Yep. Lurker here. In the sense that I upvote but don’t post or create content. I am just not witty enough to make a joke or creative enough to write a long winded content. But I do what I do and I think it’s alright.
The nice thing about this right now is that you don’t need to feel witty or creative to post stuff as long as it fits the community you’re in. There aren’t enough people to compete with for posts to get attention, that’s the main attraction to smaller social media environments: you feel like you matter more.
This is largely a reddit-discourse problem that evolved over time as the site devolved into witty one-liners and adversarial comments for engagement.
I’m hoping people push back hard against this across various fediverse instances because it just makes the internet a worse place and discourages contributions from would-be posters/commenters.
People should feel excited to post without feeling the need to look over their post/comment 100 times to pre-emptively guess what all attack angles someone is going to respond to in a post as harmless about liking the way roses smell.
In a threaded site like Reddit or Lemmy, one liners and higher effort comments can coexist. I enjoyed the joking around, sing alongs, even the puns. Then you keep scrolling or collapse the thread and you can get to the more serious replies.
As long as the comments are in good faith or good fun and try to add something, I approve of them.
It was the bad faith stuff, people trying to compete in the victim Olympics (not saying that victims shouldn’t speak up, I mean the people who are just looking for the next thing to be offended about), and attention whoring that I didn’t like. Also the people obsessed with tying every conversation back to what group of people they hate or their political position or the political position they hate. Though I guess on the bright side, those ones did make me feel better about the possibility the world will end soon.
It's not just a theory. Anyone who've seen internet before 2015 knows the difference.
An unforeseeable and unfortunate side effect of humans interacting daily with bots masquerading as humans is that we mimic them.
And that we lose our ability to see humanity in others. Being flooded with machines who cannot understand or be touched, influenced, which whom we cannot empathize changed the way we see our fellow humans.
I don't think there's any coming back from that. Hopefully there's a way forward, now that AI's aren't a big secret anymore.
It was far more tinfoil a few years ago. Especially when the "bots" were far more likely to just be people paid to post things from a script. Back then there just wasn't much evidence of the tech being that good. Like human made content on YouTube has a noticable difference from generated content and that generated content probably still had some human help.
It has more legs today with chatgpt or similar tech. It clearly been used for pumping out crap articles and videos or being used for automating the early steps in scamming. There are even a few AI generated influencers and a few chatgpt based things designed to simulate a relationship.
I remember watching some BBC documentary and they said that whenever a household for enough money that they started to buy appliances, the first one they bought was almost always a clothes washer.
Not surprised. Vegetarianism has been the default in India for ages.
They’ve greatly explored the spice palette and can make pretty much anything taste amazing.
EDIT: some clarification. I did not mean to imply that majority of Indians are vegetarian. No. Majority do eat meat.
But in most parts of India they do not eat meat on a daily basis. It’s typically a once a week kind of thing. And yes, I’ve observed this among friends and colleagues from practically all parts of India. Even the most fierce non-veg fiends will typically do a weekend bash, but eat regular roti sabzi, dal chawal rest of the week.
they also have world’s biggest food security program. nutrition is improving and they also lifted huge percentage of their population from below poverty.
Yeah, no. 70% of Indians are non-vegetarian. Rice &/ rotis are the important part of the meal and stuff like dal & vegetable are standard being both cheaper & easier to cook. Meat, fish, eggs, etc. being more expensive are curried or fried as side-dishes to make a little go a long way.
A dish like pot roast or meat loaf would just be too expensive as main course for most. And we do love to get creative with our spices.
I merely said that vegetarianism was the default. I’m not saying that majority are vegetarians.
What i meant was that most families do not eat meat on a daily basis. And not because they can’t afford it. Most average families eat chicken once a week, while the rest of the week is all vegetarian food.
All what i said still stands. Even though 70% of people do eat meat, they don’t do so on a daily basis.
Source: am Indian, with dozens of friends and colleagues who do eat meat. They do not eat meat daily.
They took a negative and turned it into a rallying cry.
Same as with “Yankee Doodle.” Yankee was a derogatory term for Americans, because many were of Dutch origin. “Jan” was a popular Dutch name. Doodle mean, well doo-doo.
Funny how some derogatory terms get embraced and others don’t.
I feel like trying to switch to this would cause more problems than it would solve. If you switch to this time system, what do you do about all the other units of measure that include a time component? Either everything has to change, or you have to start using two different time systems.
Dates? Swatch replaces seconds, minutes, and hours with .beats. Metres per second (used in scientific contexts), minutes per kilometre (used by runners), and kilometres per hour (used in most other contexts) would all be unusable under Swatch time.
That's not how people work. You think Americans are stubborn about our customary units? Try damn-near everyone (including many Americans) with SI.
