PrimalAnimist

NC mountain man. Animist. 420. Poly. Primal. Anti-consumerism. Pro-people.

My Blog * Discord * Pixelfed * Wisdom

  • 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle


  • Well I think I pay something like $95 for YouTube TV +Max. Netflix is like 12? I’m on a sweet Spotify+Hulu for 9.99 promo for years, but I think it’s going up to $10.99. Disney is like $9. It may seem like a lot, but that’s all I spend on entertainment. I don’t eat outside the home regularly. I don’t go see movies at theaters. I don’t buy things like DVDs and stuff.

    And to be fair, it’s for the household. We’re poly so there’s a variety of interests. And if you divide that by 5 adults, it’s cheap.


  • PrimalAnimist@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlYoutube Premium
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I cancelled cable a few years ago and now use YouTube TV. I love it because I can record everything, never run out of DVR space. I can run 5 tvs with different shows on each. I can watch TV anywhere on my phone and laptop. I can stop on one device and pick back up on another. Well over 100 channels now (but I only really watch a handful). Every channel also has an on-demand section. Like TCM has what’s live but also a huge library to stream from.

    I have Hulu, Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Peacock, Max…but if I had to just use one service, it would be YouTube TV. It follows me, and is not tied to my house. If I go visit another state, it will even switch to the local news wherever I am. It has, by far, the most content in one spot for one price.


  • PrimalAnimist@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not everyone watches US politics, or Fox News. I live in the US and don’t know her. I am sure there are famous faces you don’t know because it’s not your field of interest. Can you identify famous contemporary painters by face? Physicists? Composers? Game designers? Belittling someone’s education because they don’t know something you do is pathetic and says a lot more about you than it does the person you were mocking.









  • PrimalAnimist@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe struggle is real
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    For me, sugars and processed foods (grains especially) were an addiction. I see a lot of advice about allowing yourself a “cheat” day now and then but I would advise against it. It’s like telling a drug addict it’s ok to shoot up now and then, or it’s ok for the alcoholic to have a drink on special occasions. Processed foods are harmful to us over time. So while it won’t kill you when you are 20 or even 30, it will catch up with you.

    Push through those cravings. They will go away.



  • I hear a problem and I want to offer solutions. But I gotta fight that instinct.

    I’m curious how much of that is instinct vs. cultural programming. I used to be the same way. My partner would tell me about something that has aggravated her during her day and my first instinct was to think of ways to fix whatever it was and not just listen and be supportive. But that’s the exact opposite as the conversations I might have with my buddy would go. When he tells me about a problem, I just listen and if he pauses for a verbal response, I ask him how he handled it, not give him advice on how I would handle it.

    So is that a primal bias or a cultural one? Does it come from some sort of deep genetic behavioral coding that we much protect our female mate? I’m certainly not able to answer that with any authority, but my gut says it’s learned behavior. I’ve since let go of that desire to fix. And for me, it’s much more satisfying to always listen as support and learning without seeing it as a task. That’s the default. I don’t even think about a solution unless I’m specifically asked.


  • I think listening behaviors are quite culturally based as well. For example:

    Here in the Appalachian mountains, suppose two guys are talking to each other, perhaps both leaning on a fence. The guy who is listening doesn’t watch the speaker the entire time. They don’t make occasional noises either.

    My buddy asks if I want to hear a story about some trouble he had recently with a neighbor. I nod and look at him “Yea”. He then proceeds to look forward, out across the field and I do the same. Buddy says something that I support, like what he did that started the trouble. I nod, quietly, or even make that “this is ok” face. If I make that face, it’s like saying “That makes sense to me, nothing unreasonable about that”. Unless he says something that you know he expects support for, then you just motionlessly stare into the foreground.

    If he tells me something the neighbor did that angered him, I will look at him and make the astonished face, he will look at me and nod, then he verbally confirms it as we go back to staring at the field. He will go on about it some, and I will quietly lower my head a little and shake it back forth to show my disbelief in how crappy his neighbor is.

    Then whatever conclusion he comes up with, I’ll either say, “hell yeah, that’s what I’d do” or “whoa I dunno about all that now” or something similar. The cues for listening and the correct responses to them will vary probably within subcultures.


  • I do not believe upvotes and down votes are enough information to reveal the identity of anyone. If this was truly such a risk, where has the concern for this been on Facebook, where you can see who leaves reactions by name. Or Discord where every account that clicks a reaction is available?

    Here that info is not available to the public at large. On Facebook it’s available to anyone who sees a post. Why haven’t security voices been pressuring Facebook to not track social reactions if it’s so dangerous?

    This is a feature of social media for the most part. What I write as posts and comments is available to everyone as is vastly more useful info for someone to collect.




  • Money has no intrinsic value at all. The true wealth is labor. Labor has actual value. The masses own the wealth and we give it to others in exchange for “money”. The power of the rich only remains for as long as they can control the labor. This is why they spread so much fear about AI “taking your jobs”. Every time AI and automation take away a job, it takes away a little bit of power. Because capitalism has taught us, all things being equal, the service or product that costs less is what we buy. Products with an AI labor force don’t have to pay for that labor, and capitalistic competition will drive the prices down. As more and more labor is shifted to AI and automation, those who controlled human labor, the actual wealth, will lose control of that wealth.

    If they are unable to stop it, the eventual progression would be replacing all human labor and do away with the need to even have a money system. This will do away with wage slaves, and allow us to focus on learning and having fun. But the billionaires would be no different than everyone else when that playing field is levelled. They hate that. They oppose it. They try and manipulate us to fear AI and to resist it. Capitalism is truly just another system of control.