Your problem is that when people argue against rational self-interest, they’re arguing against what ayn rand meant by it… because she coined the term and defined it, and as she defined it, it’s really stupid.

You’re just talking about rational self interest the phrase, which has nothing to do with her ideology, and is not what is ever being criticized… because again she is the inventor of the ideology.

This is akin to if you argued with a communist, saying communism is obviously wrong because you don’t like particular communities such as terrorists and commun-ism means belief that all communities are good. This is technically a correct interpretation of the etymology, but is not what anyone means when they refer to communism. You’ve completely redefined the term that has already been defined by a particular person who coined it, because you prefer to use the etymological definition rather than the definition created by the inventor of the term. You are then arguing that people using the term as it was defined by it’s creator are using it wrong, even though there is a particular history associated with this term and people are referring to that history. Why do you believe that the historical value of the term is less important than it’s etymology? If we follow this structure, most meaning will fall completely apart.

for example, the word meaning, mean-ing, without the history that binds us in our communication that could mean the process of being mean, there’s no reason this doesn’t work etymologically, but we have history with these terms that make them have meaning beyond their etymology.

yeah but i mean come on, it’s a core fundamental feature, you’d think they’d bother to make it at least decent, especially with all the insane patching work they’ve done, you’d figure one of them would be a combat overhaul, but i’m still waiting!

Do you believe ayn rand believed in rational self-interest?

If so, why was she against all forms of welfare and socialism? If not, isn’t she the inventor of the concept and thus the arbiter of what it should mean? Doesn’t that mean you’re changing the definition to suit your needs?

Yeah I feel the game is really missing exciting combat and raids. Got bored pretty fast.

Scaleless beardies are one of the most detrimental ones however, that one is very unfortunate for the animal

If you think about it scales are just keratin, basically hair

In captivity it’s fine, however some scaleless morphs are detrimental to survival, there are no safe scaleless ball python morphs for example, this is a rat/corn snake, they have one of the benign ones

Scales are made of keratin, they are basically hair!

These generally still have their belly scutes, and even if they didn’t, they only need them to move better, they can move without them if necessary, they just suck at it

Maybe out of the box, but with classicshell 8 was better

None of that applies here, can you give a specific method?

Can you give a specific example of how bluesky could be?

I really don’t see how it could matter tbh

I think lemmy should get atproto support too.

Since bluesky is mit licensed, what’s to stop a fork if something goes wrong?

what’s to stop a activitypub and atproto compatibility?

Bluesky is federated

Bluesky is federated and mit licensed

Bluesky is not proprietary, it’s mit licensed and open source

Bluesky is mit licensed, if it goes bad what’s to stop a fork? Once there’s interop between the protocols will it matter at all?

I hate teams because it consistently doesn’t just work

missed notifications, screensharing

i have little use of it and it constantly breaks

He won the popular vote…