conservatives made a whole smear campaign against her to try and silence her and demoralize her, and she’s only stood up even more for it. Can’t say she’s done nothing if they’re trying so hard to discredit her
At bare minimum its to show that there are still groups willing to oppose mass polluters in the hopes that at some point someone with power will make the right call and save the planet.
Is it naive? Quite a bit, but sad complacency isn’t helping much either. As many of these groups are quite young many including Greta may also go into actual politics later in life, then these past incidents serve as proof of authenticity, similar to the pic of Bernie Sanders getting carried away.
Think it was very brave of her to stand up and say that, to say she wants the right to life, to not be forced to inherit a dead planet, and that’s a very bold and self aware statement for a teenager to make. It’s one that obviously made a lot of people uncomfortable because it shoves what we’ve all been complacent in in our faces. To have a child tell us to our faces that we’re all responsible for killing the planet (and especially those in charge) and that it’s their lives we’ve ruined - well that takes a lot of guts. (and it needs to be said)
I think I see your point, awareness alone might be just as you asked, but for some she also gave the courage to act on that awareness, to commit themselves to take steps towards progress and away from practices that harm an entire planet while benefiting very few, by supporting public policies focusing on such and raising more awareness. I’ve certainly benefited from having a personal vehicle and modern industry but those that profit immensely from them should be held responsible with proper regulation and responsibility to cleaning up messes and compensating the lives and environments ruined as a result. Too many weak and corrupt individuals have again and again taken the attractive “deal with the devil” to look the other way in order to secure something they desire. We are all capable of corruption and we are all capable of integrity. I have hope for the future because of people inspiring me like, civil rights leaders; MLK and Bernie Sanders, abolitionists; Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass, and finally who I see as everyday people like; Greta Thunberg and Daryl Davis.
Awareness is oversimplifying it but it’s a necessary first step for any major movement/revolution. What can one hope to achieve if people won’t acknowledge the problem? Greta highlighted the importance of climate change to many people around the world, and I’m sure she’s a role model to many as well. Many more people are plant based/vegan now compared to 5 years ago. Companies are profit driven so every little change from people makes a difference. It’s the power of awareness that can push people to change for their new found beliefs.
We had awareness in the 70’s but we had action then too. We had the clean-air act passed, the clean water act, the EPA created and I’m sure around the same time coutnry’s in the rest of the world also did similar things. Spreading “awareness” today is just self-aggrandizing and benefits no-one but yourself as the figurehead.
Are you implying that she was doing it for the fame? She missed out on school and a lot of normal teenager activities because she prioritised spreading awareness on climate change. Regardless of the reasons why she or anyone is doing it, her impact is undeniable. I think assuming the worst isn’t fair. It’s not like she has been in scandals related to corruption. Many celebrities and politicians are way more full of shit. She is consistently doing what she can for the environment.
To address your other point: Yes, there has been some actions taken in the past. Yes, there has been some awareness on it spread in the past. No one is saying she’s the first one to do so. The point is those actions and bits of awareness wasn’t enough. That’s why we are where we are. That’s why polar caps are melting at record speed. Amazon forest is the smallest it has ever been. (90+% of the space is used for animal farming). That’s why our global climate is hotter and wilder than ever (record high global average temps last month).
If you don’t think these things are an issue then I can see why spreading awareness would feel like a waste of time. However, if that’s the case then I would strongly recommend looking up the effects and potential dangers of the direction we’re headed regarding climate change. Our future generations are fucked.
You are making an assumption that lack of “awareness” is the problem that needs to be solved. Meanwhile icecaps are melting and mass extinction is occurring, we are already aware of it! Multiple European Governments and energy industries are enabling it! But instead of asking why Germany is still building Coal plants, she is staging fake protests where she “gets arrested” for a photo-op.
That’s exactly why there needs to be enough people to vote for the environment focused government party, if any. There’s no downside to raising awareness when there are still people out there who are in denial of climate change. I did not know about the fake protest arrests. Imo, no one can be perfect in the way their convey their message. Convincing the mass is a difficult thing to do. People will have various opinions on what’s the right way to protest/spread the message. The important thing is that effort is spent, and it’s having an impact. Lastly, we don’t need to focus on one issue at a time as a society. Different groups of people can be responsible for different tasks.