Time in particular is unlikely to be significantly reworked because you can only push the inconsistencies out so far. So you divide the day into a thousand beats. Great. A year is still not an integer number of days, and weeks and months are only loosely based on physical (lunar) phenomena at all.
These high-minded treaties don’t actually mean anything - there’s no enforcement mechanism and countries with a much worse human-rights record than the USA have signed them without consequences. IMO it’s better not to sign them than it is to pretend that signing does any good and lend unearned legitimacy to those other countries.
The US is a member of the International Court of Justice - every country in the United Nations is. Are you thinking of the International Criminal Court?
Other than that, my answer is “yes but that’s not a bad thing”.
The actions of an international court will inevitably be political.
The countries that are the worst human rights violators will never voluntary accept the authority of the court.
In that context, why should the USA give other, potentially hostile countries power over itself? It might have been worthwhile if it meant everyone had to follow the rules but in practice it would just give countries opposed to US foreign policy a tool for interfering without giving the US anything useful.
(My general view is that the US has made many very harmful mistakes but the era of American hegemony has still been one of remarkable global peace and prosperity. Like democracy, it’s the worst system except for everything else that has been tried. Now we’re seeing serious challenges to this hegemony and if they succeed, the world will get worse for almost everyone, not just for Americans. So if you think the US does more harm than good, we’re unlikely to come to an agreement.)
The problem is that we need to for many reasons transition to an international order of democratic cooperation instead of economic and military domination. And if the US can never accept this kind of shared and cooperative approach foreign policy of everyone is going to be forever dragged towards this kind of zero sum bullshit we have at the moment. Even though it’s obvious that foreign policy doesn’t have to be zero sum.
Even if other countries are potentially less honest with their implementation of global treaties, even a relatively slow movement there and maybe a more thorough movement in the US makes everyone better off.
The only way to actually foster a cooperative relationship is to make yourself vulnerable, otherwise it’s just coercion and power not cooperation. And yes if you get hurt too much maybe you’ll have to leave again, but this pessimistic outlook from the get go is certainly never going to lead to the changes we obviously need.
How do we solve things that require global attentio and accountability, like climate change, with an increasingly hostile and isolationist country calling the shots on decisions about global economic matters.
Simply put if I want to live in a world somewhat resembling the current one in 60 years, American collapse or integration into global democracy is a necessity.
Also calling a country that has been at war for 80+% of it’s history a protector of global peace seems a bit questionable. Similarly I don’t think anyone can conclusively say that the US has done more or less harm than good. But by that same nebulous metric shouldn’t China hold that same title, as well as the Soviets, the British empire, the Spanish empire,the Romans ?
I would expect almost everyone to feel more ambiguously about the later list than the US, but both the US and empires of the past are exactly what they’ve always been, a tool for those inside, especially the ones in power to increase their quality of life, while everyone outside gets to be exploited, integrated, subjected to rules that do harm, and be attacked, regime changed and so on. It’s not actually the US that is a problem it’s the US being a modern empire that’s the problem.
That the US tries to be a liberal democracy doesn’t really lessen it’s status as an empire, especially if the powers at be largely prevent it’s people to decide against the status quo of domination.
Almost by necessity the most powerful are the most harmful if there are no systems to prevent their harm, diffuse their power etc.
The treaty itself does not have any enforcement mechanism; however the US does. US courts recognize ratified treaties as having equal weight to laws passed the normal way Ratifying the Treaty would immediately make it federal law. The US has a robust enough legal system that the courts would the (over years of building up case law) determine exactly what that means.
I go to Italy often just to eat real Italian food. I understand that for Italians, the hawainana pizza is an aberration, like many other things if not cooked as they traditionally do. And I respect it, because it’s a key part of their culture. Still, I have a right to eat and like whatever I want, so I also expect respect on that sense. Some people will do this and some others won’t. I think it’s a personal choice to decide respecting others opinions.
I get that shit ALL the time. I have 34 wing flavours, a number of them address the sweet n savoury/sour thing I personally detest. I don’t carry the disgusting bulk sweet n sour sugar sauce common to this region and continually get people staring at the 34 flavours and and ask “do you have honey mustard or sweet n sour”? No. I don’t. That’s not what I’m doing here, if I had that, it would be listed. Literally every other place has that, I’m fucking trying to impart some taste to the region no matter how miniscule.
