Yeah IDK about that, I don’t think you can act a fake fight convincingly without having at least some actual skill. The moves they use are always derived from actual martial arts, the only difference is that your partner knows ahead of time what’s going to happen and how to react, and you don’t hit them to hurt. But I’m pretty sure you could figure that part out pretty easily if push comes to shove.
As long as he’s fighting an untrained opponent who’s shorter than him, my money would be on Mamoa. And even if he’s trained I’d still bet on him unless we’re talking about one of the Gracie’s.
I mean, I figure you gotta have good hand/eye coordination, sufficiently swift movement, and relatively good accuracy as well so as not to unintentionally hurt the other guy by actually landing a punch correctly.
It would seem that the only difference between fight acting and actually fighting is where you aim and with what intention. And while that might become somewhat of a habit that can be difficult to break, I imagine getting a good punch to the face would snap you out of it pretty quickly.
Of course it makes a difference whether you’re pretending or doing for real, but what I’m saying is that pretending is already half of the battle.
Boxers don’t just spar in the ring all day, they practice shadow boxing to get their moves right. Other martial arts have katas or training forms for the same purpose. Those are all forms of pretend fighting, with the purpose of training correct body mechanics.
I would assume for instance, that when you’re stage fighting, you probably still throw your whole body into a punch so that it looks like it would hurt even though it doesn’t connect. If you’re just flailing your arms like a grade schooler on his first day at the playground, you’re just not going to convince anybody.
And if you can pull of a convincing haymaker and purposefully not hit the other guy’s face, you’re literally six inches away from doing so, which is miles ahead of anyone who hasn’t practiced at all. All you gotta do is adjust your aim a little, and not immediately give up if you do get hit back. But with a guy the size of Mamoa I’m not too worried about the latter.
Fair enough, that certainly is a bigger difference between what actors train for vs. what fighters train for.
But like I said, I’m fairly confident a guy the size of Mamoa could take a hit or two without fainting right away, even if it’s not something he regularly trains for.
Yes, and one day people will understand that Trump didn’t say all Mexicans are criminals and rapists.
The problem is, when you make sweeping generalizations like this, even if you add a disclaimer or explanation, you’re bound to severely misjudge some people, and you’re always going to have some folks who completely miss your clarification and will just run with “oh, so we should hate ALL of them then”.
This has incited violence against a lot of innocent people trying to find a place to live and support their family just like any sane person in their shoes would.
This is exactly why I bring it up. If Trump saying immigrants are bad (and he didn’t even say all of them are) is harmful, people saying “all men are terrible” is just as bad, because it probably also leads to some, if not many, of them being judged unfairly because of a few bad apples.
If you think Trump is wrong for saying this about immigrants, but it’s acceptable for women to say “all men are terrible”, then I’m sorry, but you have double standards.
I’ll go first. Mine is that I can’t stand the Deadpool movies. They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree. It’s like being continually reminded that I am in a movie. I swear the success of that movie has directly lead to every blockbuster having to have a joke every 30 seconds
Hmm, so I like movies that kinda play with your expectations and turn out to go into a completely different direction than you’d expect.
Dragon (2011) with Donnie Yen is a good example. You think you’re getting another Kung Fu flick, but it turns out to be more of a detective story of almost Sherlock Holmes-style complexity.
Yes there’s kung fu but it’s mostly esoteric and there’s only a few fights, but it’s still a fascinating movie.
[email protected] kindly commented that wifi network names of you and your neighbour can be used to locate your address, so please be aware to avoid betraying your privacy. Peace!
Well, it’s not like I haven’t tried, but the problem is that if you ask two leftists what they believe, you tend to get three different opinions, and they’re all based on theory.
Also, few of them can hold an argument, as soon as you present a criticism, they feel personally attacked and tend to become hostile.
Communism isn’t “people working for the common good,” it’s people working to improve their own material conditions.
Same goes for capitalism. Why is it called communism then, if your definition doesn’t even contain any reference to anything communal? At the very least, it would have to be “people working together to improve their own material conditions”, but that’s perfectly acceptable in capitalism as well.
Come on now, if you want to have a debate about this, at least try to make argument that doesn’t fall apart at the slightest breeze.
It’s funny because most communists seem to want to be the ones on top by trying to impose communism on everybody else.
Why not start at the bottom and learn how to cooperate with people there? Make some friends at work and see if they can help you get a better job. Put that philosophy into practice in the here and now instead of dreaming of some grand utopia where everyone willingly cooperates with everyone else everywhere and all the time.
Have you ever actually exposed yourself to what communists think and believe, or are you afraid of a spectre?
I’m being exposed to it on Lemmy nearly every single day.
I’m already super cushy in my job, I dont want involuntary homelessness to exist, and I also don’t want homeless people to be killed. I want kids to be able to go to bed and not be hungry. That isnt possible under capitalism.