I think I’ve beaten this horse enough. So I’ll just say that while you and I are certainly both environmentalists, I disagree that people like Greta doing what she has been doing, is very useful since it takes a fatal systematic problem and individualizes it for, imo, dubious reasons.
Maybe even if the individual responses are futile in their direct effect, they can still help build a sense of commitment to the eventual solution.
Say a person gives up eating meat. That itself might not fix the problem, even when summed across all the people who make that choice, but the act of sacrificing something in their life helps to establish their identity as someone willing to put forward effort.
IMO the right solution is centrally-imposed taxes on carbon extraction, subsidies on sequestration, and modulation of those financial incentives to whatever numbers necessary to actively manage atmospheric greenhouse gas levels.
I think that individual solutions are a waste of time and can even be dangerous because they can create a sense of complacency. But I think psychologically, they could possibly be part of the path toward people doing all the hard work to get that system of taxes and subsidies in place.
Kinda like how punching a bag can get you trained up to punch out an opponent. Giving up meat becomes an exercise, rather than the work itself.
Yeah as much as I hate to use this term, I think a small committee is better suited to handle a complex topic than the entirety of society.
That’s not to say I think committees are great ways of handling things, but that I think a small committee is better at handling things than a large committee.
IMO the only workable solutions to global problems are going to be ones only a few people understand. And not from lack of access to the information, but from lack of time to educate everyone on every problem.
My sources tell me it’s because of anti-nuclear sentiment, (and also because of sudden lack of access to Russian gas), but I’ve got source bias and my sources haven’t done an in-depth analysis it’s always mentioned offhand in some bigger message context.
I don’t know. I assume because they needed to make up the gap from shutting down their nuclear plants and coal is cheap and pretty fast to get going, plus doesn’t require any “exotic” manufacturing like solar/wind need. cleanenergywire.org/…/germanys-energy-consumption…
I mostly agree with your point, but I’m not sure if “awareness” is the right term here. She is helping to spread commitment. She’s more like a coach than she is like a reporter. She helps people who already know about climate change decide to take responsibility for it and do something about it.
That’s simple. We just locate the nearest parallel universe where she doesn’t exist and compare the future series of climate data from our universe to that one.
Interdimensional science is going to revolutionize the fields of sociology and economics.
We’re way beyond saving by planting trees. We’re way beyond saving by picking up trash on the streets. This is a worldwide systemic issue that can NOT be solved by individuals reducing their carbon footprint, we as a species need a negative carbon footprint to survive this century, or even these next few decades, or even these next few years. We have a transport problem, we have a factories problem, we have an affluence problem, a conglomerates problem, we have a capitalism problem, we have a “progress” problem.
It’s ridiculous to get angry at a child that sees all this and cries out in desperation, most of us will die before she and her generation does, and they’re going to be left with a mess beyond repair. And it’s not because Timmy ate a burger or because Anne didn’t pick up trash in a park, nor is it because Bob commutes using a car, it’s because our economic system demands “progress” at all cost right this moment. It’s because our cities around the world prioritize cars and cheap individualistic transportation. It’s because prices need to be stable, so let’s throw products away to create a limit on supply. It’s because it’s more profitable to implement planned obsolescence than it is to implement renewability and durability into products. This is clearly not something that can be solved by a single person, whether that person is an everyday anon who does his or her best to reduce their carbon footpront, or whether that is a kid addressing the world leaders while in distress about her future life in this world. The change that needs to happen is revolution, and the world is too complacent and too scared of taking such actions to save itself, and I can’t really blame people for it, even if we should.
You know who has? The anonymous kid who plants trees.
No. They haven’t had a measurable impact. Especially if they’re the kind of kid who drives a car somewhere to go plant those trees and then drives back.
The kid who pics up garbage left on the road.
Making it so that people don’t see the garbage building up, and feel OK about just tossing their stuff out their car windows.
