[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)


IRC Chat





| Catalog | Home

File: 1623187796461.png (286.69 KB, 576x566, privilege.png)

 No.305951[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

aka /leftypol/: An Exploration into the Causes and Effects of Identity Politics.
Let's get to the bottom of identity politics, bane of the radical left and blockade to normie socialism.

ITT post about idpol and anti-idpol.
Post literature, effortposts, infographics, etc.
Post about what idpol is, the history of idpol, idpol today, the problems with it, and how to deal with it.

The point of this thread is to develop our discourse on the topic. Currently the meaning of idpol and many people's understanding of it is extremely nebulous. This is a problem for us in addressing it in general. It is a problem for the mods appropriately moderating it. It's a problem for users knowing what posts are good. Most importantly it's an obstacle to people knowing what kind of theory is sensible and based versus what is idpozzed and cringe. Most of us will agree that idpol is a problem the left deals with to some degree more or less online or in real life. It is both an inferior understanding of politics and a way of baiting people. What we sometimes don't agree on is what idpol is and how it works. That's what this thread is for: fleshing out our discourse so that we can better combat liberalism (and other right wing politics) and promote communism.
605 posts and 86 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


So i watched this https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=oHsIn9bAzAU debate on the Katie Halper show between lets say "id-pol professors" and Norman Finkelstein. Norm did a great job critiquing id-pol but i thought he was kinda soft on them.

There's a way of analyzing what people say by focusing primarily on 2 things
<what's being defended
<what's being attacked

What stood out to me was that the "id-pol professors"
they attacked "class reductionists" (which just means Marxists and Socialists)
they defended protecting "elite super rich people" from identity oppression.

That means they use id-pol as a method of gate-keeping against socialism.
They want to use the political energies of the proles to defend capitalists who will never reciprocate.

I can't help but see this as a pull towards a reactionary direction.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


I wonder if I could have my cake and eat it. Be a right wing media grifter, but literally just engage in Marxist takes.
It seems when it comes to Idpol, being a Marxist is literally a far-right position according to Libs.


Maybe if you can center on class politics you can gain support from people across the cultural spectrum. You should probably avoid using the bourgeois political left-right divide to understand politics. I think that would be limiting your self to cultural preferences of different bourgeois factions.

We may have to update our labels, because liberals are not liberal anymore, their focus is almost entirely on regulating the individual, they seem to be increasingly opposed to granting people more autonomy over their immediate environment, bodies, minds and personal possessions.

The liberals are also no longer championing social progress. For example there has been a huge regression in terms of prostitution. The liberals of the past used to agree with socialists that women ought not be forced to rent them selves out as prostitutes to affluent men. The people who see them selves as liberal today will explode in rage if you suggest that they can't command sex with money.

I'm also suspicious about other social theories from the liberals, i think it's going to be used to attack reproductive-rights for women. G-theory for example is minimizing the focus on the reproductive aspects of sexuality. This is certainly very convenient from the perspective of somebody trying to cloak their attacks on female reproductive rights. If womanhood is no longer defined by reproduction than the protections for womanhood will no longer cover reproduction.
The material explanation for this development might be that capitalism is attempting to commodify human-gestation. So that affluent bourgeois women no longer have to bare children but can rent surrogate wombs for that. Wealthy women will no longer need the protection of female reproductive rights to have autonomy over their bodies. They might even come to see it in the opposite light. The physical demands of pregnancy are a big disadvantage in the game of capital accumulation, and bourgeois women might see access to "womb-services" as a way to gain more "bourgeois-equality" compared to bourgeois men.

Socialists and people who used to be considered left would obviously be opposed to turning proletarian women into living gestation-pods for bourgeois spawn. But the liberals will likely champion this the same way they regressed on prostitution. I foresee surrogate womb services as a kindPost too long. Click here to view the full text.




