In all seriousness, I hope this person will be fine. It is usually detrimental to self preservation, with either active or passive aggression, to openly state what things are. I hope this person can protect himself from any harm of any nature (even harassment).

Incidental, but the cause of Valery Legasov's death is accepted to be suicide. Whether that is actually what happened I won't argue for however, it is something I do not know anything about.

I do not agree with the method of Luigi Mangione, if he was indeed the one who killed Brian Robert Thompson, because it completely put him in the power of others. A better way is to be a pain in the backsides of all such as Brian Robert Thompson (which is not going to be even a tiny fraction affected by the politics of Saint what should or should not be done as it is going to be by non co-operation, civil disobedience and boycotts), such that they can no longer do what they do and no one can simply replace them (which is what will probably happen now. I doubt too many are concerned about the deceased very badly, instead their own safety. The chances of a 'better person' taking the CEO role are low). That said, what he will face is likely to be anything but 'justice'. On the surface, yes, but I would heavily doubt any claim made that he was not subjected to illegal treatment, and continues to not be subjected to it, while in custody. This is on the basis of the reaction of the authorities to the killing, mostly from the political and law enforcement. One would think that the most benevolent person was killed by one who is varying degrees of being evil. The authorities who control the process have mostly taken a side, and that is never the feature of a system which seeks to uphold 'justice'.

This looks like the plot of Chernobyl, which was a TV show creation of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster which tried to portray what happened mostly, re-enacted. I hope this fellow does not face harassment as a result of this article. Though that is unlikely.

People with power behaving like people with power. There used to be concessions to logic, but that I see less and less.

I had been intending to replace my OS with GrapheneOS since last week but have been delayed—need to back up some stuff I haven't done yet—and this post comes at a good time for me. Thank you for making it.

Yeah, I never looked into that series because I can't afford it. Nevermind, since I have a backlog too…

And perhaps I'll get heroes 4 while I'm at it. The review led me to avoid it at the time. I've played 1–3 so far (not playing the expansion of 2 fully because I didn't like it and playing it regardless turned out to be painful), having never finished the base campaign of 3 let alone the expansions. I could play 4 soon after.

The problem stated here is an extreme oversimplification of an already extreme oversimplification, but at least it covers some individuals and political entities doing horrible things. As for any actual solution, it is punishable under the law for hurting religious sentiment, is going to attract the hatred of all who are not the most powerless (from every religion and group) for disrupting the economic way of life, and is going to attract the attention of the countless Trump-size trolls in the country (a popular example). In addition to that, it is going to attract the ire of those persons who feel that making India the next China is the solution to countering China. ~~The population is no more than a resource in a classified labour intensive region, however flawed the system may be, and capital intensive is not as simple as it sounds. The whole country depends on the existence of a powerless segment, and parts of the world depend on those in the country who depend on the existence of a powerless segment.~~

In other words, get ready for many people with a vested interest in the cruel structure of the country to treat you like the most evil person in the world.

Oppressed communities also have a tendency to oppress a segment of their own, so you will have those who believe that every oppressed side is composed of saint-like persons will also be against you—in this world where it is common to choose a 'lesser evil'. It goes without saying that the oppression itself is unacceptable, of course.

That is on a large scale. On an individual scale, those who does not follow the principle of harming others for personal gain are seen as fools, and as easy targets for harming for personal gain. It doesn't matter how nice a person is, behind the niceness is usually hidden this acceptance. I would say that such persons who refuse to harm, however indirect the harm may be, are not fools but idiots who refuse to understand such a way of living which is dependent on cruelty. And I will continue to be such an idiot. If anyone is a fool, it is the persons with those acceptances. They mess around so much because they aren't happy. And the most unfortunate cases are ones who try to co-operate with the ones who would harm them with the hope of reduced hostility, rather than wholly refuse to co-operate with them. Maybe even grouping up to pressurise rebelling forces to not disrupt the plans of the group. That said, the oppression itself does not get the slightest bit of justification. The attitude to harm another for gain is unacceptable to me.

The current problem is a combination of multi-layered vested interest in cruelty, embarrassment even within the country over admitting to the occurrence of such a thing, and naivety which enables the hand which oppresses oneself—rather than denying it the aid it needs to do such a thing. In other words, political reliance mentioned in the article for the starving village was probably part of the problem rather than an improvement. If you are not respected as a human, you do not improve the situation by contributing to the functioning of those who were oppressing you. The situation seems no different from a group which had outlived its usefulness, and I think it is probably what happened. It is a horrible possibility which the vested interest group would have more interest in not knowing than not having it happen. What actually happened will be buried under layers of politics due to the embarrassment I mentioned before. Deducing things is the best one can do to know what happened. However, interested persons can also put in work to solve the problems faced by the village if they desire.