I use the subscription feed and it’s how I’ve always used YouTube. I certainly don’t want it giving me random notifications. It’s not like I need to drop what I’m doing during the day just because someone published a video. When I want to watch videos, I’ll go check my subscriptions.
I turned off notifications for everything outside text messages a couple of years ago and I could physically feel the anxiety going away. I hate this trend of notifications for the smallest things.
I’ve like newpipe because it’s just a clean experience of only my subscription feed. I’ve hated any page other than subscription on YouTube, since I can’t even stand most of the thumbnails and I don’t endlessly use YouTube. Don’t even check out most of the videos in my own feed, so don’t need all the additional clutter YouTube shows now days.
This. There is no way in hell I would want to be notified of a YouTube video dropping. I’ll watch when I want to watch, and it’s always the subscription feed that I go for. I will scroll back to the previous spot that I had watched and go through the feed from there to see if there is anything worth watching. If no one has posted for awhile and there is nothing new to watch in my subscription feed, then I’ll go to the Home feed and look at recommened videos, but 90% of the time I’m only going to check the subscription feeds.
ReVanced Manager on mobile, and SmartTubeNext on my TVs.
Hey, good news, Elon. Most of us have gone from calling it “twitter” to calling it “that facist shithole that used to be twitter”.
Good job wasting 43 BILLION dollars only to see it’s traffic literally cut in half, you micro-penised shitstain on society. You will not be remembered as the genius your group of ass kissers tell you you are. You’ll be remembered as being dumber than a one brain celled orange tabby.
That’s giving him too much credit, orange cats are just dumb not evil. He sucks the life of of people, encourages the spread of disease and death. He’s a mosquito. Just an annoying, insignificant bug that will only be remembered for the discomfort he caused.
I thought we always called it “radical shithole”. Not much changed. It’s just SJWs making indie gamedevs suicide were replaced with Christians making everyone else suicide.
God I hate the pedo hunts, like yeah even if they find real freaks… The fact that so many who weren’t guilty had their lives ruined and in some cases ended over bullshit accusations is offensive, especially since evidence collected in an illicit manner is not admissible in court. Prosecutors call it “Fruit from the Forbidden Tree”
Well he did take a fairly neutral platform used to spread ideas and form movements and destroy it. So I’m sure the right and the rich are happy about that.
Huh, good to know. I’m still going to install Debian next time I reinstall the os. Unless I can’t get it to work with my laptops weird chipset, then I guess it’s Arch.
To stop infinite scroll on social media, quickly scroll 2-3 screen lengths down without looking at the posts. Now read the posts scrolling up. Eventually you’ll reach where you started and most probably the laziness to go all the way back will prompt you to exit the app.
I changed the icon location, and my muscle memory still was trying to open them from the previous location, basically in a complete auto-pilot mode. That led me to a realization of how fucked up the situation was, and eventually helped me uninstall/reduce screen time of those apps.
For some reason I always have a habit of scroll to the bottom of any list and reading up. Like I wanna confirm how long the list is before working my way up
What I have seen previously is that the amount of energy you get from the solar cells that you could fit on the top of the car is really small compared to what it takes to charge the battery.
Since there is minimal benefit, and it’s costly to include them and wire them to the battery, it hasn’t been viewed as worthwhile.
Yeah this is what I’ve heard as well. Aging Wheels goes into it a bit in this review of a concept car, kinda neat - it has pedals like a bicycle but the energy they add is a tiny fraction of what the thing needs to move.
For comparison, my rooftop solar array, with around 16 full-sized panels (~6kwp) produces just under 2 miles per hour in my electric car (around 3.3kwh/mi). Or in real life, takes about 2 fully sunny days to produce the power to charge the car.
You get 4 miles per kwh and they get 3.3 and you call that insanely high? The 2.5-4 mile to kwh is really standard for EVs. I don’t think the 3.3 is outside of the norm at all.
They mentioned their car uses 3.3 kwh per mile. With their solar setup they can generate around 6hwh per hour. Meaning they can generate roughly 2 miles every hour of sunlight.
