It is a triangle. The abstraction of lines in non-Euclidean geometry are geodesics and just like three lines form a triangle, so do the geodesics. If you walked along the earth’s surface from the equator to the North Pole and back, taking 90 degrees angles every time, you will have felt that you made a triangle by walking straight in three directions.

The reason the angle sum can be more than 180 degrees is that the sphere has a positive curvature. If you want one with negative curvature and less than 180 degrees angle sum, try to make one on the side of the hole on a torus (look up its curvature if my explanation was lacking).

EDIT: Picture for reference:

The answer is obvious. Depending on the curvature of the object the triangles have higher or lower than 180 degrees angle sums. Flat space just happens to have 0 curvature.

Did not know about this site. It was a nice read and their mission statement is cool. Thanks for sharing! :)

It is nice where possible and can help locally, but on scale it will not force through any changes. To see why, we only need to consider the historical material conditions that allowed the development of the current capitalist form in the first place. Small businesses where defeated by capitalists that could employ tactics the others couldn’t answer.

In order to answer to the consequences of our current mode of production, we have to force changes to how production is carried out. Saying we want our products locally, ethically and environmentally made will only change their branding, not the fundamental exploitation in search of surplus value.

When you have to spend on things like haircuts, repairs, etc, keep the money in your social network.

While I agree with the idea of not buying garbage, there is absolutely no way we can unconsume ourselves out of the capitalist ploy to extract surplus value. Do not put the blame on people who try to (often) satisfy legitimate needs, but on those forcing labor to be spent at the cost of both the environment and workers themselves.

Ecofascism (not accusing you here) is not going to solve the climate crisis.

I like people who think critically themselves (and are sometimes weird in lovely ways). Often I find them to be leftists and/or Linux users. I encourage your independent thought as to why.

Yeah, hearing about how hard it would be to get tenure dissuaded me from pursuing my original dream of doing a PhD. In retrospect I think I am much happier where I am now than I would’ve been, which really is what matter the most to me now. Freeing myself of the obligation of attaining my goals was actually quite nice.

I misinterpreted your comment and was very pleasantly surprised that something named “rational wiki” would call him out for the crackpot that he is.

Yeah, this is not a nazi bar.

I am pretty certain our brains evolved to filter out friendly/known voices some tens of thousands of years (or more) ago. I feel tired sometimes before and after coffee, and often less so on coffee breaks because the real issue with coffee is that the caffeine can definitely disrupt sleep.

I understand you need consistency to not be engaged by sounds. I hope you understand that other people have other limitations, hence, again, it is your first statement I disagree with.

I see you repeating the claim that it makes sleeping more difficult, but I do think those that listen to sounds, be it ocean waves or someone talking, have the experience that it makes it easier for them to fall asleep.

Sure, there can be problems with sleep quality for numerous reasons. However, making a blanket statement that this disrupts the sleep, especially of those that have positve experience with it, is going to need some factual sources (that I do not think exists).

According to what I have read, it is fine if it is not too stimulating.

EDIT: Also, it is easy to take a break from coffee: It only requires not drinking a few cups. Either way it does not really prevent fatigue, at most delaying it.

How is it bad sleep hygiene to fall asleep to noise? If it is adequately non-engaging, it is pretty much the same as other white noise. Furthermore, it really depends on each person what makes them relax.

To paraphrase an actual sleep scientist (and not just talk out of my ass like most people do about health):

It is easy to see know if you are getting enough sleep. If you feel tired during the day, you need more sleep.

Loved out of life 👻

This is called multi-seating and requires input handling of more than one keyboard and mouse (as well as other things). It is not really useful for that in the state shown above.

I obviously downloaded a car after seeing that obnoxious anti-piracy ad.

Yeah, living in a parliamentary democracy means I have to make an effort to wrap my head around how the US “democratic” institution works. The internal structure of the Democratic Party has more in common with our democratic structure than the structure of their “competing” parties. As a result there is more room for difference within the Democratic Party than within a political party in our system, but the political difference between parties in our system is greater than those within the democratic party.

Whilst it economically is to the right, many of its social policies it endorses are leftist.

My analysis has long been that there is no political will to implement leftist economical policies in the US, i.e. those that really matter in the grand scheme of things, even though there exists a semi-conscious wish for them within the populace. Please do not misunderstand, increasing equity between people of different backgrounds is important, but important single issues such as gay marriage are insufficient if they do not come along with, or better yet, as a product of equity of material conditions. It was all the same with the feminist movement where social advancements were conceded in lieu of increasing their economical statuses, with the division in measurable quantities, such as income or capital ownership still going strong (note I do not advocate changing the ruling elite from one subset of people to another subset of different characteristics, but instead saying that capital ownership should be transferred from the subset to the whole).

Strengthening the political power of the marginalized by increasing the material conditions of their strata is the best way to make social progress, which the ruling elite of the US is painfully aware and which is why they sometimes are willing to skip the first step and reach the inevitable second immediately. The discrepancy between the people’s wants and needs for leftist policies, again conscious or not, and the actual politics of the US, is deeply connected to the Democratic Party’s willingness to concede these social changes without losing the backing of the capital interests that fund them.

Because MSNBC is an American organization and their coverage is American-focused, their bias relative to American politics is what’s relevant here.

I understand what you are trying to say, but I disagree. They are making claims about a lot of news outlets in other countries, which means they cannot present an American skewed perspective as the truth (unless what they really want is to export political views and exert influence domestically and abroad, now we might be talking here).

It doesn’t matter what their beliefs or policy positions are relative to any particular standard, what matters is whether or not their work presents the news accurately or in a way intended to mislead or influence their viewers in favor of one side or the other, which they clearly do.

All reporting should be held to the highest standard. Anyone seriously attempting to critique and comment on reporting at a meta level, should hold themselves to the same, or even a higher standard, for the same reason. What I am essentially arguing is that the MediaBiasFactCheck falls in line with pretty much all of US news as mass propaganda machines in the interest of capital. If you disagree, why do you think they operate at all?

I am not from the US so why should I base my definition of left-wing on the Democratic party (and subsequently arrive upon the wrong conclusion that the Democratic party is leftist)? More importantly, why would you?

If you want to talk relatively, use relative terms. That being said, left of the farthest right is not very useful, which is precisely why I care about the distinction.

We seem to have a different opinion of what is left-wing and what is not. I do not think the Democratic party is left-wing at all. It is centre-right to right (with the Republican party being far-right).

I know of none American left-wing news outlets and the only left-wing bias I know of is truth.

As an urchin background forest gnome, I tried to abuse the hell out of my pet mouse and speak with small beasts ability. Unfortunately, our sessions did not last long enough for me to come up with too much fun shenanigans.