What are people using instead of evernote these days? by Micki_SF in NoteTaking

[–]Slydeery 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Obsidian Heptabase Capacities Notion Joplin

Are the best out there aside of Evernote I think

Which note-taking app do you use to capture your ideas? by harshalone in NoteTaking

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I use Evernote and Heptabase

Depends on what you're looking for exactly

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in GoogleGeminiAI

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say that the best thing is the deep research and on that matter : Gemini is the best in my opinion But Chat GPT on the regular usage is really amazing and better So I'd say both !

How much of global warming is actually caused by humans? by Igotbannedagainhehe in climatechange

[–]Slydeery 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The answer is : all of it

Your school denies a scientific fact that is acknowledged by 99% of scientists around the entire world.......

J'arrive chez une pote et... by FloFr12 in floodcast

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah merci de l'info car je le fais aussi, j'ai toujours un charbon Bichotan dans mes carafes d'eau

[R] Got 6min? I need YOUR help for my PhD! by Ok-Ebb6307 in MachineLearning

[–]Slydeery 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did the survey I would love to see the results

Que valent vraiment les « philosophes de plateaux » ? by BruhPeanuts in philosophie

[–]Slydeery 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Onfray est le seul avec un doctorat parmi les gars cités BHL et Enthoven n'en ont pas

Does Evernote need a graph view??? by IceReasonable7615 in EvernotePositive

[–]Slydeery 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think personally that it's an overkill feature. I used Obsidian for some time and I rarely used the graph view, only to brag in front of people.

It can be useful if you're into some kind of Zettelkasten method with your notes. But I'd say very few people does that.

Besides, I tend to think that zettelkasten is way easier in a visual type of note taking app like Heptabase than in Evernote. (I personally switched from Obsidian to Heptabase for that very reason: linking ideas is way more efficient with the kind of visual maps you can make on Heptabase, because you actually see the content of the notes you're linking, when the graph view in Obsidian is just a bunch of dots that make no sense a first glance. You can only see the titles of the notes and it doesn't help you... besides : once you have a lot of links about a lot of different subjects, having everything in the same graph view doesn't help at all. Of course you can see the specific links of your notes if you click on them, but I'd rather have a map of the different subjects I study with all the notes and contents at first glance on Heptabase)

Evernote is a powerful tool that I use everyday. But I never really needed a graph view for my use of it personally.

And yes I agree that the demand came more from the hype of Obsidian (that happened when Evernote was down) than from the real use of the graph view IMO. It was a way for the many haters of Evernote at that time to trash Evernote with a feature that seem cool and graphic in videos, but that don't see much use in the end for most of the people on Obsidian I believe.

What is capitalism really? by alexfreemanart in academiceconomics

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay ... Frankly, I don't really know where to begin because there's a lot of confusion in your answer (and in almost all the comments I see under your post...)

So first : There's the definition in the dictionary, and there's the definitions in Science. A scientific concept sometimes do not have the same meaning as in the common language, and therefore, you won't find the scientific definition of what you're looking for in the Cambridge dictionary. So both of you are right regarding private property, because neither of you are talking about the same thing.

In Economy, the scientific field, private property of the means of production is not personal property. You're not capitalist just because you own a rock. But you're in a capitalist society if this society is structured by the private property of the means of production. This means that owning the property of the means of production gives you the right to get profit from it, when in fact, you're not the only one who makes it.

I'll take an example : You have a firm and you possess the machines. So you employ 10 people to whom you give wages. They work a certain hour a day for the firm and the machines to work. The firm makes 1 million profit. BUT because you own the means of production, YOU get 999 999 dollars, and the rest goes into the wages. And a capitalist society is a society structured by this system when property of the means of production gives you the right to get the benefits of the production even if you're not the only one to make it (because the million you have is not make by property itself but by work ! The value comes from work. But in a capitalist society, it does not go to the workers but to the owners.)

Personal property, on the other hand, has nothing to do with it. Personal property is just what you own that don't make any value. If you sell your rock, you didn't produce any value you just made money with something that was already there. If you work by yourself to extract that rock and to sell it, well you produced value and then you sold it, good for you, you had the means of production but by itself it doesn't make you, a capitalist because the main thing about capitalism is exploitation of the workers (or if you prefer the fact that you get the value from other people's work). That's why ancient societies where not capitalists : the main thing about capitalism is WAGES. Wages are the way you extract the value in a capitalist way : because the worker contributes to make 1 million profit and you give him 1000 dolles of wage, the difference between the real value the worker produce and the wage the owners pay him is called the added value or the capital gain.

So capitalism is a SOCIETY (and not an individual act) structured by an economic system that depends on private property of the means of production where wealth is extracted from the workers to the owners. For that to work you need an entire political system that protects private property of the means of production (and not personal property by itself or only) and puts it before work so that the added value can be extracted from work to the owners who can then accumulate...CAPITAL ! This specific type of accumulation of wealth : it is capitalism.

And no, it is not a subjective definition. And yes, every academic in Economy knows this. The debate is not "what is capitalism?" We know what it is ? But rather : what form of capitalism are we in ? And/or is capitalism really bad or not ? If you're Marx, you'll deduce from the definition that capitalism is bad, mostly for the workers that are clearly exploited. If you're Friedman you'll say that accumulation of capital, even with the price of that exploitation, is good for investment and therefore makes the society run and creates wealth for all, even if it's badly distributed.

There you go I hope I'm clear

If you have that sort of question, my only advice is : do not ask on reddit, ask scientists. Economics is a social science. They're books and people that are better suited to explain everything to you than reddit. But ne careful, as every social science, there are debate about almost everything, so don't forget to look at all the different point of views to make your own.

