Comments

1

AngryData wrote (edited )

Im in my late 20s. I definitely see the appeal of such a device, I just don't like how it has been implemented. Im probably the target audience for Windows 9 and 10 for mobile computing but Microsoft has really soured my taste lately by trying to get in on the same social/media/advertisement/propaganda crap as everyone else, especially after they have already fucked them up so many times before.

I still use an ancient tablet for reading digital books, froyo version which I think was 1.2 or something, but its not like it works with any new programs these days.

1

AngryData wrote (edited )

yeah no, the reason I never abandoned reddit before is I would go onto another site, try to post a comment and get "Sorry, you didn't submit enough post garbage spam to comment or vote yet" and then I left, and then everybody else left because nobody could comment except for post spammers and bots.

3

AngryData wrote (edited )

I don't have one because they don't provide a high enough level of user control. Built like garbage, infested with more software garbage, expensive as fuck with all sorts of bells and whistles you don't need, and it makes you pay ridiculous data prices and get fucked in the ass by billing.

If you want a computer, use a computer, if you want to text or call, then use a normal phone. I don't know how anyone can stand mobile browsing, its like trying to read a news paper with a paper bag on your head with crooked eye holes.

4

AngryData wrote

That matches up pretty well with my own beliefs the only difference is I personally think there needs to be a 'small' form of a larger state, that helps direct larger public works projects, organizes disaster relief, and help manage other large infrastructure projects, but knocking out pretty much all its other duties/powers.

2

AngryData wrote (edited )

Interesting. I mean obviously they can't use wax because coffee is hot and would melt it and soak into the paper, the plastic works but I doubt most people knew it was originally sent to China to one of their garbage villages. Now since China's trying to get rid of or downsize those places they just go into the landfill. Maybe an advance compost pile that is injected with plastic-eating bacteria? The plastic is very thin with lots of surface area so is an ideal situation for decomposition, but it probably would take far too long for any short term capitalists to give a shit.

I wish I could see into the future just to laugh at plastic products 2000 years from now though when they start getting infected by the rise of plastic-eating bacteria. Originally lignin from trees was indigestible by bacteria too, the source of much of our coal as those trees sank into the ground and got covered, but these days it only takes a couple years for wood to start rotting away.

3

AngryData wrote

Its even more disgusting because of how far Walmart has strayed from Sam Walton's original philosophy. While it was a never a great job, Sam at least tried to paid an okay wage. When his kids took over they went full asshole cutting every penny possible and now most of their employees require social aid just so they can afford to work for Walmart.

3

AngryData wrote (edited )

Remington is going bankrupt because they got bought out by Capital group, they significantly lowered the build quality, and tried to ride on the name to make big profits. Now years later gun owners want nothing to do with a new remington productions because they are at best shitty and at worst potentially dangerous if their shit chinesium metal full of pits and holes explodes in your face.

Same thing with Kimberly 1911s. They use to be one of the best you can buy, tight tolerances that needed like 500 rounds to wear in but great. They got bought out like 10 or so years ago, now their 1911s have visual defects and flaws, like they didn't think people would take apart their super expensive gun in order to clean it and notice?

4

AngryData wrote (edited )

There are a few reasons, most of it comes down to the political propaganda people are sold on even if it has nothing to do with what the party is actually pushing. However there are some HUGE issues.

One is that the democratic party keeps trying to ban guns really hard, especially the last few years, which is protected by our constitution which pisses a lot of people off. On top of that, very few people trust the government, which is the entire reason we have the 2nd amendment, to overthrow tyrannical government. Plus we have the largest group of experienced battle veterans in the world along with all of the world's largest civilian militias and have for a long time without problem. Then there is the immense amount of hunting in the US (we have tons of empty wilderness), sport shooting, police shootings, gang activity from the drug war, there is no requirement for police to protect you, ect. Then combine all that with previous democrat gun bills that ban completely useless and illogical shit like gun shrouds, slings, folding stocks, gun mufflers, and other bullshit that doesn't effect weapons. Plus trying to enact gun law based on how scary the gun looks rather than the actual functionality of the gun. People get angry and if you have a gun, voting democrat is voting to make yourself a criminal. The democratic party seems completely ignorant to the amount of voters they lose by pushing gun control.

Another is regulation in general. Democrats are all for regulations, and in many cases I agree there needs to be regulations, however they do not in any way shape or form base their ideas and thoughts upon informed science, research, or any other publicly available information or voter consensus, its just a bunch of of rich farts patting each other on the backs for passing arbitrary regulatory laws that get manipulated by industry-insiders to limit potential competition.

