What’s a bad upvote?

My claim is that the economic inequality experienced in peripheral Eurozone countries will contribute to the rise of fascism in those countries.

The context being an economic/political liberalism that provides no credible alternative to arrest the reduction in quality of life for poor/former working class people.

No, I understand your train of thought in terms of context. Economic and social strife leading to dissatisfaction with established economic and political systems is not a very controversial equation. I just don’t understand that inevitable “= fascism” conclusion that you’re drawing.
Surely that entirely depends on how that dissatisfaction is channeled? From Machtergreifung to Glorious Revolution and every flavor of action and even non-action inbetween.

Individual countries don’t have an exchange rate, the ability to devalue their currency, and until now, where Germany now decides to build itself a huge army, the ability to run deficits to manage downturns.

To me that does not suggest a shortcoming of the Euro as a concept but a severe lack of authority on the part of the EU. Ideally, member states would not even be able to run their own economic policies in a unified economic zone and would have that managed by the EU as well. Yeah, half-assing a federation will always have half-assed results.

the Euro has accentuated differences between countries in it, ultimately contributing to the rise of the far right.

I do not think I can get behind that claim. What’s the implied relationship here? Heterogeneous wealthy nations + time + marginal economic inequality = nationalism?

It’s so much easier to set up and install than Matrix.

Unbelievably so. Mumble is… basically one setup command. Don’t even need a domain. And it needs absolutely no resources, can run on a Pi Zero.
Setting up my own Matrix server was honestly one of the most difficult things I’ve ever attempted in decades of non-professionally using computers and I’m still not sure I’d be able to properly take care of the installation if it breaks. Sooo many moving parts. All the federation-oriented projects that rely on adoption rates reaaaaally desperately need setup wizards before any other additional feature.

Never forget Stanislav Petrov. In the end it’s a human that needs to press the button, at least for now.

Fair (with a special ominous shoutout to your “at least for now”), but do you think Petrov’s or any similar individual person’s decision making in this scenario would involve any considerations regarding the size launching nation’s or block’s arsenal? I.e. “Launch detected from US… hm, better play it safe. Launch detected from France… eh, hit that button!”?
I mean… nuclear threat is nuclear threat. I am not questioning the effectiveness of that threat, I’m questioning the premise of the article.

However, “what really influences Russian decision-making is the scale of US deterrence”, he said.

I find that hard to believe, considering that nuclear weapons have no strategic or tactical military applications whatsoever and only serve as an (effective) PR-campaign for scaring opposing civilian populations.
… does the Russian civilian population have any influence on Russian decision-making? Is there any point in running expensive PR-campaigns against them?

Have started it up as well because I fear like there might not be much time to enjoy its benefits for much longer :(

Looks pretty neat! Too bad there’s no standalone installation, only docker.

You’ve got to be joking acting like you dont understand the stakes of war

I think there might be some misunderstanding here - what do you think I wrote in my previous post? What am I missing?

For example that you cannot just invade other countries to take them over, that you shouldn’t kill people with other religions or sexual preferences, or that your country is superior to all the others.

Apologies for not wording that more clearly, but I was not asking for examples of value differences. I was asking why you think value differences make more and more people refusing to risk their lives not a good thing.

It can only be a good thing if the enemy shares the same values, which is not the case with Russia.

Even if it only leads to reconsidering and restructuring conventional “militaries” then I’d also count that as a drop in the good-bucket. I can’t quite see values factoring into it, what do you mean by that?

Do you think that joining into literal, dangerous, physical battle is a useful contribution to further that cause? If you think it would be useful, do you think it necessary? Or do you feel it’s simply the only contribution you could offer and you’d feel powerless otherwise?

Can’t blame anyone for not wanting to risk their lhealth or even lives. More and more people doing that is probably a good thing in general. Brings everyone closer to making the old adage “imagine there’s war and nobody comes” a reality.

Does that matter if you’ve already cut all other ties and live somewhere else? I mean, actually paying the taxes seems like more of an active choice if you’re living in a different jurisdiction, isn’t it?

How so?

That sounds bleak. Could you elaborate?

It is concerning - because Firefox barely has enough users to sustain it.

Er… if you think Mozilla is sustained by its users then I have some bad news for you. Or am I misunderstanding you?

that it’s an artificially engineered “crisis” by the medical industrial complex to justify modern day discrimination and refuse to provide healthcare to fat people, Black people, etc
podcast episode on this

Thanks! I’m slightly confused by the sources linked in the podcast description though. While it’s pretty US-centric they universally seem to confirm that yes, obesity rates are rising and that yes, medical consensus is that obesity is a bad thing. Does the podcast then come to some kind of different conclusion?
I don’t have a hard time believing that American companies are profiteering off of sick people, but I feel like there might be some accidental shuffling of cause and effect here. You can fleece and discriminate against a fat person, but in order for that to happen you first need a fat person, don’t you?

I mean, I get where you’re going with this, but as much as we’d like adequate public transit in the US, it’s simply not going to happen fast enough for people to not buy cars any more. Prices will keep going up as long as people keep buying, and I don’t see that stopping any time soon.

I feel like I might be too cynical in this, but demand is a strange thing, especially in a heavily corporatized country like the States. A less mobile workforce due to more and more folks not being able to afford individual transportation anymore will at some point result in more lobbying from businesses for alternative transport solutions.
But you’re right, that might just be wishful trickle-down thinking and from my understanding the States’ problem lies more with inherently car-centry city planning anyway and not with just a lack of busses or trains. That is hard to fix.

there’s no obesity epidemic. it’s all eugenics to the core

I’m almost afraid to ask, but what do you mean by that?

These are the people who then say that if you gain weight it is because you are lazy or weak willed.

Whether someone perceives it as hard to lose or not gain weight doesn’t really factor into it, does it? For adults the ultimate decision to eat more than one needs lies with exactly one person.

Really it is 99% hormones and only 1% strength of character.

I’m not sure I understand correctly, are you suggesting that obesity epidemics have some kind of shared underlying physiological reason?