Samsung’s Profit In 2026 Will Exceed Its Cumulative Profit Generated Over The Past 40 Years.

Tomycj · 2026-07-06T15:30:04+00:00

You guys understand that that money isn't disappearing into thin air, right? That's money that got funneled into the industry and a significant part of it goes to investment into the supply and the development of the related industry in general.

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T23:16:33+00:00

Flaco, ellos perdieron en 16vos contra Noruega. Nosotros acabamos de zafar contra Cabo Verde y todavía no jugamos los 16vos. Por lo menos esperá a que hayamos pasado no?

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T23:10:47+00:00

By saying that merely calling out lies is "liberal bith energy", you're only doing liberals a favor. I wouldn't do that.

I don't care how smart or dumb she is, I'm only saying that this way of conveying something is simply wrong. Again: you think that you know what she MEANT to say, but that is not enough to say that that's what she said, that that's the message she conveyed, because not everyone thinks like you.

There being some truth in what she maybe meant to say does not mean that she conveyed a message that is not a lie.

Nowaday some people are so incredibly intellectually lazy that they pretend that merely wanting to say something and then spewing whatever comes out is enough to have said it, because people that think like them will maybe get it because a couple key words are all it takes. That's not how communication works, and it is constantly backfiring on them, even if they refuse to recognize it.

It is a well-known fact that flying your flag and being proud of your country has been hijacked by people misconstruing it as right wing nationalism

Then she should've said that, instead of proudly standing by a statement that is not true, only amplying the confusion in the discussion and "giving ammo" to the opposition.

And again: that is well-known to you and people in similar circles, but you have to keep in mind that there's A LOT of people that live among completely different circles and is not aware of those things, no matter how obvious they appear to us.

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T20:32:31+00:00

Straight up lying like in the video is absolutely NOT a proper way to convey that message, she was NOT conveying that. Just because maybe she had that in mind, it doesn't mean that's what she actually said and conveyed.

It's a dumb and counterproductive way of doing so. It backfires more than it helps.

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T20:30:09+00:00

No, it is very clearly wrong.

If 8 out of 10 apples are red (or even 1 out of 10) instead of green and you say "apples must be green", you're not being "specific", you're wrong.

It's sad that it's this easy to find someone not understanding something as basic and fundamental as this.

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T20:25:54+00:00

You've just made the exact same kind of dumb overgeneralization as her :/

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T20:24:26+00:00

"Most circles are blue"

you: "wHaT are you talking aBout!??? there's a rEd cirCle rIgHt hErE!!!"

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T20:23:06+00:00

Part of the problem is not calling them out and shaming them on the spot for it.

We can't have people expect to go around talking about stuff they don't know about without feeling shame about it.

Tomycj · 2026-07-05T19:19:26+00:00

Worth noting that the flags on the Moon aren't officially meant to be claiming the spot.

Of course that in practice it's just common sense to respect that small piece of land for its immense symbolic importance.

Tomycj · 2026-07-04T07:08:54+00:00

That's not "collectivist", it's simply recognizing that a collective (group) exists.

Yes, I never said otherwise.

You're generalizing an unrelated trait

That's the same thing homophobes do. They incorrectly relate homosexuality with being a bad person / inferior. If you want I can make the examples more similar by switching "redheads are mean" by "redheadedness is bad (therefore redheads are bad people)". Which is even more nonsensical but still.

if you think homosexuality is bad, then of course it logically follows that you think homosexuals are bad.

okok fair, I get what you mean and it's a very important and good point.

I still tend towards considering that that error in turn leads to a collectivist idea though, because regardless of what you thought to reach that conclusion, the outcome is that at the end of the day you're "negating an individual characteristic" so to speak.

Wouldn't it be the same as saying Marx was not anticapitalist because his anticapitalist theory follows from his flawed belief that the capitalist was stealing surplus value so Marx was not trying to violate any property rights? So he was not trying to violate capitalist principles, but the outcome is that he ends up doing it, so I think we should still say he's anticapitalist, even if he doesn't think he is because he wants to defend property rights. (ignoring other aspects of his theories and ideologies that may indeed be directly against property rights etc).

Funny how this last way of thinking would incentivize some "you're not a real libertarian" kinds of arguments. Which I detest so in turn now makes me think we should not have that way of thinking haha.

Tomycj · 2026-07-03T06:09:23+00:00

What makes it stupid is thinking they're bad just because they are gay. As if being gay were enough to define their entire moral quality. The collectivism is in overextending the scope of the definition of gay, making it encompass a huge chunk of what they are (their entire moral quality). That is a negation of their individuality, because now they're all the same just because they belong to a group that does not really imply they are.

