I mean that’s what happens when Harris is the vice president of the administration currently carrying out genocide in Gaza. Harris also repeated misinformation about Hamas members/ Palestinian men sexually assaulting Israelis during October 7 during the last presidential debate. How are Muslim voters supposed to trust someone like that? Someone that repeats racist and Islamophobic lies about them and their Muslim brothers and sisters in Gaza. Someone actively part of a genocidal administration. Of course Muslims do not want to vote for Harris, and the reasons are very obvious.

Are you just going to ignore the racist and xenophobic talking points by Harris about how immigrants are bringing fentanyl to kill US citizens? Or Harris bringing up the factually incorrect claims about Hamas members and Palestinian men sexually assaulting Israelis, based on racist colonial tropes. Or how Harris was a top prosecutor that spent her entire career locking up minorities. I could go on and on, the entire debate consisted of the candidates trying to outdo each other with the amount of racism they were spewing.

Neutron Music Player for Android. Yes the UI is outdated, but the efficiency and feature set cannot be beat. It’s so efficient on battery life compared to both streaming music services like Spotify, or any other local music player Android app. And the feature set is incredible. The full parametric equalizer, built in frequency response correction for almost any headphone model you can name, volume normalisation, EQ presets, direct USB access to USB DACs to bypass Android volume or format limitations, crossfeed for headphones, and that’s just what I can think of now. I’m sure there are more features I haven’t even used yet.

Need For Speed Underground 2. That was a great racing game. Shortly followed by Burnout 3 Takedown. Got a PlayStation 2 bundle with both of those games for Christmas as a kid.

It was rare to see this but when I did it was a Samsung and it had been dropped.

Yeah I agree with you there I’ve experienced the same, it’s almost always a Samsung with an OLED screen and curved edges, that gets dropped with a hard impact on one of the corners.

With my experience in repairing smartphones, I’ve found that those with curved edge displays are the most susceptible. I remember when the s7 edge launched, a ton of those phones got the green lines across the screen. So I’d imagine phones with folding screens are also more susceptible to this damage.

In the article, the two phones mentioned have either a curved edge or a folding screen. It seems that any curve or fold in the OLED display makes it easier to damage.

I’ve updated my first response.

But as for looking at it in a Marxist way (obviously you are correct in that Marx did not mention unequal exchange, the chapter of Capital based on international trade never saw daylight and it is impossible to know what Marx would’ve written), Samir Amin came up with two accumulation models.

I have proposed two accumulation models, one involving the center and the other the periphery. The model involving the center is governed by the articulation of Capital’s two Departments, I and II, which, by that fact, expresses the coherence of a self-centered capitalist economy. Contrariwise, in the periphery model, the articulation that governs the reproduction of the system links exports (the motive force) to (induced) consumption. The model is “outward-turned” (as opposed to “self-centered”). It conveys a “dependence,” in the sense that the periphery adjusts “unilaterally” to the dominant tendencies on the scale of the world system in which it is integrated, these tendencies being the very ones governed by the demands of accumulation at the center…

These conditions, governing accumulation on a world scale, thus reproduce unequal development. They make clear that the underdeveloped countries are so because they are super-exploited and not because they are backward…

The “two models,” nonetheless, constitute but a single reality, that of accumulation operative on a world scale, and characterized by the articulation of Marx’s Departments I and II—grasped henceforward at the global scale and no longer at the scale of societies at the center. For the periphery’s exports, at this scale, become constitutive elements of constant capital and variable capital (whose prices they lower), while their imports fulfill functions analogous to those of Department III: that is to say, they facilitate the realization of excess surplus-value.

There is no unequal exchange. Workers in more developed countries get paid more because they produce more per hour.

…

There are statistics showing the amount of steel or the amount of grain produced per man-hour of labour in India might be 10-100 times lower than in the USA or UK (because workers use more technologically advanced tools).

The important question to ask here, if we want to work within this model, is why countries in the periphery do not use the labour techniques and tools used by by centre and combine this with their lower peripheral wages? Surely this would generate more profit than using their inefficient techniques. Secondly, if this could be the case, why hasn’t all capital fled from the centre to the periphery, as this would make the most profit. Lastly, given the current distribution of techniques and technology being what it is, one has to ask the question: is the international division of labour that results from that, with the centre specialising in certain branches of production, and the periphery responsible for other branches, compatible with equal exchange? If it was, the fractional share of products the centre produces that are exchanged for what the periphery produces, at a single price for each product, should be equal. But is it?

One possible answer here is that labour is not exploited uniformly; the rates of surplus value are unequal. And this needs to be explained in terms of value, rather than in direct prices. And how is this unequal exploitation of labour manifested? It is manifested through unequal exchange. It is this unequal exploitation of labour, and the unequal exchange that results from it, that dictates inequality in the international distribution of labour. Demand is distorted structurally across a global scale, which accelerates self centred acculturation in the centre, while hindering dependent, extroverted accumulation in the periphery.

deleted by creator

Yeah exactly you’re right, why overcomplicate the problem like the Reddit comment did? I guess that’s just typical Reddit thinking that being pendantic and using lots of fancy words and long explanations makes you smart.

The SPEs on the cell processor are actually pretty good at rendering graphics. In a lot of late gen exclusive PS3 games you can see that the developers utilised them more and more for graphics rendering. So the plan was to have the SPEs on both cell processors do all the graphics.

Imagine if Sony executives got their way and the PS3 had two cell processors and no conventional GPU. It would have been even more of a nightmare to work on.

deleted by creator

What does “winning the war” look like to you?

Can’t join NATO with an existing territorial dispute. “Agreeing and joining NATO anyways” would be an official admission by the Ukrainian government that the territories currently held by Russia are not part of Ukraine anymore.

While I agree that the ANC has deserved to lose an election for a while, one must be very careful here. Without any viable opposition party ( the DA is not considered a viable opposition party by the majority of South Africans, as seen by them failing to grow their voter base this election), the “big tent” ANC is splitting along racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious lines, in a reactionary manner. Jacob Zuma’s MK party is the most obvious example of this, their manifesto calls for scrapping the constitution.

They will lose their majority. Votes are 99% counted and the ANC is barely above 40% of the vote. The ANC have screwed themselves with rampant corruption and a failure to deliver government services reliably, the most obvious example being the rolling electricity blackouts (loadshedding) that South Africans regularly experience. Having no electricity for 8+ hours a day at worst due to government incompetence, corruption, and austerity is not workable.

Okay then, why is the solution of making sleeping outdoors illegal bring debated by the highest court in the land? Why is the supreme court of the US even entertaining such an unethical proposition? Doing so is just the US abdicating responsibility for it’s people, and intensifying and welcoming inequality. Why not debate starting housing programmes for people instead, so that people do not have to sleep outside in the first place?

Going to be honest back when I was in high school we drew penises on the fields in the dew/frost. It was an all boys school so yeah.

deleted by creator