Look, I’m gonna level with you here. Like the vast majority of leftists who have been minted since Occupy Wall Street, my principles, values, and policy preferences don’t stem from a coherent set of moral values, developed into an ideology, which then suggests preferred policies. At all. That requires a lot of reading and I’m busy organizing black tie fundraisers at work and bringing Kayleigh and Dakota to fencing practice. I just don’t have the time. So my politics have been bolted together in a horribly awkward process of absorbing which opinions are least likely to get me screamed at by an online activist or mocked by a podcaster. My politics are therefore really a kind of self-defensive pastiche, an odd Frankensteining of traditional leftist rhetoric and vocabulary from Ivy League humanities departments I don’t understand. I quote Marx, but I got the quote from Tumblr. I cite Gloria Anzaldua, but only because someone on TikTok did it first. I support defunding the police because in 2020, when the social and professional consequences for appearing not to accept social justice norms were enormous, that was the safest place for me to hide. I maintain a vague attachment to police and prison abolition because that still appears to be the safest place for me to hide. I vote Democrat but/and call myself a socialist because that is the safest place for me to hide. I’m not a bad person; I want freedom and equality. I want good things for everyone. But politics scare and confuse me. I just can’t stand to lose face, so I have to present all of my terribly confused ideals with maximum superficial confidence. If you probe any of my specific beliefs with minimal force, they will collapse, as those “beliefs” are simply instruments of social manipulation. I can’t take my kid to the Prospect Park carousel and tell the other parents that I don’t support police abolition. It would damage my brand and I can’t have that. And that contradiction you detected, where I support maximum forgiveness for crime but no forgiveness at all for being offensive? For me, that’s no contradiction at all. Those beliefs are not part of a functioning and internally-consistent political system but a potpourri of deracinated slogans that protect me from headaches I don’t need. I never wanted to be a leftist. I just wanted to take my justifiable but inchoate feelings of dissatisfaction with the way things are and wrap them up into part of the narrative that I tell other people about myself, the Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: 1679059824860.jpg (90.49 KB, 631x778, french streets when macron….jpg)


The strikes are massive and the political opposition to macron's pension-rape has doubled from 26% to 46% in just a few months.

Macron has undemocratically bypassed the french parliament by using article 49.3 of the french constitution, to box this through. However it's now possible to oust him with a no-confidence motion.

There's a very strong possibility that this is Macrons political suicide, and it's very unlikely that this pension-rape will stand. The French imperial bourgeoisie has recently lost a lot of power in their African pseudo-colonies. The president of the Congo Felix Tshisedkedi recently flat out told Macron to shut-up his "imperial paternalism" during a political conference. And that means they can't fight against the french proles at home and fight to maintain imperial dominance in Africa at the same time.

I don't know enough about the political realities in France to make predictions about the ramifications, but seems that the imperial bourgeoisie in France is going to get a serious haircut.

Video source for the op-pic
11 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Meanwhile, burgers would literally let their boss have sex with their wives while they watch.







File: 1680034970274.jpg (51.57 KB, 723x583, multipass stream.jpg)




File: 1680892733354.jpg (110.7 KB, 1100x619, frogs storm black rock off….jpg)

Based frog protestors stormed a Blackrock office

<Paris/London(CNN) Demonstrators forced their way into the building that houses BlackRock's office in Paris Thursday, taking their protest against the government's pension reforms to the world's biggest money manager.

<Videos shared on social media showed protesters entering the Centorial office block, located near the Opéra Garnier opera house, holding red flares and firing smoke bombs.

<About 100 people, including representatives of several labor unions, were on the ground floor of the building for about 10 minutes, chanting anti-reform slogans. BlackRock's office is located on the third floor.

<"The meaning of this action is quite simple. We went to the headquarters of BlackRock to tell them: the money of workers, for our pensions, they are taking it," Jerome Schmitt, spokesman for French union SUD, told CNN affiliate BFM-TV. BlackRock declined to comment.


File: 1680224036967.png (167.96 KB, 400x292, CourageBackground.png)


This might not be worthy of its own thread, but once you've built a solid support base within one workplace/neighborhood/whatever, how do you build connections with other activists while simultaneously avoiding feds as best as possible(I am pessimistic on how possible that is, but that is a gut feeling rather than something that I have strong logic on, and will accept criticism)? If anyone has insight, it'd do a great service.


I don't think you're going to be able to avoid feds, and spending too much effort to try to weed them out is effort you're not expending toward the actual things you want to accomplish. Far better to assemble structures and rules from the outset that are resistant to sabotage. For example, don't ever give leaders too much power so that their position becomes a target for opportunists. Conversely, don't use anti-democratic decision-making processes such as "consensus" that allow the weakest link to sabotage decisions. At all costs, you want to avoid the kind of performative arrangements that allow narcissist identarians to make meetings about themselves instead the actual fucking task at hand. Feds or not, they are the ultimate wreckers. Never give these people an inch or they'll take a mile.


Rather than asking yourself what a cop/fed would look like so you can avoid them, ask yourself "What is a cop/fed likely to do in this situation, and how can we obviate it?"


