Because the cheapest manufactured homes in the US are now 100k shipped from the factory.

Inflation in the US (i.e. pure greed) is off the charts. People that think manufactured homes are affordable haven’t looked in 20 years.

It can, sure, but that isn’t the point of work or where most people fulfill their social needs. That is called finding community in suffering. During bank robberies and other hostage situations the victims also find ways to trauma bond and take their mind off of their current suffering, to the point where trauma bonded people are far more likely to be lifelong friends and partners than just random strangers.

In an ideal world where people magically get to do what they want to do and not worry about getting paid, your view point makes more sense. We don’t live in that world though, and selecting applicants based on how much they’re willing to fake being your friend just results in less competency and more work for everyone.

I said the opposite, actually, the problem is your work is your entire life. Jobs are there to enable you to live life. They are not your life. They are not what you do, they are the necessary component that allows you to do what you want to do because we live in a world that does not value human life.

While NIMBYISM is real, it’s not happening here. The protests in council meetings are not ‘we don’t want it here,’ it’s ‘we don’t want it anywhere in our state.’ Because the effects of AI are state wide reductions in resources.

I’d pick the person that is most competent for the job, personally, as that means less work for others on their team, and less work overall that needs to be done in order for a day to be over.

I’m not at work to make friends, normal humans have a life outside of work for that. ‘Work friends’ are not real friends, they’re hardly real people. They are entities you have to interact with in order to continue living.

One could say the same to you. What you described is inexorably linked to AI. Those things will always be a part of it. If AI was useful, or liked, by the general public – if it served a single useful function they appreciated, they would accept the consequences of its existence.

People like driving in the US. It is destroying the environment. It poisons the water and air. It is expensive and raises taxes, hell most property tax that most people pay in the US goes towards road maintenance for cars, and nearly half of all utility expenses are due to the complexities of car-centric urban design. But people accept that.

People are not accepting of AI. Period. It does not provide enough value for its cost.

“I don’t think people that are motivated to catch murderers are motivated by their hatred of murder. It tends to be mostly driven by things like no liking dead bodies or the fact Susan is no longer around.”

It’s not supposed to be fun. No one is at work to have fun. People are at work because they die if they do not work. It’s not really possible to have fun with a gun to your head unless you’re mentally incompetent or a psychopath.

So you favor dumb people over competent people?

Sounds about right for the average hiring manager. People don’t care about your organization. The incredibly inefficient system of capitalism they were born into requires them to exchange the unrenewable resource that is their time, the only thing they have in this universe, for arbitrarily valued currency which changes value constantly through no action they make, so they get the privilege of continuing to exchange their time for more of this currency, until their flesh suit is too broken to continue this exchange.

No one has ever been excited about working for your company. A few learned to fake it. A few simply aren’t capable of complex thought and treat working for your company the same way they’d treat a colonoscopy or birthday party because they literally can’t tell the difference.

Your view is the exact opposite of reality given the number of AI Data centers that are being delayed and just outright stopped by local communities.

Well that was quite literally Harris’ 2024 campaign so… yeah. Most dems want to keep things the same and often campaign on it. At worst they dress more of the same with co-opted progressive ideas that historically have ended with just more of the same.

Only from a propagandist and defeatist point of view. There are not just two options. There is no reason to support people that are only willing to keep you alive as long as you ostensibly give them power. The lesser evil is just evil that is not applied to you, only others; voting for that makes you just as bad as any MAGA supporter, since you’re voting for the same reasons.

She has been very visibly involved with progressive politics for a decade. Not democratic. Those two are not even in the same ideological strata. The most progressive democrat is still far right to any modern progressive or leftist. AOC is to left-wing politics as Donald Trump is to Bill Clinton.

And I did watch the video, she did not say not to vote at all. She said not to vote for genocidal candidates even if they’re democrats. There’s a pretty big difference. FPTP is not a duopoly unlike what the propagandists consistently sell you. If people voted for their interests, not to appease billionaires but actually for people in parties for their interest, there would be no two party system in the US, even with FPTP. There is nothing stopping a third party from winning a seat, Bernie Sanders is proof of this. There is nothing stopping a third party from having the presidency, except the perception that a third party can’t.

If there are no democrats that are against genocide on the ballot, if there are no progressive democrats at all, then guess what; don’t vote democrat. If enough people do that, dems lose. Permanently. This does not mean republicans win.

Can you actually link to any part of anything she has posted that has told people not to vote at all?

Anywhere?

I’ll even give you her substack which is more radical than what news sites tend to select of her words.

She also is not a ‘democratic strategist.’ by any definition.

Actually I’m not suggesting not voting. I’m suggesting not voting for genocidal fascists because they have a different tie. We have tried your way for LITERALLY OVER A CENTURY. IT DOES NOT WORK.

How is ‘stating the requirements for a candidate to receive a vote’ sabotage in a democracy?

They have moved to the right every single election since Jimmy Carter, win or lose.

This election did not make a difference in that regard. FFS Bill Clinton’s ENTIRE FUCKING CAMPAIGN AND PRESIDENCY, was bending over backwards sucking off the conservative voting base trying to convince them the ‘southern democrats’ have risen again.

Hence why she lost, she did not have a base.

Yes, unironically. It’d eliminate most security risks currently inherent to Windows while allowing for decent customization. It would also greatly accelerate WINE and ReactOS, giving legacy software a smooth offramp from insecure older versions of windows to Linux.

Apology accepted.