Right, which is why people are confused. Fish likely meant 3.3 miles / kWh, but that comes out to 20 miles for one hour of charge. But the fact they said just under 2 miles of range actually correlates with their 3.3kWh/mile statement, but no one has ever heard of an EV with efficiency that terrible.
Probably the two a half billion people claiming to identify as christian while actively opposing and taking action against any of Christ’s non-self-serving ideals.
That must be painful and frustrating. An old coworker of mine was a “real” Christian (by that I mean kind, pleasant, and non-judgmental) and I often wonder what his take on the last several years would be.
I know what mine is. Nobody is truly thinking about how they “should” go about things, they make the word second fiddle to something else, whether it’s public speakers being selective and hoarding their money to supposedly “Catholic” or “Protestant” governors enacting policies that would make even Neo-Stoics give up on them. I often hear about people going through hardships with supposedly Christ-loving families, hardships that shouldn’t be there, and it makes me mad I can’t do anything. I might be terrified of being a mom, but I’d do it for those people.
A good rule of thumb: The ten commandments > The word of Jesus > The rest of the old testament > Indirect interpretations, with Paul being nothing more than the Christian equivalent of a hadith.
Jesus still said the ten commandments were crucial expressions of the commandment of doing to others as one one have done to themselves. The ten commandments had been brought up a few times in the new testament, either with Jesus being questioned as to why he wasn’t following them (in response to which he’d elaborate why a commandment is important and why he’s not dishonoring it) or with him expanding a commandment, such as at Matthew 5:28-29.
Also seems a bit weird to me. Maybe they meant it along the lines of what is easy to look up and apply quickly. But even then, there’s “Love thy neighbour as thyself“ which is maybe even simpler. Maybe they’ll explain what they meant.
The ten commandments are a priority, Jesus stressed often the need to not impede on those. Commandments were brought up a few times in the synoptic gospels. The most famous example was when he said that fantasizing about someone you’re not married to was (figuratively) as good as adultery. In another, he was asked why he was “working on Sundays” and he went out of his way to demonstrate how it wasn’t work in a laborious sense. The ten commandments do take priority over other teachings, that’s why they’re called the ten commandments and why, according to some, they were inscribed on stone while other rules were spoken orally.
Jesus himself did this. The implication behind them being inscribed in stone was that they are a priority. Imagine putting something in bold print and saying “oh don’t worry, that text is in bold just because I felt like it”. If someone had to choose between, say, disobeying a commandment and disobeying the food rules, you should disobey the food rule.
I feel like there was something in Revelations about how a powerful delusion would fall on people because they "loved not the truth".
And I'm not saying this is the end times but I definitely feel like there wouldn't be much difference between how I felt right now and how I would feel if I knew for a fact it was the end times.
For real. I am no catholic or god worshipper but i feel like i am living a more religious life then them because I recognize the fiction of Jesus life for the vast inspirational philophies it contains and actually try to incorporate some of it in my life.
Wow, top voted reply. Damn Lemmy is cynical. There are many people out there doing God’s work caring for each other for no recognition, no reward. And certainly there are many folks out there too that make things look really bad, and the media loves to tell that story, but don’t for a moment think that that’s every Christian.
The biggest real-life plot holes and you didn’t expect something that directly affects 8 out of ten people (and indirectly affects the other 2) on the planet to come up?
Anything that affects that many people is going to have real life plot-holes:
America nominally fought its last war in 1945, but we’ve had soldiers fighting and dying in dozens of countries ever since.
Fossil fuels and unregulated pollution is proven to be destroying the recent period of relative climate stability and fossil fuel companies are getting paid by the government to stay in business.
America produces enough food to feed the entire country(and probably several others) but created laws that force you to throw it away.
The best thing these unrecognized christians “doing God’s work” you say exist could be doing to help the world right now is to be actively and vocally trying to oppose the Christians that are currently very loudly advocating for fascism. There is literally no bigger threat right now. There is a clear imbalance in voices in the Christian community. The good Christians could be just as loud if they wanted, they could be setting an example, but they aren’t. People always say it’s just a “few” loud voices when talking about the bad things being said, if it only takes a few to be that loud then why the fuck are the good ones silent?