And for social services, republicans like to frame all social services as lazy people that never worked just sucking money for free and pretend they just party every night blowing all their food stamps and welfare on drugs and avocados. In order to counter such claims, democrats agree to more regulatory requirements for social services, many times so much regulations that you are better off not wasting endless hours doing worksheets, filling out forms, and reporting to some government bureaucrat every week, ultimately resulting in spending $2 for every $1 given out to make sure the 'wrong' people don't get any help, which makes the system ineffective and expensive which is just more fuel for the republicans to pour on the fire about dem lazy poor people who, in their minds, would have become regional manager and rich in a year if only they would work harder.

There are lots more but I really only meant to give a brief overview, there are a lot more issues. 90% of the problems come down to having a black and white choices when picking your favorite color of the political rainbow. You can't say you like red, but hate blue, you only get to pick whether you think a black or white choice will result in a better color spectrum. You can't say "I agree we need gun control but only pertaining to handguns because they make up 90%+ of gun crime." Instead you get to choose between democrats "Scary polymer guns are scary! Ban the least likely weapons to be used in crime and useless knicknacks!" or the republicans side of "We want to be able to buy any and all weapons! Unless you are poor, we should really charge a flat-rate tax so poor and colored people can't get guns and shoot back as we stomp on their rights."

2

AngryData wrote (edited )

Honestly, I think you should get rid of these rules. Not because I want people to post them, but because it sets a dangerous precedent that is easily abused when we already have the right kind of user base to self-select content and suppress lies and bullshit. Voat is already a containment site for those people.

I don't need nor want other people telling me what is and isn't acceptable for me to read about, its the main reason I came here from reddit. And if I see censorship just because somebody disagrees with the content, ill drop this place in a heart beat. Just reading about it makes me want to leave, it's extremely authoritarian even if you think its for the right reasons.

9

AngryData wrote

The US doesn't have a real leftist party, at least not as a main party, usually better identified by the 'liberal' moniker. Democrats are right of center, not a lot, but enough. The republicans are like the extreme ideological right, like just shy of Nazi levels. The main difference between the two parties is how they want to accomplish their authoritarian ideals. Democrats want the government to control and regulate as much shit as possible to make 'us' all 'equal', but of course the rampant corruption ends up making some 'more equal' than others, usually the rich because they have political weight. The republicans however want the 'free market', or in reality, the ruling wealthy class, to have all the power. Basically to remove government power and put it in the hands to wealthy private individuals in the name of business and rampant capitalism and personal profit.

Tl;DR Republicans = far right, advocates for personal power through wealth and money. Democrats = Slight right, advocates for government power by regulating and controlling as many normal people as possible through heavy handed law, thus giving default power and control to the rich who can write in exceptions for themselves.

5

AngryData wrote

Paranoid enough to block all scripts and cookies by default, paranoid enough to not own or use a smart phone, paranoid enough to avoid photography which inevitable ends up online.

Not paranoid for tinfoil hats but a lot of conspiracies do have elements of truth, as evident by nearly every government in history doing illegal and immoral testing on its civilians unknowingly and fully admitting they did so in the fairly recent past. (Oh but not today! Of course not! How ridiculous would we be to think a bunch of morally bankrupt and corrupt as fuck politicians, bureaucrats and authoritarian nutjobs would violate our rights willy nilly?!)

3

AngryData wrote (edited )

Mustard and like 95% of products that originate from mustard family plants. Mustard, cabbage, kale, brussel sprouts, cauliflower, rutabega, turnips, ect.

If they all went extinct tomorrow, I would give zero fucks.

Oh and peas, those are pretty nasty too.

1

AngryData wrote (edited )

I own plain solid color pocket t-shirts, some jeans, some cargo shorts. Most are a little oversized because I use them as work cloths, all cloths are work cloths. Nothing is made to match, I wear steel toe boots 80% of the time I leave the house. A flannel work jacket, one green light jacket. White tube socks.

I guess the real question is do I even know what fashion is? Because im not sure ive ever picked out a single piece of clothing based on appearance except that it doesn't have a bunch of shit on it that makes retardedly slow readers constantly stop me for 5 minutes at a time.

2

AngryData wrote

This right here, unless someone else brings up the world communism, we shouldn't because the word has been poisoned. You can get someone to agree with every single point about communism, only to flip on what they claim to support if they are4 told that it was communism.

Sure debate the word, meaning, and history with people. But if they don't bring up the label, neither should you.

4

AngryData wrote

If you treat different groups of people differently you are just fueling another class struggle down the line.

Learn from the failure of previous communist states, if everyone isn't equal, then nobody is equal, which pretty much guarantees a ruling dictatorial class will assume power and start trampling on the 'undesirables' and once they are done with them they will move on to you.