Volunteer at a soup kitchen, donate to a homeless shelter, etc.
Do you understand the notion that people will generally cooperate when it is in their mutual selfish interest to cooperate? Does that make sense to you? Or do you reject even that notion?
Yes, that totally makes sense. But in my experience, this works best when people freely choose to cooperate because they realize it’s in their own self-interest, instead of having cooperation imposed on them by force.
Russian communism: ~5M dead in the Holodemor
Chinese communism: ~15-55M dead in the Great Famine
Cambodian communism: >1M dead in the Killing Fields
inb4 not real communism
Okay, then explain the difference between scientific and utopian socialism, what what differentiates labor from labor power in the context of surplus labor value extraction?
Muh “you can’t criticize socialism because you don’t understand THEORY”. You probably don’t understand capitalism either outside of socialist critiques of it. Then how can you be so certain of what capitalists believe?
Put a bandaid on a gunshot wound while you’re at it.
“I can’t help EVERYONE so I’m just not gonna help ANYONE”.
*goes off and tries to convince people to follow an ideology that only works if everyone believes in it.
can you name any successful socialist revolution that didn’t involve education and the creation of mass popular support?
Can you name one socialist revolution that hasn’t involved massive amounts of murder and violence?
I think that’s both fairly accurate, and seems to be more or less the norm across all cultures for most of history. Regular people are mostly benign, those in power tend to get worse the more power they have.
This poses an interesting question: what if this is in fact the most self-stable and therefore sustainable solution in the long term? And is it actually fair to assume that those in power benefit asymmetrically, or do they pay for it in ways that people without such means or ambition cannot even fathom?
If you live a normal, unremarkable life and generally get along with others, you probably won’t have much excess material wealth, but you will also have relatively few enemies. The more you try to compete for the position of the top dog, however, the more you have to watch your back. Is it really preferable to sleep in a palace surrounded by armed guards because you are worried about assassins, just so you can own 50 nice cars you’ll barely ever get to drive?
In other words, people who envy the rich and powerful always only ever look at the benefits, never at the price they pay for their privilege.
If capitalism encourages or favors competition, how come there is such a thing as companies? Those generally require some level of cooperation. If everyone works against each other, they would simply fall apart.
Also, why do we often see companies getting bigger and bigger, sometimes even by means of two competitors merging together? If capitalism encourages competition, shouldn’t they both be better off staying separate?
If you believe the Cambodians were communists, you have to believe that the nazis were.
I mean, Hitler very clearly wrote in Mein Kampf that he DID take inspiration from socialism, except that, like all other communist dictators before or after him, he thought that HE had found the missing ingredient to make it work.
Literally took years of capitalist economics in high school and college, it is one of the reasons I’m a communist.
Hah, imagine getting a “capitalist” education from people who don’t have to worry about their own job security because they have tenure. Isn’t that just like getting a communist education from a Wall Street CEO?
Chinese feudal landlords didn’t believe in socialism, that didn’t stop the communists from doing land reform.
Yes. The secret ingredient was (and always is) called violence.
By definition revolutions involve violence.
Okay, at least you’re honest enough to admit that.
Are you condemning the capitalist revolutions that threw off the monarchies? The status quo involved comparatively massive amounts of violence then, and it does now.
Yes, I condemn all violence, capitalist or otherwise. But I honestly don’t experience capitalism as particularly violent. My biggest successes all came through non-violent means, by educating myself and improving my technical and people skills. Amazingly, it turns out that if you’re willing to learn what others will pay you for, more often than not, they’ll actually just hand you money without you having to make any threats about taking over their whole company.
I don’t think people envy the rich and powerful the way you’re describing, I think people envy the idea of being able to maintain a good standard of living without having to work themselves to the bone to do it.
But do the extremely rich really get to rest and enjoy their spoils the way you think? Just look at someone like Bill Gates or Elon Musk, they just keep working even though they already have far more than they can spend. Gates is especially funny because he’s working full time on figuring out how to spend his fortune. Almost like having all that money just became another problem that now requires solving.
Yes I’m sure it helps not having to worry about the rent or the grocery bills, but everything else is likely just another unnecessary luxury that’ll quickly lose its appeal once you’ve had it.
I don’t want a mansion and fifty nice cars, I want an apartment in the city in walking distance to transit and stuff to do, and then to also save more money at the end of the month than I did at the start.
Okay, see what you just did there? You went from “being able to maintain a good standard of living without having to work themselves to the bone to do it” to having an apartment in the city in walking distance to transit, and I’m willing to bet you’re not thinking of living next to skid row either. And then you want to be able to save money on top of that, too.