If you can't avoid an opponent try figuring out how to exploit them. If you can harvest the energy from their attacks, you'll get stronger the more they attack you.


File: 1680383042410.jpeg (14.37 KB, 474x266, tf.jpeg)

>If you can harvest the energy from their attacks, you'll get stronger the more they attack you.


File: 1680413511088.gif (328.59 KB, 500x375, giphy.gif)

>If you can harvest the energy from their attacks, you'll get stronger the more they attack you.

File: 1660059511559.png (1.08 MB, 1440x932, FIRE.png)

 No.456057[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

Let's get a general thread about FIRE (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate). Include topics about crypto as well.
95 posts and 40 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Crisis delayed



<“Project Sandman” describes a 100+ nation agreement that, when triggered, will see those nations simultaneously dump the dollar and abandon the “petrodollar” status that has allowed the USA to enjoy 50 years of fiat currency counterfeiting and material abundance at the expense of everyone else. When this decision is triggered, the dollar and all dollar-denominated assets will plunge to near-ZERO literally overnight.

This isn't real, it's a form of entertainment website for collapse-porn. Their disclaimer says:
<Please use discernment! Use logical thinking, your own intuition and your own connection with Source, Spirit and Natural Laws to help you determine what is true and what is not.

But this is still a fun thought experiment.
Would such a 100 country conspiracy to collapse the dollar actually work ?


File: 1680288510645.jpg (122.49 KB, 900x900, REBubble-124t7jt.jpg)



Usually these sites are put out as a wink to give away parts of what is planned, with the expectation that you figured out that humans lie about everything. The space aliens trope is older than you think. It came out in a big way to announce the birth of the national security state, and there are references to this in the occult milieu of the prior 50 years.

To answer the question - that is what they want to do, but there are too many interests who have no reason to run around like headless chickens. Currency schemes have collapsed before, and out of necessity vendors work out ad hoc solutions. The will of a few manipulators to create panic only works for so long. It scatters the easily defeated and those who imbibe too much ideology, but those with too much to lose work out countermeasures against these incursions. Ultimately it would rely on many millions becoming repo men and carrying out the grisly work, and that's why neoliberal managerial culture was created - to turn the whole country into the lowest forms of Einsatzgruppen they could. The result has been a steady escalation of faggotry and all the depravity inherent to the Right as a political formation, and the stripping away of anything else, leaving behind nothing but trained animals who think of nothing and have no real thoughts. Even with the vast effort spent to create these people, there are only so many reliable Einsatzgruppen, and those who are smart enough to be effective have incentives to work against the final end of this directive. It's why they want to build all these killbots and mystify tech, and why the current op is to tell us GPT-4 is Skynet. It's retarded.

Tanking the dollar, though, is shit easy, and there are interested parties that want it. The rich and their managerial lackies are already thinking of how to convert their money tokens into units of pure slavery and torture. That's the way we set for ourselves, and it has become life's prime want. Neoliberal society does not produce a single thing more than it has to in order to keep people from revolting, and they have steadily played a game of lowering standards and destroying all decencies and all expectations.

File: 1680345548452.jpg (74.4 KB, 474x371, icc sign.jpg)


The international criminal court has long had a questionable reputation for having a colonial bias because it almost exclusively has convicted war-criminals from Africa, and virtually non from western countries.

However i think there might be a conspiracy to erode it's legitimacy entirely before destroying it.

I think it started around 2018 when there were attempts to convict war-criminals from the US. It is important to know that the US is not a signatory to the various international treaties that could give the ICC jurisdiction over the US and it citizens.

Attempting to expand the reach of the jurisdiction of a criminal court is very risky because if it fails, it will damage the courts legitimacy within it's existing jurisdictions. And what happened in this case was that the US approved a law that would enable the US to invade the Netherlands in case they arrested US citizens to put them on trial in The Hague.

And recently they have done a similar thing again, but this time picked a fight with a different superpower, that is equally unlikely to yield because it too is not a signatory to international treaties that grant the ICC jurisdiction. They issued a arrest warrant against the Russian head of state, that got denied by the deputy head of the Security Council of the Russian Federation. Basically they threatened to destroy the ICC with hyper-sonic missiles if they tried to affect any arrests.

But this time the consequences went beyond military saber-rattling and legitimacy damage for the ICC, this time a number of countries have exited the international treaties, effectively rescinding the ICC jurisdiction, because they don't want the obligation to arrest the Russian head of state. Motivated by business interests and fear from retaliation of the Russian federation if they tried to go through with it.