Accepting accusations of being the worst human being around at the moment now…

Not surprising

Cool. I could still get Baba is You at some point, and I've never played a Zachtronics game before.

I do know one game which 95% meets all conditions put—Heroes of Might and Magic 3's base game without mods so far. The game has a 'fan' trap where they tell just about everyone that a popular mod is either the definitive or best way to play. I played that first. I later played without mods, it was many times more complex and somehow better balanced. I felt abusive because the mod, at that particular time, had a first time load screen which claimed the original makers did not know what they're doing—and merely stating anytime that you prefer it without mods would incite open hostility from many, even when no reference was made to the horrible methods used. The game itself, however, fully utilises having practical knowledge and using it to strategise which method you'll use against your enemies (for example counter attack, drain their armies and resources, or simply charge at them with full freedom of how to go there and to adapt) and giving you freedom with hundreds of possible strategies to play with, and the game involves the simulation of choosing any side who range between the most evil to the lesser evils all fighting each other as similarly minded factions (and doesn't really play into the harm of civilians in the game itself). There is something really enjoyable about it even if some maps could last 10 hours at a moderate pace, and even longer if you simulate a show of force with complete map domination and capture (which can be useful when you can carry over the hero levels to the next map, which is stated beforehand).

I'm playing this currently. I'm also looking into the enjoyability of wholesome sexual content, and the enjoyability of the comedic evasion of characters from people who want to do sexual acts with them but which will only lead to trouble later. But these come later and not from games.

It hurts everybody you know in different ways, and it hurts people more based on their socioeconomic status. It pokes and prods and twists millions of little parts of your life, and it’s everywhere, so you have to ignore it, because complaining about it feels futile, like complaining about the weather.It isn’t. You’re battered by the Rot Economy, and a tech industry that has become so obsessed with growth that you, the paying customer, are a nuisance to be mitigated far more than a participant in an exchange of value. A death cult has taken over the markets, using software as a mechanism to extract value at scale in the pursuit of growth at the cost of user happiness.

This 'death cult' is just ordinary people who take the easy way of forcing others to provide what they cannot do themselves. The commercial system is little more than a convoluted mechanism to fulfill this need. While, of course, not being extremely cruel to the workers because that always has consequences. This rule goes against the very instinct and reason for those radically believing in this system though, and as a result is disregarded in time by people who believe their predecessors who bit more than they could chew were foolish for not merely suffocating the poorer classes even more, in the hope they will work for them out of desperation.

These things have a simple root—it is people being unwilling to bear the burdens and pains for becoming capable of doing what they want to do, and seeing it preferable to push the pains on others instead. The most effective way to deal with it is to disobey and push the burden of pain right back to the cause of problems, rather than take up the pain for either pennies or the promise of easing the pressure, while the majority of the benefit coming from the work you put in goes to others. Push it back, reject it, and push it back again when these persons defiantly cause more problems. They'll end up toothless and—the horror—with take up some form of technical skill learning to survive.

An organisation without the technically skilled persons to ~~suffer under~~ work for them are just a bunch of persons with many desires but no way to fulfill them. All the while the structure of 'legitimacy', which forces people's hand to work for practically achieving nothing, breaks down. People are forced to work hard again if they ever had the idea of simply making others do the work and benefiting from it. In this happening you do not destroy co-operation and business themselves, but only trim these perverted aspects off them.

There are ways to mitigate this.

• Interact with software which had more to do with people doing technical work rather than being involved in 'business' or 'employment'.
• Reject the trend of legitimacy and embrace practicality.
• Simply do not co-operate with the entities doing these things. This thing in particular works even in the most hopeless seeming situations. Also, casually disobey.
• Move towards being more and more technically skilled yourself. It does not necessarily have to be with computers, if you prefer not to. You will find yourself not dependent on anything in an absolute manner, and these organisations will lose out on one more user they need to survive—because they work that inefficiently with their already less effective methods of operation.

It was then he became a believer in the potential benefits that artificial intelligence could offer society, including its ability to cure diseases and stop aging, the Times reported. “I thought we could invent some kind of scientist that could help solve them,” he told the newspaper.

I'm curious if he actually said the stop aging part, since it is not in quote yet attributed to him.

That said,

The medical examiner’s office determined the manner of death to be suicide and police officials this week said there is “currently, no evidence of foul play.”

As a person who had been suicidal since I was younger than 10 years old till a few years ago, I can confidently say that no suicide is without foul play. The foul behaviour is just… normal. And socially acceptable as a result. He was probably harassed, which is what usually happens when you question things.

Edit: spelling