How does it feel to be on the same side as most preachers and weekly church-goers?
Few things drives them more nuts than people who call themselves Christians and don’t even attempt to be followers of Christ. Trying and failing is one thing, and always an embarrassment to the church, but living like the worst dregs of society, while using that name, is worse than an intentional smear campaign.
My understanding is that the difference in terms goes back to the Norman invasion, which is when a ton of French-based terms for things were carried over.
The peasants referred to everything as the name of the animal but the French nobles referred to it as porc, boeuf, etc. This is also where we got the words for venison, mutton, veal, poultry, and also apparently pheasant
Buffalo in english is a weird word, because it’s an animal, a city and an action, which is why the phrase “Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo” is one of the weirdest things I’ve ever heard, but completely correct english.
To add to this, the rich (i.e., French-speaking) consumed the most butchered meat, by far. So, it came to be that butchered meat for sale would be labeled in French, while the live animals, which were tended by (English-speaking) peasents retained their English names.
From what I can work out, yep it seems that way. Pork and beef were too expensive for the peasants so they just referred to them as the animals they were raising, but chickens were actually on their menu so we ended up keeping the animal words for it. We still got the word for pullet (young hen) though.
I just read a theory that poisson, french for fish, didn’t come over because it sounded too much like poison, but who knows if that’s true lol.
Piggybacking off of this, “venison” comes from a Latin word meaning “to hunt” and was originally used as more of a catch-all term for game meats. You might have deer venison, boar venison, rabbit venison, etc. Over time it came to mostly be used to refer to deer
If you don’t mind my asking, which language is yours?
It’s an interesting question to ponder which different languages ended up with distinction words for the meat vs the living animal, and maybe what that says about the culture.
The distinction is not a feature of French, from what I understand, and English ending up with this distinction seems to have been entirely accidental.
Hello to the Fediverse! Hopefully you can also enjoy the rest of the sites such as Kbin, Pixelfed, Peertube, Owncast and Misskey - there’s plenty to choose from!
I’d only heard of Kbin, Lemmy, Mastodon, and Peertube until now. Pixelfed looks cool, Owncast and Misskey are too but I don’t watch streamers or microblog so.
I’ve checked a few instances of federated YouTube alternatives and just… no. Most of the content is right wing guys looking for a place to spread hate they can’t elsewhere. The type of people that watch Andrew Tate and Admin Ross. Lemmy is Great though, mastodon seems a little boring compared to twitter. The fix to that would be Elon fucking up enough that the very change averse average internet user would be willing to try mastodon.
I think the thing that may finally drive people off the platform may be the limitation on viewing posts. Busy days, I’m not likely to hit the limit - big news day? Yeah, going to hit the limit pretty fucking fast.
Mastodon gets better when you start following people by hashtag.
Account Settings > Profile > Featured Hashtags
Populate that area with hashtags of what interests you. Pretty soon you have people popping up that share your interests and you follow those that seem interesting.
OMG I love Mastodon and my instance (mas.to). Left Twitter for Mas about 8 months ago - I love following hashtags even more than people. There’s some great gems to follow though. For both Twitter, and now Reddit, I left for Fedi and just never went back. Facebook was another cold turkey quitting, no alternative for that one, that was years ago now.
What I find when I follow tags is that my feed is now totally flooded with hundreds of new roots every time I log in - how do you deal with this? It’s way too much for me to ever go through and get anything meaningful out of it.
Lists are your friend! Not sure if Mastodon can do it, but on Pleroma/Akkoma you can add users to a list without adding them to your main followed list.
Yeah- this is my big gripe with all of the alternative video sharing platforms. All of them have a significantly right-wing conspiracy theorist bias. Not really a place I see myself spending a lot of time, personally.
Yeah- this is my big gripe with all of the alternative video sharing platforms. All of them have a significantly right-wing conspiracy theorist bias. Not really a place I see myself spending a lot of time, personally.
Yeah- this is my big gripe with all of the alternative video sharing platforms. All of them have a significantly right-wing conspiracy theorist bias. Not really a place I see myself spending a lot of time, personally.