<span style="color:#323232;">Aeneas and his chiefs,
</span><span style="color:#323232;">with fair Iulus, under spreading boughs
</span><span style="color:#323232;">of one great tree made resting-place, and set
</span><span style="color:#323232;">the banquet on. Thin loaves of altar-bread
</span><span style="color:#323232;">along the sward to bear their meats were laid
</span><span style="color:#323232;">(such was the will of Jove), and wilding fruits
</span><span style="color:#323232;">rose heaping high, with Ceres' gift below.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Soon, all things else devoured, their hunger turned
</span><span style="color:#323232;">to taste the scanty bread, which they attacked
</span><span style="color:#323232;">with tooth and nail audacious, and consumed
</span><span style="color:#323232;">both round and square of that predestined leaven.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">“Look, how we eat our tables even!” cried
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Iulus, in a jest.
</span>
This is from a translation of the Aeneid, published in 19 BCE.
That’s why I mentioned pizza bianca / white pizza - it doesn’t include passata or tomato sauce, but it’s still pizza.
Cheese being added to the pizza is a bit trickier, but I’m tempted to say that the Romans already did this; they were big fans of cheese, and the white stuff in the afresco looks a lot like sheep cheese for me. And, well, cheese melting over hot bread is kind of obvious. Plus there are claims that mozzarella itself backtracks to those times, although it was originally made with sheep milk.
I could also picture them spreading some moretum (crushed cheese with herbs and olive oil, it’s rather tasty) over the dough. The white thing in the afresco is certainly not moretum as the later is green, but frankly that doesn’t sound too far from what I’ve seen people adding to pizza bianca.
Amazing how every single part of your comment is so wrong.
It’s actually a really good analogy,
Not an analogy, an example. Those two are different things.
because it can only run on
No, it can run on many things, including open source collaborative hardware that exists.
fully-capitalist hardware.
What the hell even is that? Fun fact: until very recently most of the computer hardware was made in communist China. I know, scary. And now that a lot of effort is being made to get that production out of there, those efforts are being sponsored by public money to an incredible degree. Billions of dollars of taxes (you know, community resources) are being poured into that because big corporations are the biggest lovers of government handouts.
Only RISC-V spec is open. Hardware is still proprietary and is using proprietary cores manufactured using proprietary tech processes. 1% open source in the product doesn’t make the product fully open source.
Case in point. You think quoting an argument and sneering is a counterargument. Obviously, because you don’t know the first thing about labor theory of value.
Someone asked if you think capitalists or engineers did the engineering, and you revealed you don’t understand the question.
You are once again building a flawed model of the dynamic at play here in an attempt to ease the discomfort you feel from encountering something that doesn’t make sense to you (why did I choose to join this community?). I’m not even attempting to build any counterarguments because the responses I’ve gotten don’t even attempt to understand what I’ve said in the beginning. To be utterly frank I just lack respect for people who think of themselves as any flavour of anarchist while still dreaming of a system as thoroughly rigid as the artificially created Internet. You pretend to hate the system while desperately trying to invent excuses for continuing to make yourself at home within it.
No dude, you demonstrably said ‘I’m going to repeat your argument so you can think about it.’ Projecting some emotional state onto me is not gonna change how you fucked this up.
This is mockery. I am calling you ignorant.
I am trying to highlight how you joined an explicitly leftist server, whilst remaining aggressively unaware of… genuinely the first things people learn about leftism. So when you try smugly posturing your way out of a pointed question, you’re just revealing you know less than nothing.
To be utterly frank I just lack respect for people who think of themselves as any flavour of anarchist while still dreaming of a system as thoroughly rigid as the artificially created Internet.
Anarchists being naked hippies, of course, not organized laborers. The internet was mostly designed and operated by academics. It runs on half a century of “does this sound right?” collaborative standards. Whatever browser you’re reading this in has its origins in anti-monopolist diehards building better software out of spite.
None of which is even addressing the initial failure. Capital didn’t design your computer. Intel’s founders definitely did, but only because they were workers dissatisfied under Fairchild, who were in turn workers dissatisfied under Shockley. The early history of silicon valley is halfway to semiconductor co-ops.
Well you solved that conundrum rightly. Now let’s go linch those dirty Apple and John Deere engineers. Since they’ve designed those machines, they must be the only responsible parties for designing them with their extreme anti-consumer and anti-repair policies. They must get commissions on every licensed repair or something, it’s definitely got nothing to do with capitalists putting restrictions on the design team in order to increase profits, nope…
You’re completely off on what I’m getting at. The idea of “Capitalist” hardware, as though the Capitalist did the labor, is wrong. Engineers are paid for their labor power, they don’t typically get royalties or anything of the sort, just like any other laborer.
Someone saying that FOSS software relies on Capitalist hardware is putting the Capitalist over the Engineer, as though the Capitalist created the hardware, and not the labor of the miners, assemblers, designers, engineers, and so forth, regardless of who owns the Capital the labor is done by the Workers. FOSS is agnostic to whoever owned the Means of Proruction of the hardware using or producing it.
en.wikipedia.org
Top