They’re not “against reform”, they’re disenfranchised, lazy or just… not the brightest minds.

They made a mistake (a big one at that), but that doesn’t mean that they like what’s happening. The upper class has been doing their best to keep us dumb, busy, tired and uninformed. And it’s clearly working.

First, people supporting Trump are not the majority by any metric. They are 49.8% of the people who voted, which is 31,8% of the eligible voters and 23,3% of the total us population. You could argue that the majority of people “don’t hate” Trump, and while that’s still a scary metric, it’s not the point that I wanted to make.

“They” aren’t Republicans or Trump supporters, they’re wealth-hoarding billionaires that actively make people’s lives worse. As it has already been said, support for Luigi is pretty much bipartisan. Nearly everyone hates those people, and even plenty of people who voted Trump did it because they see him as “one of the people” (for some godforsaken reason). They’re propagandized into voting Republican through all the culture war, misinformation and fear mongering, but when people like Brian Thompson die, no one is actually sad and a lot actually celebrate.

Trump does indeed have a personality cult, but from what I’ve gathered the great majority of people voting him aren’t part of that and they don’t actually like him, it’s just that they hate “the gays”, “the libs”, or “the immigrants” more.

He traded his life for another. He showed the world that it’s possible. And “we” outnumber “them”. Making people realize that is an achievement in itself.

Would you say people like Rosa Parks “didn’t accomplish anything”?

Whoops, fixed. My keyboard somehow gave the blame to non-eligible voters too.

Elon is supposedly on the spectrum, so he could have done it to show his excitement, without realizing the true meanings and implications.

And considering he’s on social media 24/7, he should’ve realized what people interpreted it as by now and posted an apology repudiating fascism.

But he didn’t, did he?

Reminder that ~270 170 million Americans allowed this to happen.

Holy hell what even is this? Are they really comparing those photos of Biden and Harris to what Elon did?

These two paragraph are full of the common assumptions and generalizations we assert as a society about fastfood work and frankly I am tired of having to nod my head and pretend like they are indisputable facts. Nothing you said is evidence, you have just dutifully sketched out the narrative we use to dehumanize fastfood work (and other “essential work”).

…so what exactly is wrong about what I said? You’re saying they’re assumptions and generalizations but didn’t bring any counterpoint.

People have been convinced by the rich to think fastfood work is demeaning, pathetic and worthless and I think it is honestly pretty disgusting how willing people are to jump on that bandwagon and do free work for the ruling class in helping undermine worker leverage to demand a decent life.

I… really don’t think that’s what’s happening? At least barring the aforementioned delusional people. If anything, jobs that are considered horrible and demeaning like certain teachers and nurses get MORE sympathy from the public exactly because we see that’s a terrible way of living and that’s not okay.

What do you think we should do then? Act like it’s an awesome job and everyone is happy doing it? Wouldn’t that have the opposite effect of making people think all is good and nothing needs improvement?

…I don’t think I understood your point. I’ll try giving my answers to these questions but I’m sure I misunderstood most of them.

For one, why is the profession of feeding people hot food in a speedy manner in remote places or late hours considered so unworthy of a basic respect that people constantly shit on it as a job?

In otherwords, why does fastfood work have to be seen as unworthy of being considered a respectable job?

Because it’s a terrible job that I don’t think anyone actually wants to do. We’ve already talked about how stressful and unsatisfying it is as a job, there’s pretty much no upside to it.

why can we only ever ask of technology in the context of the food service industry “how do we remove the humanity from this thing?” and never “how do we restore or embue humanity to this thing?”

Personally, because I don’t think it’s possible. It’s a very “mechanical” job (save a very small number of people like restaurant chefs), and giving it “humanity” (less stressful shifts, less pressure and higher pay) is counterproductive to both what companies want (more money) and what customers want (to eat food for cheap and quickly, even at odd times or in odd places).

I think it’s one of the best jobs to be replaced because it’s easy (for a machine) and no human actually likes doing it. The issue is, of course, that the cut costs will go straight to the pockets of the CEOs and will not be used to improve the customer experience (or at least make it cheaper), so the working class will just have less jobs while having to pay the same to eat, but that’s a widespread issue with capitalism that’s far harder to fix.

If there is an existential crisis here to be solved it is clearly not with helping massive corporations further slash operating costs and investments in stable decent employment, but with examining and addressing what horrifically went wrong that we have slept walk (by and large) into thinking this is an ok or healthy way to think about other human beings.

I feel like you’re conflating two things here: people that don’t consider “working at a fast food” worthy of respect (imo rightfully, because again, it’s a terrible job), and people that don’t consider “people who work at a fast food” worthy of respect (probably because they believe in the “hustler” mentality and are convinced that it’s their fault if they’re stuck with a shitty job).

