't think anarcho capitalism is the way
<raytc3>
agorism
<midfavila>
anyway, again, this nonsense about "culture" is incompatible with capitalism, too
<raytc3>
fr
<GalaxyNova>
also probably true
<midfavila>
how is the market forcing you to spend all day every day at work not corrupting and destroying culture?
<raytc3>
yeah also women are getting forced by governments to work
<midfavila>
how is the commodification of culture so it can be sold back as "lifestyle" or "experience" to be enjoyed and then put away in time for work not a watering-down of things?
<midfavila>
*everyone* is forced to work
<midfavila>
women have always worked
<raytc3>
not here
<GalaxyNova>
it is a necessary evil so to speak as it allows us to increase our standard of living and over time also our appreciation of culture
<raytc3>
here woman takes care of the kids makes meals and sleeps at night
<midfavila>
i'm very certain that women have been responsible for child-rearing, housework, craft work, and so on in india, as in most other nations
<midfavila>
yes, raytc3, that's a form of work
<raytc3>
but because of this extra freedom to waman here too they are becoming like whores
<midfavila>
and it ought to be a) distributed evenly and b) compensated
<midfavila>
whoa hey
<midfavila>
fuck off
<midfavila>
that's overstepping it
<raytc3>
bro thats how its happening here
<midfavila>
you're lucky phoebos or whoever has chanserv access hasn't set me up to be able to op myself or else you'd be gagged for that
<midfavila>
super uncool.
<raytc3>
im just saying whats happening in cities here
<raytc3>
they get drunk and cause nuisance
<midfavila>
calling women "whores" isn't acceptable
<midfavila>
or anyone really
<raytc3>
i guess you are a woman yourself
<midfavila>
even if i were, it wouldn't impact the validity of my opinions
<midfavila>
it's, frankly, irrelevant. the issue here is your behaviour.
<GalaxyNova>
I do hope society will eventually reconscile feminism with sustainable living
<midfavila>
again, not possible under capitalism
<midfavila>
capitalists have a vested interest in co-opting historically progressive movements and such and turning them against the working class to keep regular people divided and unable to focus on their exploitation by capital
<midfavila>
moreover, capitalism itself is inherently unsustainable.