Yeah- this is my big gripe with all of the alternative video sharing platforms. All of them have a significantly right-wing conspiracy theorist bias. Not really a place I see myself spending a lot of time, personally.
Yeah- this is my big gripe with all of the alternative video sharing platforms. All of them have a significantly right-wing conspiracy theorist bias. Not really a place I see myself spending a lot of time, personally.
Mastodon/Fed Twitter integration. You can post on a Lemmy community, tag a hashtag and it becomes a microblog (tweet) at the same time. But upvoted and downvotes are public on kbin. So depends what you want.
And in the long run we’ll see if kbin can keep up with the Twitter like software on the Twitter side and if it can keep up with Lemmy for reddit features at the same time. Like Lemmy can focus purely on meeting Reddits features then passing them. Kbin has to worry and work on both.
Dogs have a much shorter digestive tract. So things that have been sitting out and have parasites in them have a much smaller chance of making a dog sick than they do humans. This is why dogs can eat most raw meats without getting sick, while humans need special preparation for raw meats to make sure parasites aren’t in them.
This is new information to me and a great example of the internet having a positive role in my life. I wish it was all this way. Thanks for the mini-lesson.
I actually got curious and tried to fact check this but then realized I had no way of knowing which sites really offered actual advice to such an inane little fact, or were just making shit up. :(
This is generally how “folksy wisdom” keeps getting passed down generation to generation until it ends up in a farmer’s almanac.
It sounds reasonable, and so gets taken for true even though it has no (that I’m aware) actual scientific evidence to back it up.
It’s a causation fallacy. ie) correlation does not necessarily equal causation. Just because two things are statistically correlated, doesn’t mean that one causes the other.
It’s like if I were to say “Hey, The midwest has higher instances of heart disease. Therefore moving to the the midwest will give you heart disease.” It’s not true.
The two things are correlated, certainly, in that the mid-west folks probably for the most part has a much fattier diet, and are less likely to engage in healthier eating habits. But just the simple act of being in the midwest isn’t a cause of heart disease.
Correlation does not equal Causation. Print it on a card and keep it in your pocket please. People not grasping that concept and passing off folksy anecdotes as “wisdom” has been the cause of too much suffering.
All true, but it’s even worse: sometimes some of the cited facts are plainly wrong. Taking your example, it could be that the midwest actually has the same heart disease statistics as anywhere else. Just because someone told you something confidently doesn’t mean it’s true. “95% of statistics is made up on the spot”.
So maybe “dogs have a much shorter digestive tract” is already wrong? Maybe they have roughly the same length as us? And maybe “[things with parasites] have a much smaller chance of making a dog sick than they do humans” is also wrong? If you care about the truthfulness, you’d have to look that up too. And then you’d have to find that there’s causation between the two.
But all that said, I agree with another reply: “It’s a really low-risk bit of information, whether true or false. […] there’s no harm in taking in low-stakes stuff”. So no need to be paranoid about every little tidbit of info, just the things that matter to you.
It’s a really low-risk bit of information, whether true or false. It’s good practice to be aware of what we accept as true, though there’s no harm in taking in low-stakes stuff imo
It’s a pretty well know property of carnivore digestive systems. They also tend to have more and stronger stomach acid, which also helps with killing parasites. It get’s even crazier for carrion eaters.
As I understand, humans have an extremely acidic stomach compared to other animals, even carnivores. Our stomach acid is on the level of scavengers, and this is to kill bacteria and parasites in the food we eat. Humans could be more tolerant of spoiled food than most other species.
The modern western diet/lifestyle can damage our digestive tract in ways that affect our pH and microbiome making us susceptible to what we should normally be tolerant of. Anyone taking antacids or dealing with heartburn type issues I would expect to more vulnerable to food poisoning since any pathogens can more easily pass deeper into their digestive tract.
The short digestive tract in a dog is all that is needed to extract nutrients from animal sources, digesting plants requires help from a microbiome and they need somewhere to live and do their work, this is why plant eaters have extensive digestive tracts that are not very acidic so they don’t kill them off. Humans (not sure about other animals) neutralize the “chime” exiting your stomach so that it’s pH is appropriate for the microbiome living in the intestines.
