Honestly its common to get asked for summary on lemmy. Even for relatively short ones and on comms where the topic is semi whimsical.

I do agree that for many things a written form would be better.

So its even cooler than I thought!!!

Tbf selfish is how one should interact with for profit institutions. Particularly the larger ones.

want a screen off mode period. There have been times I’d like to stream a game

I dock my deck sometimes. In desktop mode you can turn off the deck's display and only use the external. Not sure if this helps.

Don't set charge limits, because odds are you can never get back to 100% battery charging ever again due to bugs (at best I get 99% now.)

Where can I read more about this?

Not to say that China isn't belligerent only that I think they're generally less corrosive to the world

PH, Peru and Argentina all have the same complaints on China regarding fishing. Their aggressive ghost fleets will show up to take everything and ram them out of their own waters. To say they are less aggressive is giving good will they haven't earned. Likely because they don't have the same power projection the west currently has.

that there are plenty of other countries who are interested in World stability and will pick up the mantle at the US leaves on the ground.

I think an issue with this statement is that it just assumes things will work out. I specifically brought up the csto as a non western example of an empire collapsing causing a war among two other parties that were in that *sphere of influence* as they say. I also brought up ancaps as another unserious group of wishful thinking. I don't have an answer but I am calling yours out as handwaving real concerns.

Iceland, South Korea, and The Philippines make a short list that would agree they've benefit. The class may discuss others.

You just know magas put real effort into being this stupid.

You’re acting as if there aren’t large will powers that aren’t chopping at the bit to take the place of United States to maintain World stability.

You’re acting as if the United States single handily keeps the world stable which is absolutely not true.

I am not and I addressed that when I said,

"Weather the mongols (or the USA) are a good empire is a separate matter. "

In your other comment you bring up how China is bullying The Philippines. Russia also treats central asian / caucasian countries the way the US treats central america. Is that good? No, and yet many might say that a strong Russia is a kind of stabilizing force. A stronger Russia is able to bluff that the CSTO is worth the paper its printed on and have deterred the Amermenian-Azzeri war that happened a few years ago.

Do I think the Russian Federation or current China with its imperial goals are forces for good? No, but that is a different question to "do they bring stabilizing effects". And I will point out again the question was more or less as to why people consider the US a stabilizing force; not if that is a good or moral thing.

A strong USA is a call for stability. Consider what they said about the mongols, "For fear of his yasa and punishment his followers were so well disciplined that during his reign no traveller, so long as he was near his army, had need of guard or patrol on any stretch of road ; and, as is said by way of hyperbole, a woman with a golden vessel on her head might walk alone without fear or dread."

Weather the mongols (or the USA) are a good empire is a separate matter. The US brings a lot of stability for small countries and keeps sea ways open for trade. It is not an act of charity the way some republicans frame it, but still. Simply saying for the US empire to fold those *responsibilities* begs the question, who or what will take its place?

These are not easy questions and leave a lot unsatisfied. They almost remind me of anarcho capitalists saying that with out states and leaving things to the free market everyone will hold hands and sing kumbaya.

Just forge a latter from the prime minister inviting him over for a swim. We can all get over it.

Im empathetic to surface level libertarian stuff, but i have to treat them for what they are overall; supporters of oligarchy. Their attacks on environmental protections and civil rights don't out right say it, but its clear and the logical conclusion for "let the market solve it"

Part of the issue here is that you are supporting a libertarian platform. Cutting aid for the needy and cutting taxes to support oligarchy is pretty much their game plan. They won't say they are supporting oligarchy, but it is the logical conclusion of their ideas.

They also gave us Steven Crowder, so idk. /s

Guy calls himself ancap and guts services people depend on. Pretty ancap.

He's an ancap and just as shitty as all the others. No need to no true Scotts the guy

Milei is not an anarcho-capitalist.

From the horses mouth

Edit: And another source in spanish where he referred to himself as an ancap.