I think that this goes beyond abusing a legal court for political goals, i think this is also about destroying an institution that over time could grow out of it's colonial legacy and become a truly international institution with the power to impose the legal discipline of international law on anybody, including the most powerful people.

File: 1676735784813-0.jpg (72.9 KB, 774x800, trolloon.jpg)

File: 1676735784813-1.png (76.74 KB, 1294x1362, imperialism wages war agai….png)


So the entire UFO happening was the US military spending big bux to shoot down hobby-balloons.
I feel bad for the people who have that hobby, they probably thought that balloons were so harmless that nobody would ever bother to disturb their happy fun time.

Why did this thing turn into such a big deal ?
10 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1678141892196.jpg (112.15 KB, 1009x862, spycranes.jpg)

<National-security and Pentagon officials are warning about the potential use of giant Chinese-made and operated cranes as intelligence collection tools


Is this a genuine thing, or are they manufacturing more balloon-type hysteria ?
Are all chinese things going to become Amogus ?



When America's "right" is in power it's all "we are the strongest, haha, look at our might."
When America's "left" is in power it's all "well, we can't let the "right" call us weak, better be exactly as retarded and let them get whatever they want and blame the voters"
It's very disconcerting, or it ought to be!



Idk… I mean all this shit has had computers in it forever. The US seems to want every piece of its own tech to have a double-purpose for surveillance, it's probably something which could be done. It's dumb, but… the whole thing is fucking dumb. The US is paranoid, but also kinda should be… but the American public should be more paranoid about the American state itself.


If the US wants to have surveillance for those cranes, can't they just stick their own surveillance equipment on those cranes ?

>The US is paranoid, but also kinda should be…

In that case I don't get it. From a technical point of view the most secure crane, is the one that uses technical minimalism. If you only implement the technology needed to operate the crane, the attack surface for subverting it's function is the smallest. If you add more features like surveillance, that massively increases the attack surface.

As far as container security goes, i would try to figure out ways to scan their contents for malicious stuff. The scan method has to be fast and economical, so x-ray-ing a bazillion containers is out. However you can scan for particulate emissions to find hazardous materials like toxic chemicals or explosives. You only need an air-pump and a molecular-particle detector to extract a container-gas-sample, which only adds a few seconds to container processing because it only requires sticking in a small suction-tube in one of the many container-drain-holes. That method is neigh impossible to beat because it will detect particles even through many layers of plastic wrap. Inherent Molecular vibration means all containers leak a little. A few molecules will always manage to wiggle through the walls of any container, and even low cost mol-dedectors are ridiculously sensitive.

>the American public should be more paranoid about the American state itself.

Even if you trust your own government, you have to be aware that all technical backdoors are very promiscuous.
In a potential cyber-war between the US and China, the Chinese will have access to all those backdoors as well. Backdoors have become near-infinite-value targets, and any rational actor with the means to pay the price for getting in, will do so. This isn't just my opinion, this is what most technical security researches think.


Apparently the Chinese refused to set up a meeting to talk about the balloon with US delegates.


time stamp 01:08:40

File: 1678548620202.jpg (97.86 KB, 1200x900, Space chariot.jpg)


Noam Chomsky has a principle that he will only criticize his government (the US government in his case). His reason is guarding against co-optation, he doesn't want the chorus of reactionary intellectuals that manufacture consent for the powers that be, to be able to use anything that he writes or says for their sinister purposes. I think the Chomsky principle is largely correct but it's too strict, i think that you can criticize other governments as long as they aren't on the official LE-BIG-BAD list. So based on that you can criticize countries like Saudi Arabia or Israel, but for example Russia, China, and the DPRK can't be criticized, because they are the ""axis of evil"" in the mainstream narrative. I'm following this weaker Chomsky principle because i don't want to say anything that might be appropriated for an argument that supports a new cold-war or worse. Keep that in mind when you read this.

Main topic
I'm trying to get a materialist view of liberties. Usually people consider liberties to be timeless conditionaless absolutes. In some places of the world owning a gun is considered a liberty. In order to have that liberty you do need a government that doesn't try to disarm it's population, but far more importantly you need to have invented sophisticated metallurgy and gunpowder. So in conclusion liberties are conditional to development, in this case technical development. Tho not all conditions for liberties must be of a technical nature.

