Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 21:58:16 JST cjd
   Nobody wants to admit this, but you only get a High Trust Society by EXCLUDING people. In American cities you can build all the tramways you want but still nobody's getting out of their car because it's just not safe to do so.
   • Embed this notice
     Special Guest Star (s2208@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Wednesday, 29-May-2024 21:58:15 JST Special Guest Star

     in reply to
     tramways and so forth are just ways to spread low trust people into the suburbs.
   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Thursday, 30-May-2024 02:00:20 JST ≠

     in reply to
     @cjd
     
     Supremacism works for all ethnic groups. They all believe they are the chosen master race, and that's probably healthy.
     
     However, I think the problem with white supremacism is that it is not tied to culture. Culture produces goodwill and zaps violators.
     
     The insurance idea is a good one, since it transfers the cost of criminality to everyone through collective punishment.
     
     Taxes are unaccountable and always wasted.
     ✙ dcc :pedomustdie: :phear_slackware: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Thursday, 30-May-2024 02:00:21 JST cjd

     in reply to
     White Supremacism is a simple and largely effective way to exclude low trust people - this is why even after 70 years of Teachers Teachering just as hard as they possibly can, they've still been unable to get rid of it entirely. It confers evolutionary advantage because it works.
     
     However, it is not perfect at all. Case in point, which one of these you rather have as your neighbor?
     
     If you pick the meth head just because he's white, you're not being serious.
     
     Other than the problem that it's not always accurate, White Supremacism has a bigger problem: There's no continuous selection pressure. If you're born white, you can be whatever kind of hoodlum you want because you "already passed". Entropy is constant, so anything that isn't continuously improving is continuously devolving.
     
     As I've said numerous times before, if a city would simply require criminal liability insurance for anyone inside city bounds, within 5 years that city would be the most wonderful place to live in the entire world.
   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Thursday, 30-May-2024 02:00:46 JST ≠

     in reply to

     • Flat Moon Theories
     @cjd @Sirpantangelini
     
     The smart side of libertarianism recognizes that people will abuse anything they get for free.
     ✙ dcc :pedomustdie: :phear_slackware: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Flat Moon Theories (sirpantangelini@noauthority.social)'s status on Thursday, 30-May-2024 02:00:47 JST Flat Moon Theories

     in reply to

     @cjd woe. Insurance to exist in a city in case you commit a crime... yea... that will totally make cities nicer.

     Did you know the moon is flat

   • Embed this notice
     cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Thursday, 30-May-2024 02:00:47 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Flat Moon Theories
     You gonna spit gum on the sidewalk if it's gonna make your insurance rate go up ?
   • Embed this notice
     cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:31:57 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Flat Moon Theories
     • Felix Krull
     • ≠
     We do not.
     
     The worst we have is climate/enviro/vegan/communism, but the whole "teachers recruit your kids to be gay and eunuchs" is not a thing here.
     on-lain ✔ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Felix Krull (felix_krull@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:31:59 JST Felix Krull

     in reply to

     • Flat Moon Theories
     • ≠
     @cjd @Sirpantangelini @amerika Do you have tranny story hour in France?
   • Embed this notice
     cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:32:00 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Flat Moon Theories
     • ≠
     > Why would they charge you less? It's a business, they charge as much as they can.
     
     Communist logic detected.
     
     > What will they pay out if you
     
     Not me, my landlord - if I destroy his property.
     
     > How is playing scatch off cards any different in risk assesment?
     
     I'm in France, we still have a functioning legal system, fake scam insurance companies aren't a thing here.
   • Embed this notice
     Flat Moon Theories (sirpantangelini@noauthority.social)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:32:01 JST Flat Moon Theories

     in reply to

     • ≠

     @cjd @amerika

     Why would they charge you less? It's a business, they charge as much as they can.

     What will they pay out if you have a claim and how much arguement and paperwork will it take to get your value back?

     How is playing scatch off cards any different in risk assesment?

   • Embed this notice
     Flat Moon Theories (sirpantangelini@noauthority.social)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:32:02 JST Flat Moon Theories

     in reply to

     • ≠

     @cjd @amerika

     Why would you buy insurance?
     In what aspect of life would you want insured?

   • Embed this notice
     cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:32:02 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Flat Moon Theories
     • ≠
     I buy renter's insurance because my landlord won't rent to me without it. It costs me like 200/year and it would probably be less if the insurers knew more about me.
   • Embed this notice
     cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 31-May-2024 02:32:03 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • ≠
     I'm also a fan of decentralized unregulated insurance markets. The government has no business deciding how risk is evaluated. If I'm gonna buy insurance, I don't want to pay one cent more than the cost of the actual risk based on the kind of person I am.