When I learned about it first time I thought it sounded too good to be true. Turns out, it is just that good.

It is a work of art!

It is a triangle. The abstraction of lines in non-Euclidean geometry are geodesics and just like three lines form a triangle, so do the geodesics. If you walked along the earth’s surface from the equator to the North Pole and back, taking 90 degrees angles every time, you will have felt that you made a triangle by walking straight in three directions.

The reason the angle sum can be more than 180 degrees is that the sphere has a positive curvature. If you want one with negative curvature and less than 180 degrees angle sum, try to make one on the side of the hole on a torus (look up its curvature if my explanation was lacking).

EDIT: Picture for reference:

The answer is obvious. Depending on the curvature of the object the triangles have higher or lower than 180 degrees angle sums. Flat space just happens to have 0 curvature.

Did not know about this site. It was a nice read and their mission statement is cool. Thanks for sharing! :)

Yeah, hearing about how hard it would be to get tenure dissuaded me from pursuing my original dream of doing a PhD. In retrospect I think I am much happier where I am now than I would’ve been, which really is what matter the most to me now. Freeing myself of the obligation of attaining my goals was actually quite nice.

I misinterpreted your comment and was very pleasantly surprised that something named “rational wiki” would call him out for the crackpot that he is.

Yeah, this is not a nazi bar.

Realistically, how many people build applications themselves? Signal does not have reproducible builds (on Android at least) and depends on Play Store Services for notifications.

Loved out of life 👻

Also, reported income is not the same for regular people and the top 1%. Tax evasion techniques makes it seem as if they have way less income than they really have.

EDIT: I do realize some of this could be incorporated into the statement of your quote above.

The (then) right-wing Norwegian government (left-wing by US standards ordered a study because they wanted to claim this. The results (source in Norwegian, use a translator) were the opposite of what they wanted.

For example: “the businesses used more money on their workers when the stock owners were subjected to higher wealth tax” (paraphrasing here).

Is a car or shirt or house personal property?

Yes.

I reference “dignity” because it’s part of “the unshakeable foundation of the Republic of Poland”

Yea, not sure I care about the right-wingers in Poland either.

cooperate with you if you remind them of the Soviet Union, and I expect that saying “we should remove the capitalist class” will do that.

Well, I think we should be honest about our intentions, unlike the capitalist class that tell you “brown people” or “the economy” is the reason they pay you slave wages.

What misinformation am I repeating? I wouldn’t have written a statement that I don’t think is true, so I suggest you point out anything you think is incorrect and explain your perspective, and maybe share a URL for some more interesting sources.

The part about seizing personal property to pay taxes, for instance. A progressive tax system can have bottom tiers paying no taxes. The right are those who impose high tax rates on the middle class and poor, in order to make them hate taxes.

The US is the only country I know of that practises this.

1. Wealth tax does not block economic growth, rather the opposite, because it forces wealth to be reinvested to not lose too much value.
2. You clearly need a lesson in proportional taxation if you think people would have their personal property appropriated.
3. I do not give a fuck about you placing your dignity in ownership of material assets, that is a you problem.
4. The top 10% pay less income taxes as a fraction of their income than the bottom 10%.
5. Really, we should remove the capitalist class because they will fight back to the detriment of everyone else.
6. I do not give a fuck about the IRS. I am not an American. My country actually has a wealth tax.
7. You are repeating misinformation and capitalist propaganda with little understanding of what you are saying. Have you even reflected on what “the economy” really is? If you are a trickle-down Reaganomics-follower, you might want to get your brain checked.

Exactly.

GitHub has long sought to discredit copyleft generally. Their various CEOs have often spoken loudly and negatively about copyleft, including their founder (and former CEO) devoting his OSCON keynote on attacking copyleft and the GPL. This trickled down from the top. We’ve personally observed various GitHub employees over the years arguing in many venues to convince projects to avoid copyleft; we’ve even seen a GitHub employee do this in a GitHub bug ticket directly.

You only need to know that corporations do not like copyleft to know it is good. The same goes with capitalists and wealth tax / inheritance tax.

I obviously downloaded a car after seeing that obnoxious anti-piracy ad.

Yeah, kind of. Moderation is tricky and moderating moderators is even worse. I got banned from !worldnews@lemmy.ml for being a “white moderate”. Was it censorship of non-leftists? No. I am a communist, not a moderate.

There is one rogue mod there banning people right, left and centre and that is a problem, but not one of plain censorship. I would rather say it is frankly the problem of having a bad mod who does not understand their role. I imagine the same happens on .world and other places, albeit under different guises.

Yeah, living in a parliamentary democracy means I have to make an effort to wrap my head around how the US “democratic” institution works. The internal structure of the Democratic Party has more in common with our democratic structure than the structure of their “competing” parties. As a result there is more room for difference within the Democratic Party than within a political party in our system, but the political difference between parties in our system is greater than those within the democratic party.

Whilst it economically is to the right, many of its social policies it endorses are leftist.

My analysis has long been that there is no political will to implement leftist economical policies in the US, i.e. those that really matter in the grand scheme of things, even though there exists a semi-conscious wish for them within the populace. Please do not misunderstand, increasing equity between people of different backgrounds is important, but important single issues such as gay marriage are insufficient if they do not come along with, or better yet, as a product of equity of material conditions. It was all the same with the feminist movement where social advancements were conceded in lieu of increasing their economical statuses, with the division in measurable quantities, such as income or capital ownership still going strong (note I do not advocate changing the ruling elite from one subset of people to another subset of different characteristics, but instead saying that capital ownership should be transferred from the subset to the whole).

Strengthening the political power of the marginalized by increasing the material conditions of their strata is the best way to make social progress, which the ruling elite of the US is painfully aware and which is why they sometimes are willing to skip the first step and reach the inevitable second immediately. The discrepancy between the people’s wants and needs for leftist policies, again conscious or not, and the actual politics of the US, is deeply connected to the Democratic Party’s willingness to concede these social changes without losing the backing of the capital interests that fund them.

Because MSNBC is an American organization and their coverage is American-focused, their bias relative to American politics is what’s relevant here.

I understand what you are trying to say, but I disagree. They are making claims about a lot of news outlets in other countries, which means they cannot present an American skewed perspective as the truth (unless what they really want is to export political views and exert influence domestically and abroad, now we might be talking here).

It doesn’t matter what their beliefs or policy positions are relative to any particular standard, what matters is whether or not their work presents the news accurately or in a way intended to mislead or influence their viewers in favor of one side or the other, which they clearly do.

All reporting should be held to the highest standard. Anyone seriously attempting to critique and comment on reporting at a meta level, should hold themselves to the same, or even a higher standard, for the same reason. What I am essentially arguing is that the MediaBiasFactCheck falls in line with pretty much all of US news as mass propaganda machines in the interest of capital. If you disagree, why do you think they operate at all?