Many people are criticizing China for lacking certain personal liberties, and a big chunk of that is made up horror stories that never happened, but not all of it is wrong. For example China lacks technology privacy.

A considerable section of the Chinese population is not plugged into the techno-social information infrastructure. Since China has only beaten absolute poverty but not yet uneven development. That means if china were to move ahead and improve the tech-rights for Chinese citizens at this point in time they would benefit only the wealthier sections of society that can afford all the information services. That section of society could potentially seek to pull up the ladder behind them selves and prevent the rest of society from gaining access to beneficial information services.

So I will speculate that once China has leveled the uneven development, it will become politically viable for China to advance tech-rights. Politically viable in this context mePost too long. Click here to view the full text.
37 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


China-expert should be hyphenated. The rest is you pretending to be dumber than you are



I have no idea why, of all things, multiple people ITT have chosen to focus on me referring to China as "CCP."
It's not a talking point. Whether it's called CCP or CPC has literally zero bearing on my opinion of them, it's still the same country.

>brand China as an enemy

But I don't see China as an enemy?
I see its system of government as something I wouldn't personally like. People both in and outside of China seem to think it's especially censorious, but that doesn't make China an enemy - a lot of Chinese people like the way China is run, that's none of my business, I just would not like living in a country which operated this way. They have privatized industry and, even by their own admission, pretty strict regulations of expression & social life. This is what I describe as authoritarian capitalism.

>I don't want to get to deep into political theory but whether or not authority is good or bad depends on whose interests it serves.

Yeah, no, I don't actually agree with this.
I don't see protection of individual rights as authoritarian, I don't see recognition of rights to organize as authoritarian, I don't see abolition of slavery as authoritarian. I do see rigid restrictions on speech and restrictions imposed upon workers as authoritarian. This doesn't mean that a government which does these things can't also do good things - for example, China has, as far as I'm aware, a pretty robust public healthcare & housing system. This is good! This is also something Nordic socdem countries with fewer restrictions on speech have afaik, but it's good that China also does it!

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


>me referring to China as "CCP."
Well there is a point in not using that propaganda terminology. If only to communicate that you aren't towing the ideological line that seeks to demonize China in order to make war. Also language is an ideological battlefield why would you seed any ground to the warmongers ?

>But I don't see China as an enemy?

You are still repeating the same criticisms about China that are being used to manufacture consent for painting China as an enemy. The neocon warmongers create a black and white political reality where you are either with them or against them. They will treat you as an enemy unless you tow the warmonger line exactly. Otherwise they will treat you as an enemy regardless how nuanced your stance is.

When somebody resorts to this us/them-binary, the only rational choice that you have is to maximize the hostility of your stance against them. Unless you can find a way to criticize China while still maximizing your opposition to the neocons, you will maneuver your self into a weak position, where you partially agree with people that will do nothing but relentlessly attack you.

>I see its system of government as something I wouldn't personally like.

There's the problem, you are looking at this separated from the material world, as if you were analyzing a platonic ideal.
>People both in and outside of China seem to think it's especially censorious
Censorious in relation to what ? China has a lot less censorship than it did 30 years ago.

Before the communist revolution, China was a defeated empire under foreign colonial occupation, there was no freedom of speech and since most people were illiterate and could not access information systems, there wasn't even the potential for it. When the communists took over they fixed illiteracy and they build accessible information systems. While they very severely censored those systems, they did create the potential for freedom of speech to exist. The Chinese internet is very heavily censored, but Chinese people can say more than they used to. It's a slowly improving trajectory. You may lament that they are on a low level of civil liberties, but as long as it's getting better, it's not worth much worry.Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


>Well there is a point in not using that propaganda terminology. If only to communicate that you aren't towing the ideological line that seeks to demonize China in order to make war. Also language is an ideological battlefield why would you seed any ground to the warmongers ?
So basically virtue signaling?


What ?
no, it's not a virtue, there's nothing virtuous about this, it's an ideological position.

File: 1679615705471.png (96.03 KB, 300x388, goldcoiins.png)


During marx's time money based on precious metals like gold or silver were the universal commodity, against which all other commodities were measured.

After money was detached from metal, the only real universal commodity money was the dollar because that was the only one against which all other commodities were measured. And you could say many of the big currencies that were easily converted into dollars had some of that universality rub off on them. By the way i count precious metal derived money as fiat money as well.

After the US began expanding sanctions at some point they crossed the line where the dollar can't be considered as the universal commodity against which all other commodities are measured anymore.