The human digestive tract suggest sit evolved for adaptability, a healthy human can safely eat anything from carrion (not saying it’s fine, just that we evolved to be able to survive it), be a vegetarian, or eat mostly meat and thrive.
Last I checked hexbear had something like 70% more total comments than lemmy.world despite only having a tiny fraction of the users. Sounds like bots to me
Hexbear has had an established and more active community for a longer time than Lemmy.world. You can visit Hexbear yourself and check, it’s not illegal or anything.
Over time Lemmy.world may overtake Hexbear, but not for a while.
I have imagined that ever since the Reddit emigration hype ended and things settled down a bit here that the vast majority of world and shit users are mostly lurkers and not terribly vocal, as is the case on a lot of other platforms.
Yep, I agree, same goes for Lemm.ee and other “generalist” instances. Those attracted the most people from Reddit as they required the least knowledge before-hand of Lemmy and aimed at replicating Reddit in some ways.
More niche communities tend to be more active per user if they are well established, with Hexbear as a prime example.
That’s very ironic given that they ban anyone further left than “Capitalist Russia is the best country in the world! Let’s support their invasion of Ukraine for no reason! Ughur genocide fake by the way! Is not so bad that Stalin banned being gay.”
Plus whenever somebody talks ill about the CCP over there they get barraged by copypasta responses. Their posts mirror popular posts on other servers, and generally lack any form of real discussion. The place looks like the bottiest of all instances and nothing can change my mind.
A lot of troll accounts are semi-automated. They run a script that detects certain keywords, and posts premade replies to them (nowadays said premade replies are being finetuned with generative AI to look less uniform), also a human is watching over them to ensure both correct operation and to overtake in case of emergency.
Source: My father’s ex-girlfriend’s ex-boyfriend was (is) a paid online troll for Fidesz. They also had Discord (later Matrix if I recall) servers for organizing mass reports, downvotes, angry/haha react campaigns, often they also did some “private doxxing”.
Idk ozma was pushing a super hard the left should protest vote or not vote before getting called out in every thread. They have been slowly evolving the shill to be less and less obvious. Even started posting memes and other content to try and get the political agenda across without posting negative articles. Now the message isnt the very obvous up front don’t vote, but they are just “critical of Biden,” yet have nothing to say about anyone else. Doesn’t seem like an edgy kid to me.
Weird how I didn’t say either of those things. Also pretty hypocritical to not like what I said, put words in my mouth, and then call me Blue MAGA. Really helps your point.
Love how you quickly diverted from the hypocrisy of putting words in my mouth and then do the exact thing you seem to be crying about of labeling me Blue MAGA because I said something you didn’t like. In the US we have a FPTP voting system. We do not have a luxury of choosing the best candidate, but the lesser of 2 evils. So pretending that protesting voting or not voting is standing for a cause is a joke and disingenuous. All it does is help the opposition party. You can be critical all you want but don’t pretend to be liberal when you know a protest vote or not vote helps the other party. The message was very clear they didn’t want people to vote. Now they are trying to be more subtle about it. But sure lets be a 1 issue voter and pretend a Trump presidency would be better for the social issues everyone crying Blue MAGA seems to care so much about.
There are still clowns who think that if they say “Blue MAGA” enough people will believe it’s real? Checks the username, oh, of course, it’s one of the regulars lol.
Hey, I’m here! I said vote for whoever you want or don’t vote, that’s democracy.
I’ve said over and over I’m a gay guy living in the Los Angeles area and far left. I keep sounding the alarm Biden will lose to Trump but nobody wants to listen to me.
And then, the debate tonight everyone is surprised Pikachu face now.
In the US it’s a spectrum combining party policy and Overton Window. As you move left, you go deeper and deeper into increasingly extreme thoughts on policy regarding what we consider classic liberal topics such as social justice, corporate power, various societal and economic reforms, etc till it hits an extreme that’s considered radical to the average, the same goes for the right and classic conservative views.
