So wouldnt a sugnificant number of people want more than they have?

You can still bribe leaders in a communist system. Woman amd healthcare exist in lots of capalist systems.

While most people who were alive in the former Soviet block would prefer to go back to when it existed because it caused a huge economic disaster when they sold the countries off for parts and privatized everything for the oligarchs

Not even close to most. Make friends in Europe.

The important part is that it’s a system not focused on things like GDP, growth, or money made by corporations to determine success, but the happiness and well-being of all the humans as a collective

Don’t I have the power over my happiness in capitalism because I can work towards higher wealth extraction to achieve my own goals?.

Who decides when growth isn’t required?

The Soviet Union threatened my parents and grandparents lives. My country did try it, we decided against it. All the issues that capitalism has, communism still has. Add centralized power, and human exploitation is worse. Communism will not solve your problems.

Why wouldn’t communism lead to cancer like growth? Wouldn’t political leaders be incentivized by the masses for never ending quality of life improvements?

Money is not the problem, it’s people. If replace the system, nothing changes. If we want sustainability, that needs to be desired by the masses, and that is achievable without communism.

That is naive. People will still fight for power and exploit others to get it.

Doesn’t communism consume everything too?

Never once.

If I worked at Google I 100% would have had the same policy. I thought the controversy was not grounded.

Frank Grimes is season 8.

My understanding is that flash was under ordered so SSD prices will be high for a long while.

Prob USSR

Twitter is wall to wall bots. I wonder how many are on lemmy.

I did not care for The Godfather.

A lot of AI art is highly controlled. Control net, manually redrawing the noise to guide output, additive models just to name a few ways artists control the output. It’s genuinely more art that some people give it credit.

Lalo lost because he likes vlogging. So much for the scary powerful smart killer.

Gus left the safe house because he planned that Lalo likes vlogging. Impossibly improbable. Beyond stupid.

Natcho dies because he wasn’t smart enough to come up with a better plan despite frequently demonstrating that he’s smart. I can understand being unable to run from your problems forever, but his ending was the laziest way to show that.

Jimmy and Kim were just passive observers in something that didn’t really involve them. Kim has a life before Jimmy, and the boring life without Jimmy is unfitting of her character. Jimmy never had an expressive turn that justified his change of heart. It was unearned.

Genuinely lazy writing. There was no point for any of these characters to exist. By far the worst final season of a show to ever exist. So much potential wasted.

Did you like that all the character building amounted to nothing? Jimmy, Kim, Lalo, Gus, Natcho all didn’t evolve or have any intresting endings that used their character. You could have replaced every of them with completely new characters during the final season and it wouldn’t change anything.

I wonder why I found True Detective unoriginal but I suspect it’s because I grew up on The Simpsons where philosophy and metaphysicality frequently is the joke and plot of an episode. Maybe a perspective that expanded on and challenged common modern thought would have made True Detective interesting to me, but as it was I felt it lacked insight and purpose. The show didn’t personally expand on anything I knew to be true.

Did you reply to the wrong comment? The finale is only one part of a weak season.

People hate my opinions.