My opinions on a job and on someone who work at said job are vastly different, and not just for the food industry. I’m guessing a lot of people also think similarly, I’ve never seen people shit on fast food workers as people, except for the aforementioned delusional types who think anyone could be a billionaire if they just put in “enough work”.

Again, sorry but I don’t think I really got the meaning of your last comment so do tell me if I completely missed your point and all my answers were gibberish based on assumptions I had.

I never said “working fast food” is extremely easy. What I said is, listening to a customer speaking and just relying that to a machine is extremely easy.

Doing that for a full shift is NOT easy. Doing that while being stressed because the pay is shit and you might even have another job on top of that is NOT easy. Being treated as a robot for half of your non-sleeping life is NOT easy. But all of those things are not easy for a human. None of these are issues for a software, whose hardest task is simply “listening to a customer speaking and just relying that to a machine”, which is, taking out of the equation human matters like stress, emotions and whatnot, extremely easy.

A stressed, underpaid human? Yeah, that’s not an appropriate tool for those things.

I don’t think it’s shitting on fast food jobs at all. The point of this is that taking orders at a fast food is, in the micro, an extremely easy task. What makes the job as a whole exhausting is the fact that you have to do that for a full shift and the human brain gets stressed from doing that. But AI doesn’t, and yet it’s messing up the simplest part of the job.

That’s just false. People are all capable of reasoning, it’s just that plenty of them get terribly wrong conclusions from doing that, often because they’re not “good” at reasoning. But they’re still able to do that, unlike AI (at least for now).

I legit think the state/oligarchy will kill him silently.

Wouldn’t that backfire though?

Won’t more people start thinking “So this guy killed a really important CEO and apparently never got caught nor faced repercussions… you know what…”

The definitions of several concepts are fuzzy, and therefore can be circumvented or challenged or abused by all sides of the equation.

They are, but it’s not like they’re very definite nowadays either.

What is a ‘similar product’ that is allowed after 30 years (and therefore what is a ‘dissimilar product’ that would be forbidden before),

I’d say “similar product” is anything that doesn’t try to pass off as the original one, and is mechanically different enough. Palworld for example, or all the other Pokéclones that popped up in recent years.

how would a non-profit that just pays high salaries to its managers fare between the marks of 30 and 50 years (and just gives some little money to research or charity).

They wouldn’t, in that period I’d allow stuff like piracy or free cultural events, stuff like that. Obviously the copyright holder would still be able to profit off of their own products, but everyone else would have to ask them to do so.

And again, why give artists and creative companies so much more time of IP protection than we give STEM inventors and companies time in patents (this random site claims patents last 15 to 20 years only) ?

Because those are things that humanity needs to progress. I do think they could be longer in a different way, like “they can be used by anyone without consent from the inventor, but they need to pay a small percentage in royalties” or something like that, just to ensure they have a permanent source of income that’s enough to live off. I’m not knowledgeable enough about that to talk though, so I can’t really answer that question without going into baseless speculations.

I still think if copyright laws weren’t so oppressive, 50 years would be fair (And still a huge improvement from the current situation).

Maybe have it in tiers or something? First 10 years: full copyright - until 30: similar products allowed, but no blatant reproduction - until 50: reproduction allowed as long as it’s not for-profit - post 50: public domain?

If we’re talking PvP, battling has constantly evolved through new abilities, even without gimmicks the way the game is played changed a lot through the years.

In single player they also changed a lot of stuff since gen 4, although the positive changes were mostly in gen 5/6 and the later ones like wild areas and the switch to “””open world””” were… not as well received.

However Pokemon came out in 96, that’s 28 years. There’s been very little innovation in their games since.

First, not really, there’s been a LOT of innovation in Pokémon, as much as people want to deny it.

And second, 28 years is really not that much. We’re not in the Disney realm of copyright-hogging, I think 50 years is a fair amount of time. The issue is that it’s often way too broad: it should protect only extremely blatant copies (i.e. the guy who literally rereleased Pokémon Yellow as a mobile game), not concepts or general mechanics. Palworld has a completely different gameplay from any Pokémon game so far, and (most of) the creatures are distinct enough. That should suffice to make it rightfully exist (maybe removing the 4/5 Pals that are absolute ripoffs, sure).

It’s the studio Nintendo chose as lead developer for BDSP.

I can’t think of a single first-party Nintendo game that’s released riddled with bugs in recent memory

Literally Pokémon. SwSh, SV and BDSP are all a bug-ridden mess. You will probably find more bugs playing SV for an hour than in all gen 3-6 games together.

Although yeah, it’s a (huge) anomaly and the rest of the first-party games are extremely polished. It just sucks to be a Pokémon fan in the 2020s.