Precious metals are still universal in the sense that every economy will exchange for it, but you can't really use it to buy stuff. Shops don't have scales for measuring the weight of metal anymore, and won't accept pieces of metal as payments. That means that it's not really money.

There are a select few crypto moneys that appear to have the ambition to become a universal commodity, but they are very far away from realizing that.

So where does that leave universal commodity money ?
Does that still exist ?
48 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>Anyone who doesn't agree with me is more evidence to supports my worldview


You reek of Tavistock.


How do you know what it smells like though?


It's so odious that the smell is transmitted by words alone. You know it when you develop a sense for it.


Sounds like you spend a decent amount of time around troons. No doubt all part of the eugenics plot

File: 1680139320386.png (199.18 KB, 512x512, 1673203564626.png)


Visited leftypol accidentally thinking it was this site, whole place just looks like a Twitteroid hivemind but more "sophisticated". Why is leftypol such a shithole but this place seemingly rational?


File: 1680140583001.png (900.84 KB, 1190x800, 94.png)

>lazy moderators
>semi-shit posts are realized to be semi-shit posts
>circle jerks get the acid treatment
thats all really


File: 1680165493409.jpg (293.17 KB, 900x900, a1410459764_10.jpg)

troon-joon modocracy tyranny

no gods no masters



File: 1641545780518.jpg (498.25 KB, 1280x720, 985499.large.jpg)


I'm really enjoying all of the videogame journalists pissing and shidding themselves over the gold rush game publishers are in over NFTs.

Practically every major publisher is promising to integrate NFTs into games and some like Sega, are already selling them now.

One legitimate criticism of NFTs are their environmental impact. But every media talking head that brings this up never spoke out against the Iraq War that irradiated entire cities with depleted uranium munitions, or the Pentagon, who is the number single emitter of greenhouse gases.

So I'm with the crypto bros on this one say this is sour grapes on people that missed out on the ground floor of this get-rich-quick scheme.

I also see this as anger from the burger settler class who are now really getting priced out of the middle class lifestyle in earnest to the point where their steady diet of new videogames may soon be out of their reach. As someone who grew up poor and was always priced out of these type of consumerist leisure goods I relish their anguish.

Another example of this is when Settlers (read white people) shidded themselves over Disney's new $2000 a night Stars Wars themed hotel. As they rightfully saw this as a new trend in Disneyland Theme Parks where they will soon only cater to the 1%. I never got to go to Disneyland when I was young and was told by these same Settlers that I shouldn't be upset because I can live without it. Ironically, it's them who will now live without it while I can actually still afford to go.

And game journalists are particularly hypocritical because we've seen none scarce digital goods sold for 20+ years now, first with iTunes, and then with Amazon with books, and later Steam with games. No one every questioned the environmental impact of these systems.

Overall I think NFTs will be a net good for the proletariat, it will provide a second hand market of digital goods that proles have already spent billions on, and put a lot of equity in their pocket.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
75 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1645644647347.jpg (103.92 KB, 534x606, REBubble-szpcqk.jpg)



>That is true, but in order to get the full freedom like the ability to host a website on your home computer,
It was far more difficult to locally host your own website then than now.
You could get Windows Server 2003 with IIS but that license cost $$$ or you setup an Apache server on linux which was hard as balls as there wasn't good documentation or YouTube back then.


Uh yes the fuck you can. It's tedious as hell but you can do it. Putty is on the fucking app store.


This bby far is TНE most enjoyable sports betting game
avаilable!There aгеn't many ads. Тhe numberѕ are annоunced in a
pleasnt manner and thеу have the ssports betting board close tօ your cards sο you ϲan look up yߋur numbеrs in casse you
missed one! !


>Are you retarded, the pre smart phone internet was a middle class country club. It was closed off to the poor, that's what we've been arguing about.
kek, Imagine believing this

the sheer copes phonecucks invent to convince themselves they are not a segregated cattle

>No one said the internet was free but it was more open than it is today by a long shot. To bad you zoomers missed it cause it was pretty neat.
Amen brother. When "browsing" actually meant something.

Barely seen a captcha before phonepocalypse. Corporations fucked everything up, from web design to data silos

Present day "Internet"? more like Botnet lol

Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
[ 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16 / 17 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 23 / 24 / 25 / 26 / 27 / 28 / 29 / 30 / 31 / 32 / 33 / 34 / 35 / 36 ]
| Catalog | Home