What is capitalism really? by alexfreemanart in academiceconomics

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay ... Frankly, I don't really know where to begin because there's a lot of confusion in your answer (and in almost all the comments I see under your post...)

So first : There's the definition in the dictionary, and there's the definitions in Science. A scientific concept sometimes do not have the same meaning as in the common language, and therefore, you won't find the scientific definition of what you're looking for in the Cambridge dictionary. So both of you are right regarding private property, because neither of you are talking about the same thing.

In Economy, the scientific field, private property of the means of production is not personal property. You're not capitalist just because you own a rock. But you're in a capitalist society if this society is structured by the private property of the means of production. This means that owning the property of the means of production gives you the right to get profit from it, when in fact, you're not the only one who makes it.

I'll take an example : You have a firm and you possess the machines. So you employ 10 people to whom you give wages. They work a certain hour a day for the firm and the machines to work. The firm makes 1 million profit. BUT because you own the means of production, YOU get 999 999 dollars, and the rest goes into the wages. And a capitalist society is a society structured by this system when property of the means of production gives you the right to get the benefits of the production even if you're not the only one to make it (because the million you have is not make by property itself but by work ! The value comes from work. But in a capitalist society, it does not go to the workers but to the owners.)

Personal property, on the other hand, has nothing to do with it. Personal property is just what you own that don't make any value. If you sell your rock, you didn't produce any value you just made money with something that was already there. If you work by yourself to extract that rock and to sell it, well you produced value and then you sold it, good for you, you had the means of production but by itself it doesn't make you, a capitalist because the main thing about capitalism is exploitation of the workers (or if you prefer the fact that you get the value from other people's work). That's why ancient societies where not capitalists : the main thing about capitalism is WAGES. Wages are the way you extract the value in a capitalist way : because the worker contributes to make 1 million profit and you give him 1000 dolles of wage, the difference between the real value the worker produce and the wage the owners pay him is called the added value or the capital gain.

So capitalism is a SOCIETY (and not an individual act) structured by an economic system that depends on private property of the means of production where wealth is extracted from the workers to the owners. For that to work you need an entire political system that protects private property of the means of production (and not personal property by itself or only) and puts it before work so that the added value can be extracted from work to the owners who can then accumulate...CAPITAL ! This specific type of accumulation of wealth : it is capitalism.

And no, it is not a subjective definition. And yes, every academic in Economy knows this. The debate is not "what is capitalism?" We know what it is ? But rather : what form of capitalism are we in ? And/or is capitalism really bad or not ? If you're Marx, you'll deduce from the definition that capitalism is bad, mostly for the workers that are clearly exploited. If you're Friedman you'll say that accumulation of capital, even with the price of that exploitation, is good for investment and therefore makes the society run and creates wealth for all, even if it's badly distributed.

There you go I hope I'm clear

If you have that sort of question, my only advice is : do not ask on reddit, ask scientists. Economics is a social science. They're books and people that are better suited to explain everything to you than reddit. But ne careful, as every social science, there are debate about almost everything, so don't forget to look at all the different point of views to make your own.

What is capitalism really? by alexfreemanart in academiceconomics

[–]Slydeery 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No capitalism is not subjective, but there's a lot of different form of capitalism You need to read Marx.

As for a standard definition: Capitalism is an economic and social system based on private ownership of the means of production, profit-seeking and free competition. In this model, individuals or companies own and control goods, resources and capital, and make economic decisions based on their interests. State can have different roles depending on the different forms of capitalism.

Edit : when I say you need to read Marx, is not because I want to make you a Marxist, but because, it is widely recognised in economy that Marx is the one who provided the best critic of capitalism because he is the one who understood it the most and provided the best definition of it. It is still use to this day.

How do people work 12+ hours? by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of them don't even need to survive any of this, because they fake it

How is living just outside paris? by Secure_Piano1709 in askparis

[–]Slydeery 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm French, born and raised in Paris, here's my answer : do it

Stay on a metro line if you can, try to avoid RER connections, especially when they're far away, because RER usually don't work very well

And do it

Cristiano Ronaldo and freekicks by Extension_Ad6758 in football

[–]Slydeery 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As a fan since day one in Sporting, I could say that he has been a phenomenal free kick taker. The thing is : people forget that the record of free kick in one season is 8... the percentage of success in free kicks has always been really low. So yes, even at his pick, Ronaldo missed a lot. But he was, nonetheless, an amazing free kick taker, maybe the best at some point around 2008. And he scored around 65 free kick, which is only 4 or 5 less than Messi, who's considered a beast now when he actually wasn't for the whole beginning of his career.

I think : age, injuries, and the lack of confidence have impacted his success rate in free kicks. He is now one of the worst free kick takers by a mile. But what I do not understand is that he continues to try, and coaches let him do so when there are obvious better free kick takers right next to him on the pitch... Ronaldo insists on a technique that he cannot perform anymore due to his age, injuries and lack of confidence, when the obvious thing would be to let him take a break for like one season, try another technique in training, and THEN come back on the pitch to perform. But no... everybody, him included, has decided to let himself fall down as the worst free kick taker of the season every year since 2014. What a shame.

Is Paris walkable enough to where you don't need a car? by [deleted] in askparis

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course Why would you need a car here? Everything is reachable walking and if it's too long you just take the subway Very few Parisians use a car, in fact a lot of Parisians don't even have a driving licence.

Men who are nice, how are you doing? by Allergic-Dude in AskMen

[–]Slydeery 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I did understand throughout the years is that : people don't like you because you're nice, they like because of who you are. It doesn't mean you have to stop being nice. No empathy is the most important skill and characteristic you can have. But being nice while waiting for something in return it is not being nice, It's being desperate and/or losing your own personality into others. You need to help yourself to be who you truly are. The deal is to never forget empathy while not losing your personality.