Yeah, that script should only take a few days, most of which spent on creating an ascii pooping animation while it’s waiting for you to return.

If you want to set up a spreadsheet, the formulas are pretty simple:

Salary / 52 = weekly pay (approx, there’s a few extra days in the year but my bi-weekly pay is salary / 26, which actually works out to a slightly higher pay than if they did it by extact days)

Weekly pay / 40 = hourly equivalent (or 37.5 if you want to assume unpaid lunches, which effectively increases your hourly rate)

Hourly equivalent / 60 = minute equivalent

Time in minutes pooping * hourly equivalent = money earned pooping

For hourly pay, just drop that in to the hourly equivalent variable above.

From my perspective, things have shifted in recent years. In the past, there seemed to be a general consensus that both the right and left were interested in building a system that benefited society at large, they just disagreed on what that looked like. Seems like more and more people are realizing that all conservatives want to conserve is their power and access to wealth.

It’s also becoming more apparent that even conservative social issues aren’t intended to improve anything for anyone but are just about controlling people and making them more vulnerable. Like it’s no longer a secret that the drug war was more about racism than public health. The abortion ban and their plans for divorce laws are clearly about making women either more dependent on men or unable to leave them if they can’t prove fault.

All that plus the red wave that was supposed to take over Europe didn’t.

It’s too early to tell for sure and it might just be the pendulum swinging this way before it swings back that way. It could also be more of a reaction to the far right than conservatism in general, since the far right has seized so much control over conservative political groups. But I do hope that this sentiment sticks.

Guessing they are talking about it more loudly now to try to redirect the rising anti-conservative sentiment before it threatens the status quo.

You don’t get to a billion dollars by being ethical in the first place. At the very least, they are all willing to exploit the labour of hundreds or thousands or more.

They don’t need a strip search to see you have a spoon in your underwear with the scanners they use these days. They can tell what kind of genitals you have in your underwear and which way it’s tucked (at least they are technically capable of showing that, they might have pulled back from that due to the backlash about how much they could see). Spoon in the underwear is a specific signal to let authorities know someone is being trafficked and can apply to sex trafficking or kids being brought to countries where they can be married off into an arranged marriage. Not sure how it would work if the parents want to emigrate to Russia. Also not sure how thoroughly they block the arranged marriage thing if both parents are on board.

Spoon in underwear at the airport, kids, if you think your parents might be trafficking you to another country and you don’t want to go.

They wouldn’t dare! They don’t have the guts!

Define “worked”. Because Poland is where the Allies pivoted from “appeasement while we frantically try to build up fighting power” to “ok now it’s war”.

What the others said plus Ukraine has gotten pretty good at setting up defensive lines that become meat grinders for Russian attacks. The Russian offensive is winding down in Ukraine, which means they are settling in and won’t be using up as many resources and they’ll get to play the defensive game with Ukraine coming at them instead. If they can hold what they have, they might get to keep it if Ukraine eventually gives up, so they can bide their time on offensives.

By taking some territory from Russia, they can’t just dig in and hold it, they need to retake that land, so Ukraine can set up the meat grinders there to keep Russian manpower and resource losses high. Also, Ukraine can set up a more elastic defense because holding that land isn’t as important as defending their own territory. Pulling back tactically doesn’t mean that Putin will control the fate of a Ukrainian settlement in the area given up.

Plus, all they need to do is treat any settlements they do take decently and Putin might lose popular support since their whole justification for the invasion is that the Ukrainians are as evil now as the Nazis were.

Also, due to the shape of the geography, Russia has more space it needs to defend from random attacks like this than Ukraine does. Sure, the border is the same length on both sides, but it’s easier to centralize in a convex area than a concave area. If you’re in a convex area, you can travel straight to areas of interest on the border. If you’re in a concave area, you need to go around things to get to any spot on the border.

So Ukraine could have one force that could attack in a number of places or respond to defend while Putin would have to stretch a similar force out more to be able to respond just as fast or move it more to set up an attack (which then would have fewer options for where to attack).

I just hope they are setting something up with the people of Belarus. It would be both awesome and hilarious to see Belarus get liberated with the help of Ukraine in the middle of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Also, Ukraine being able to do this isn’t a great sign for Russia’s preparedness for WWIII. If things go in that direction, Putin will be at risk of becoming China’s puppet in the best case scenarios for him.

Now I want to see an “all your base are belongs to us” parody version of the full sequence except it’s Putin’s men panicking because Ukraine set them up the bomb inside their base.

Capitalism was nice when it first popped up. Because it was an improvement over feudalism.

Actually, it wasn’t that nice when it first popped up, considering the first capitalist ventures were colonialism (including the conquest of the Aztec and Incan empires and the east Indian tea company that was worse for India than Hitler was for Europe).

But it was relatively nice because before capitalism, most development needed to be done by the king, who had limited funds. Bankers had been building wealth and capitalism allowed them to become new sub kings with their own empires. More empires meant more development, which also means a lot of employment, so it did increase the quality of life for many people as they got paid to improve things around them and new products popped up.

But we’ve since outgrown the whole kings thing for control of a geographic or political region while corporations are still run like dictatorships (with the executive team acting as sub kings for the board, which acts as sub kings for the shareholders, where institutional investors dominate, which just makes the whole thing less transparent because those institutions also have similar command structures).

So while there is some truth to capitalism having had a positive impact, the overall story is more complicated than that (the plunder from colonialism made it look a lot better at a high price in the colonies, and it was a relative improvement to “only the lord of the land can develop it and benefit from that improvement”) and society has generally since rejected that model for running political regions but the economic model has yet to catch up.

The capitalists are resisting that change similarly to how the kings resisted changing from monarchies to republics and have been since around WWI and the fascist regimes of the 20s and 30s were a result of capitalists siding with them to prevent various leftist movements from gaining power.

That would have been a liberation. And a real one, not just a propagandized liberation. If they did, the Russian forces there might find themselves contending with both Ukrainian forces and the Belarusian army that refused to join the Ukrainian invasion.

Hitler also used the largest invasion force in history (3.8 million troops, vs 3 million for the Nazi invasion of France or 2 million for the allied invasion France). And still failed so badly he lost the entire war.

Though it is hard to compare them because the contexts are so different. Russia isn’t as motivated this time as USSR was in the 1940s.

That’s mostly institutional investors. I suspect it was actually a reward for ruining Twitter.

So if I’m interpreting your analysis correctly, we don’t just have a global warming problem, but there’s also ghosts!?

But what if you’re choosing to sit at the table of Nazis because there’s a bomb in your briefcase that will kill some of them and damage Hitler’s hearing?

I think they are taking China’s concerns seriously. That’s why they are arming Taiwan.

I’m tired of this idea that the people of a region shouldn’t have the choice of whether or not they are a part of a country. This applies to Taiwan, Ukraine, Chechnya, Palestine, Catalan, Tibet, or anyone else that wants to break off from a country people other than them decided they were a part of.