Basically, you blew up your expectation of maintaining an acceptable standard of living without too much stress, which is likely more achievable than you think if you’re flexible, to something that’s far out of your reach, all by inflating the meaning of “good”.
Do you NEED that apartment before you can be satisfied with your standard of living? Or is it something that would be nice to have, but not essential?
Really not sure what you’re getting at. Why are you even on a platform rejecting Capitalism, rather than Reddit, if you’re so sure that leftism is a bad thing?
Does Lemmy as a whole reject capitalism, or is it just individual servers like this one? Because I really don’t get nearly as much hate on any other ones, it’s always here.
Also, I find it very interesting that if Lemmy or the Fediverse in general are leaning rather left, why did they choose to implement a federated model? This makes every server owner king of their own personal fiefdom, able to allow whatever content and apply whatever rules they please. Therefore, it is impossible by design to enforce that everyone had to reject capitalism.
Yes, there is some measure of democratic control in the defederation mechanism, which allows the community as a whole to somewhat isolate and contain those who don’t want to adhere to the common rules, but it doesn’t get rid of them entirely. And it certainly enables some amount of competition among instances getting a share of the total userbase.
A for-profit company could even take the codebase and spin off their own reddit clone absolutely for free. This has actually happened at least twice with Mastodon — both Gab and Truth Social are using it internally (of course both are defederated islands, but rather large ones compared to the average server size).
If this is real communism, then perhaps it’s accurate to say that previous attempts such as the UdSSR were all failures, and communism by dictatorship doesn’t work at all. But perhaps then that also implies that some level of internal competition is healthy and normal, and it is by no means required that EVERYONE has to be on the same page in order for it to work.
FOSS itself is leftist, and a rejection of Capitalism. The ability for the users to simply fork off if they don’t like the way something is heading is precisely an advantage of leftist organization, which is impossible with Capitalist Reddit.
Again, I find such statements very interesting, especially given that you so firmly rejected competition as inherently capitalist and undesirable. Because being able to just take something and fork it actually encourages competition. If I don’t like where a project is headed, and I can take their code and make my own version, and if I do a better job at it than the original maintainers, I could even outclass them. Isn’t that exactly the type of stuff you hate about capitalism?
Truth Social and Gab are built on Mastodon, yes. FOSS itself is a rejection of Capitalism, Capitalists going in and taking advantage of existing leftist infrastructure doesn’t mean the infrastructure itself is Capitalist.
No, but it isn’t inherently anti-Capitalist either, and that was my point. Also, they’re both playing by the rules and making their source code available as required by the GPL, although AFAIK it DID take some legal threats before they complied. Commercial exploitation of FOSS is something that’s explicitly allowed by most licenses, and Lemmy’s is no different. They could have chosen one that forbids such things, but they did not.
Your last paragraph is a complete non-sequitor. Much of the USSR was indeed a failure, there was a ludicrous amount of corruption at the Politburo level, and the further up you went the less democratic it was, as only local Soviets were purely democratically accountable to the Workers. With each rung you went up, it was less accountable to the Workers. However, absolutely none of what you say about competition, the USSR, or otherwise follows logically.
Your style of argumentation and tenuous grasp on logic never fails to baffle me. So you agree that Soviet Russia was an abject failure and had nothing to do with “real” communism, and you also seem to agree that the Fediverse is a much better representation of it, but then you simply reject all my other conclusions without feeling the need to even explain that at all. Sorry, but I find this entirely unconvincing.
Communism itself doesn’t depend on everyone following in lock-step, Capitalism does.
But if everyone ISN’T in lockstep then there might be… dare I say it… competition? And I thought that was a capitalist concept entirely.
Let's hope it never has to come to this (lemmy.today)
502 Bad Gateway (jlai.lu)
Lazy bastards (lemmy.today)
If you ever feel useless (lemmy.today)
Kindness over prejudice (lemmy.world)
Ice cold (lemmy.today)
Every girl has one of these at her place (lemmy.today)
Speaking of transporters (lemmy.today)
What's wrong with you, man (lemmy.today)
Please make sure to read the bottom text correctly before reporting ;)
The future is now (lemmy.today)
What is your unpopular flim opinion
I’ll go first. Mine is that I can’t stand the Deadpool movies. They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree. It’s like being continually reminded that I am in a movie. I swear the success of that movie has directly lead to every blockbuster having to have a joke every 30 seconds
Save (beehaw.org)
For that "special" someone in your life... (lemmy.today)
How it works (startrek.website)
What's the funniest WiFi network name you've seen?
[email protected] kindly commented that wifi network names of you and your neighbour can be used to locate your address, so please be aware to avoid betraying your privacy. Peace!
It's a simple world view (feddit.de)
Kernel 6.6.6 is out 😈 (cdn.kernel.org)
This is the update metalhead nerds have been waiting for.
Normalize whatever this is (lemmy.today)