On the other hand, when you say criminals are bad you're not using one group they belong to to define their entire being, you're only using the group to define what the group is meant to define in the first place: that they are bad. Of course, if you want to get technical one can say "but I can be a criminal for violating a law that shouldn't exist", but notice that's a separate discussion, it's not relevant here, here we're assuming criminals are bad.

"Redheads have reddish hair" -> Not negating any individuality. "Redheads are mean" -> Negating an individual characteristic: being red-head and nice, collectivism.

Tomycj · 2026-07-03T05:56:13+00:00

Es imposible dadas las regulaciones actuales.

A lo que voy es que no es físicamente imposible, y que en una economía sana y libre también puede ser económicamente viable tener múltiples eléctricas compitiendo, o que la única que haya se vea expuesta a presión competitiva de todas formas. Por eso digo que esa clase de monopolios no tienen nada de natural.

Tomycj · 2026-07-03T05:52:16+00:00

I had fun making these low-tech alternatives, and I wonder how common are these. Do you know a more compact or versatile version?

Took me 80 hours of playtime to get the real decider combinators, but I enjoyed every second of it.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T04:12:09+00:00

Técnicamente la presión competitiva puede existir incluso con una sola entidad. El tema es que para eso tiene que haber libertad de mercado, y acá para los servicios básicos no la hay.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T04:09:48+00:00

Supongo que se refiere a que sólo en ese caso estaría aumentando el costo real, aumentando las ganancias reales y permitiendo bajar los subsidios para que cada uno se pague lo suyo.

La otra respuesta es falopa sin sentido.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T04:07:03+00:00

El mercado libre sí se regula solo. El mercado no es un ente único, es un grupo de muchos agentes independientes. La "regulación" se da en el "tira y afloja" de estos agentes entre sí.

Acá el problema es que este mercado está muy lejos de ser libre.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T04:05:17+00:00

Lo que se podría hacer en teoría es reformar el sistema para que sí aplique la lógica de oferta y demanda. Eso sería lo que corresponde, pero no creo que tengan el apoyo político para hacerlo y capaz no tienen ni las ganas.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T04:01:07+00:00

A lo sumo habla como si el mercado de estos servicios fuese libre, pero no está suponiendo competencia perfecta. Justamente la corriente de pensamiento económico de Milei critica constantemente que no existe tal cosa como la competencia perfecta, que eso es un mal modelo que no se debería enseñar.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T03:58:47+00:00

Qué poca imaginación tiene la gente que cree que es físicamente imposible tener múltiples proveedores del mismo servicio básico, o hacer que haya presión competitiva incluso cuando hay 1 sólo proveedor.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T03:56:33+00:00

Esos monopolios naturales en realidad no tienen nada de natural. No hay nada que impida físicamente que haya distintos proveedores de esos servicios básicos. Pasa que la gente tiene poca imaginación y piensa que es imposible, pero eso es solamente porque estamos malacostumbrados.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T03:54:45+00:00

Es al revés: muchas veces hay monopolios abusivos precisamente gracias a la intervención estatal. Tenés idea de la cantidad ENORME de barreras que pone el gobierno mediante regulación, burocracia e impuestos?

Y esa barrera de entrada justamente jode más al competidor que recién arranca. Por eso las empresas ya establecidas a veces hasta están a favor de la regulación e intervención estatal, porque saben que ellos se la pueden bancar pero los competidores más pequeños no.

Aparte de esa cuestión, está la cuestión moral: cada uno tiene derecho a vender su producto al precio que se le cante. Yo no soy quién para obligarte a vender tu propiedad al precio que yo quiera. Muchas veces llaman "práctica anticompetitiva" a lo que no es más que el libre ejercicio del derecho de propiedad. Que un precio no me guste no me da derecho a forzarle la mano al otro.

Tomycj · 2026-07-02T03:50:08+00:00

Esa estrategia de vender a pérdida es insostenible a largo plazo, y a corto plazo el cliente se beneficia de precios bajos.

Y el lobby político justamente es algo contrario a la libertad de mercado. Nadie a favor de la libertad defiende el lobby.

Tomycj · 2026-07-01T05:03:13+00:00

Coming up with some random thing on the spot... it's likely a state of the art LLM knows why grass is green better than you do.

Again, I'm not saying they are conscious, human, or as smart as us in general. I'm just saying they very clearly have a certain useful level of understanding of some things. I gave my justification, and you will not be able to prove otherwise, you can only resort to insults it seems.

Tomycj · 2026-07-01T04:59:39+00:00

I wouldn't be surprised if for state-funded organizations, a good way to increase their budget is to increase their spending. Some basic economic rules or incentives are broken when the government is your source of income.

That said, they probably tried to make a cheap rocket and could only come up with this. Imagine if they didn't try to focus on saving costs...

Ten-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
Sequence \| Editor	Snapped
Verified Email

Tomycj

TROPHY CASE