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

/tech/ - Technology

"Technology reveals the active relation of man to nature"
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


File: 1648405739697.jpg ( 22.38 KB , 480x438 , FB_IMG_1498226686108.jpg )

 No.10995

I recently opened up my own HTTP page and it's incredibly trivial and easy. I know Luke Smith is a faggot but he has solid advice on starting a web page. Using his tutorial on landchad.net I was able to get the site up and running in about 3 hours. Then in 2 days with some on the cuff learning of basic HTML and CSS I had my own perfectly respectable we space up and running in no time.

https://leftychad.net you can also do this and I believe that an ecosystem of interconnected webspaces each self hosted is far superior than the soy model of imageboards implemented by our other peers. Just host your own website and you won't have to deal with faggy mods banning you.
>>

 No.11079

>>10995
Now that I'm getting more financially independent I may consider doing this. Already doing a neocities, looks like the server costs in the service Luke used in that tutorial is even less expensive than supporter, and I wouldn't need JavaScript for the kinda stuff I currently use JavaScript for.
Also holy shit this site has a mastodon instance?
>>

 No.11080

>>11079
Server costs aren't expensive at all. I pay 13 dollars a month for the pleroma node we run here.
>>

 No.11081

>>10995
you made a small spelling mistake
>but I abslutely love computers.
God bless your blog bro
>>

 No.11082

>>11081
Just saw this
>If you have any questions, or, you would like to inform me of a typo please email me at [email protected]
lmao my bad
>>

 No.11083

>>11081
Where is it?
>>

 No.11084

>>11083
It's this sentence
> I am an amature dev, learning a lot, but I abslutely love computers.
also just noticed amateur is misspelt as well
>>

 No.11088

Based
>>

 No.11089

>>11084
Thanks, i'll fix this.
>>

 No.11094

https://leftychad.net/blogs/roevwadeoverturn.html
>I see no other choice really than to just keep voting for faggy dems to at least stave off shit like what trump was able to get away with.
Been thinking about this for a few days chief and this doesn't work

If you want to play the bourgeois dictatorships fake democracy game rusted on voters get shit, it's the swinging voters who won't hold their noses and just voooot blooo and might vote for another party that get the blowjobs
>>

 No.11095

File: 1658429303298.jpg ( 478.83 KB , 1023x1011 , 1653993522592.jpg )

>>11094
I go back and forth on this. It would be different if the left wasn't completely dead, but, also democrats seem to be incapable to actually do anything of value or merit while they are in office even stop republicans from passing reactionary laws or over turning historical precedence arbitrarily.

When I wrote that blog I wasn't saying that as an absolute. I want a reason to not vote for shitty democrats. The issue is other than voting for dems what else is there? The left is basically dead and what calls itself the left today is just liberalism with Marxist aesthetics. Basically what I am saying is the alternative is that we are just totally fucked.
>>

 No.11096

>>11095
I'm new to theory and stuff, but I read The Principals of Communism, one of the articles from the /leftypol/ reading thread, I felt a bit of hope reading this part:

<Under what conditions does this sale of the labor of the proletarians to the bourgeoisie take place?


>Labor is a commodity, like any other, and its price is therefore determined by exactly the same laws that apply to other commodities. In a regime of big industry or of free competition – as we shall see, the two come to the same thing – the price of a commodity is, on the average, always equal to its cost of production. Hence, the price of labor is also equal to the cost of production of labor.


>But, the costs of production of labor consist of precisely the quantity of means of subsistence necessary to enable the worker to continue working, and to prevent the working class from dying out. The worker will therefore get no more for his labor than is necessary for this purpose; the price of labor, or the wage, will, in other words, be the lowest, the minimum, required for the maintenance of life.


>However, since business is sometimes better and sometimes worse, it follows that the worker sometimes gets more and sometimes gets less for his commodities. But, again, just as the industrialist, on the average of good times and bad, gets no more and no less for his commodities than what they cost, similarly on the average the worker gets no more and no less than his minimum.


>This economic law of wages operates the more strictly the greater the degree to which big industry has taken possession of all branches of production.


…and if I'm reading that right, then as conditions for the proletariat get worse, people will have to face the reality of their situation and move left, assert that they cannot be pushed past a certain level of subsistence. People need a certain amount of resources to live and work, work cannot be done if the proletariat cannot meet at least those needs. I think things are bad enough we'll inevitably see a resurgence in leftist political parties soon.
>>

 No.11097

>>11096
If you want more advanced theory about this check out the law of wages video: https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=85tYfXYmzJY

The gist is that workers are exploited to hard and therefor birthrates are going down. The changing demographics will reduce the available labor supply and give the workers the upper hand.
>>

 No.11098

File: 1658480891567.jpg ( 85.73 KB , 1069x1280 , 1654093581598.jpg )

>>11096
This is another thing I am back and forth on. On one hand I agree that people will be pushed in a more radical direction. On the other hand, Karl Marx ans Engles, specifically, did not have to deal with what we have to deal with today and I think they underestimated how nefarious capitalism truly could be.
I mean, think about it, we have think tanks like citizens united and nut cases like Alex jones and fox news all working as reactionary wings of the federal government trying to convince people that the answers are jews and mexicans and not the system itself and, to a degree that isn't arbitrary, it's working.
>>

 No.11099

>>11095
Something to think about; The Democratic party works very hard to keep third parties off the ballot

This shows a certain weakness that might be exploited, at the very least they're occluding Engel's barometer I reckon
>>

 No.11100

>>11099
>Engles barometer

What do you mean friend?

Yes they do fight to keep third parties off the ballot but they are so successful…

To qoute Lenin: What is to be done?
>>

 No.11101

>>11100
>Yes they do fight to keep third parties off the ballot but they are so successful…
>To qoute Lenin: What is to be done?

That makes the process undemocratic. If they expend a lot of effort to prevent a third party, they are telling you that a third party might be effective. Despite many attempts to create third parties, this has failed.

It could be that it is possible to create a third party and that failure was lack of political appeal.
A third party would have to position itself as "neither DEM nor REP" and pander to the the politically disenfranchised people who no longueur vote at all, and those that are taken hostage by either of the 2 big bourgeois parties.

It could be that the game is entirely rigged and bourgeois politics is 100% spectacle without political substance.
In that case you have to create your own separate elections, that they can't rig. And the battle for democracy then becomes a 2 stage battle. First winning the masses over to consider your new election system the most legitimate one, and the second to actually win the elections inside your own system, without rigging it.

If you went for a new system it would probably be easier to have just an election lottery. Everybody would be allowed to sign up and representatives would be chosen by the luck of the draw out of all the people that signed up. This system is simpler to set up and much less vulnerable to manipulation, and the bourgeoisie doesn't get to use their advantage in promoting political candidates, because there is no electioneering. This would be set up as an opinion poll that seeks to gain influence. if you gain traction with this you could ad more democratic features like polling everybody that signed up for their policy preferences.
>>

 No.11103

>>11101
I think the best way to do something like that would be to organize people into labor unions again on principles like this as the ultimate goal. Sortition on top of these sounds quite nice.

Unique IPs: 12

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]