It's actually a really good analogy, because it can only run on fully-capitalist hardware.
This not the dunk you think
What is "fully-capitalist hardware?"
it sanctions other CPUs and strong arms them into giving up their cycles
Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and capitalist hardware.
Fire at will, commander.
No, not the Bootlicker Beam!
Same sort of deal as "anarcho-communist" operating systems. @@
That answers absolutely nothing. Do you think Capitalists designed hardware, or Engineers?
Do you think Capitalists designed hardware, or Engineers?
I'm just gonna leave this quote as is, so you can think about it.
I have. Engineers, ie workers, designed the hardware. It was not the Capitalists that owned the companies doing the design.
Are you saying capitalists and engineers are one in the same? Maybe sometimes, but it's not capital that makes things, it's labor.
How the hell did you pick lemmy.ml?
Because people aren't one dimensional objects.
And that excuses a total lack of awareness.
I don't need to excuse your imagination.
Case in point. You think quoting an argument and sneering is a counterargument. Obviously, because you don't know the first thing about labor theory of value.
Someone asked if you think capitalists or engineers did the engineering, and you revealed you don't understand the question.
You are once again building a flawed model of the dynamic at play here in an attempt to ease the discomfort you feel from encountering something that doesn't make sense to you (why did I choose to join this community?). I'm not even attempting to build any counterarguments because the responses I've gotten don't even attempt to understand what I've said in the beginning. To be utterly frank I just lack respect for people who think of themselves as any flavour of anarchist while still dreaming of a system as thoroughly rigid as the artificially created Internet. You pretend to hate the system while desperately trying to invent excuses for continuing to make yourself at home within it.
No dude, you demonstrably said 'I'm going to repeat your argument so you can think about it.' Projecting some emotional state onto me is not gonna change how you fucked this up.
This is mockery. I am calling you ignorant.
I am trying to highlight how you joined an explicitly leftist server, whilst remaining aggressively unaware of... genuinely the first things people learn about leftism. So when you try smugly posturing your way out of a pointed question, you're just revealing you know less than nothing.
To be utterly frank I just lack respect for people who think of themselves as any flavour of anarchist while still dreaming of a system as thoroughly rigid as the artificially created Internet.
Anarchists being naked hippies, of course, not organized laborers. The internet was mostly designed and operated by academics. It runs on half a century of "does this sound right?" collaborative standards. Whatever browser you're reading this in has its origins in anti-monopolist diehards building better software out of spite.
None of which is even addressing the initial failure. Capital didn't design your computer. Intel's founders definitely did, but only because they were workers dissatisfied under Fairchild, who were in turn workers dissatisfied under Shockley. The early history of silicon valley is halfway to semiconductor co-ops.
At no point did shareholders build hardware.
It really seems like you didn't have an actual argument, you just wanted to whine and duck away from any pushback.
What in the hell is capitalist hardware? Does my computer own a factory?
how many yards of linen for my dust filters?
Amazing how every single part of your comment is so wrong.
It's actually a really good analogy,
Not an analogy, an example. Those two are different things.
because it can only run on
No, it can run on many things, including open source collaborative hardware that exists.
fully-capitalist hardware.
What the hell even is that? Fun fact: until very recently most of the computer hardware was made in communist China. I know, scary. And now that a lot of effort is being made to get that production out of there, those efforts are being sponsored by public money to an incredible degree. Billions of dollars of taxes (you know, community resources) are being poured into that because big corporations are the biggest lovers of government handouts.
Fun fact: until very recently most of the computer hardware was made in communist China. I know, scary.
China hasn't been communist in a long time.
No, it can run on many things, including open source collaborative hardware that exists
Please explain to me where this "open source collaborative" Internet hardware is on which you run your bitcoin network.
Never heard of RISC-V?
Only RISC-V spec is open. Hardware is still proprietary and is using proprietary cores manufactured using proprietary tech processes. 1% open source in the product doesn't make the product fully open source.
It's behind by decades of capitalists making the industry a festering shithole.
Why does it matter which software we're running? Running a Bitcoin node on something comes right after running Doom on it.
It's actually a really good analogy, because it can only run on fully-capitalist hardware.
This not the dunk you think
What is "fully-capitalist hardware?"
it sanctions other CPUs and strong arms them into giving up their cycles
Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and capitalist hardware.
Fire at will, commander.
No, not the Bootlicker Beam!
Same sort of deal as "anarcho-communist" operating systems. @@
That answers absolutely nothing. Do you think Capitalists designed hardware, or Engineers?
I'm just gonna leave this quote as is, so you can think about it.
I have. Engineers, ie workers, designed the hardware. It was not the Capitalists that owned the companies doing the design.
Are you saying capitalists and engineers are one in the same? Maybe sometimes, but it's not capital that makes things, it's labor.
How the hell did you pick lemmy.ml?
Because people aren't one dimensional objects.
And that excuses a total lack of awareness.
I don't need to excuse your imagination.
Case in point. You think quoting an argument and sneering is a counterargument. Obviously, because you don't know the first thing about labor theory of value.
Someone asked if you think capitalists or engineers did the engineering, and you revealed you don't understand the question.
You are once again building a flawed model of the dynamic at play here in an attempt to ease the discomfort you feel from encountering something that doesn't make sense to you (why did I choose to join this community?). I'm not even attempting to build any counterarguments because the responses I've gotten don't even attempt to understand what I've said in the beginning. To be utterly frank I just lack respect for people who think of themselves as any flavour of anarchist while still dreaming of a system as thoroughly rigid as the artificially created Internet. You pretend to hate the system while desperately trying to invent excuses for continuing to make yourself at home within it.
No dude, you demonstrably said 'I'm going to repeat your argument so you can think about it.' Projecting some emotional state onto me is not gonna change how you fucked this up.
This is mockery. I am calling you ignorant.
I am trying to highlight how you joined an explicitly leftist server, whilst remaining aggressively unaware of... genuinely the first things people learn about leftism. So when you try smugly posturing your way out of a pointed question, you're just revealing you know less than nothing.
Anarchists being naked hippies, of course, not organized laborers. The internet was mostly designed and operated by academics. It runs on half a century of "does this sound right?" collaborative standards. Whatever browser you're reading this in has its origins in anti-monopolist diehards building better software out of spite.
None of which is even addressing the initial failure. Capital didn't design your computer. Intel's founders definitely did, but only because they were workers dissatisfied under Fairchild, who were in turn workers dissatisfied under Shockley. The early history of silicon valley is halfway to semiconductor co-ops.
At no point did shareholders build hardware.
It really seems like you didn't have an actual argument, you just wanted to whine and duck away from any pushback.
What in the hell is capitalist hardware? Does my computer own a factory?
how many yards of linen for my dust filters?
Amazing how every single part of your comment is so wrong.
Not an analogy, an example. Those two are different things.
No, it can run on many things, including open source collaborative hardware that exists.
What the hell even is that? Fun fact: until very recently most of the computer hardware was made in communist China. I know, scary. And now that a lot of effort is being made to get that production out of there, those efforts are being sponsored by public money to an incredible degree. Billions of dollars of taxes (you know, community resources) are being poured into that because big corporations are the biggest lovers of government handouts.
China hasn't been communist in a long time.
Please explain to me where this "open source collaborative" Internet hardware is on which you run your bitcoin network.
Never heard of RISC-V?
Only RISC-V spec is open. Hardware is still proprietary and is using proprietary cores manufactured using proprietary tech processes. 1% open source in the product doesn't make the product fully open source.
It's behind by decades of capitalists making the industry a festering shithole.
Why does it matter which software we're running? Running a Bitcoin node on something comes right after running Doom on it.