Hugging the middle/mixed gray zone are the Centrist.
Social Justice isn’t really a “Liberal” topic. It’s a topic many US Liberals generally are progressive on, but that doesn’t make it “Liberal.” Liberalism is also not about reforming the economy but maintaining “healthy” Capitalism.
Liberal views are therefore views in line with Liberalism itself, and Liberal Parties like the DNC represent Liberalism and movements towards Liberalism, not movements towards the left.
Social Democracy, ie what Scandinavian Countries have, would be centrist.
You are a liar and you keep spreading this bullshit. Both sides in the US support economic liberalism. The US exclusively uses the term “liberal” to refer to social issues.
You can argue about whether that’s a good definition or not, but you CANNOT argue about whether that’s actually how it’s used in the US, both in everyday usage and political journalism.
You are spreading this shit because you like to intentionally blur the difference between Democrats and Republicans.
Then why are you trying to push this idea that “liberal” = “fiscally liberal”? Not only is it not true, it’s not even useful, as we have words like “capitalist” to describe the similar economic thinking between Democrats and Republicans (and I’m using similar very loosely here, it’s only similar when compared to something like socialism).
Okay, so you’re saying that liberal politicians use the term differently, but they’re wrong, because “the US” doesn’t use the term differently? You’re claiming that everyday Americans say “liberal” and are referring to the economic sense of the word?
No, I’m saying liberal politicians use the word correctly but view themselves as progressive, same with liberal citizenry. Nobody calls themselves a Liberal but is actually a Socialist or anything.
World and Hexbear are both liberal cesspits. One is full of centrists who think they’re leftists, and one is full of conservatives who think they’re communists.
This just pretends democratic socialism doesn’t exist. Like there’s nothing between liberal and ML communist.
So, you are saying that if someone wants the same end goal as you, but has a differing opinion on how we accomplish that, you insult them. I’m sure you change a lot of minds and make a lot of friends with your method.
There is nothing between liberal and ML “communist”. They’re the same. Democratic socialism is to the left of both of those, and anarchist ideologies such as anarcho-communism, syndicalism, and mutualism are to the left of that. See, demsocs may not be the biggest fans of Marx, but they adhere far more closely to his ideas than Stalinists do.
I see now. Intriguing take you have. It’s different than the way everybody else classifies things, but I guess I can see where you are coming from. In my opinion, ML theory is pretty left leaning when it comes to economics and the end goal of it, but the authoritarian plan for transitioning to it does not align with most other leftist virtues and ideas.
Stalinists are just so afraid to actually pursue their supposed end goal. They always say “I want a stateless, classless moneyless society”, but if you say “Okay, let’s have a communist revolution and get rid of all that garbage right now”, they call you an idiot. “No, no, no”, they say. “You have to have a socialist revolution, and then wait two hundred years for the state to dissolve itself.” Well I’m sick of waiting. Russia never dissolved its socialist state, and China isn’t going to either. But you know who didn’t have a state, and still managed to fight bloody hard against the capitalists? Catalonia. They had the right idea, they just got rid of the state straight away. They were actually communists. I figure if the Stalinists keep saying no to communism, then they can’t be communists at all.
True leftism is when you reject reality, and anyone that doesn’t subscribe to your extremely niche, extremely online ideology is either a conservative or a centrist. Everyone who disagrees with you, whether on the basis of theory or history or material conditions or lived experience, is just too morally impure to achieve the same level of leftism as you, you are the One True Leftist, and you’re not going to let little things like what things exist or are possible get in the way of that.
Wow, a fellow soulist. You’re being a bit too evangelical, though. We actually have a discord server with over 70 members! discord.gg/nfbVVyXK. And if you don’t like that one, there are two newer servers run by different mod teams. discord.com/invite/w7tvaR6s. discord.gg/5THVKZrk. Also, many soulists come from diverse walks of life and have more lived experience of realist oppression than nearly anyone. For example, I have schizotypal personality disorder, so my experience of reality is neurodivergent to begin with. There are many otherkin and plural systems within the community. Even material conditions, which are fake and socially constructed, can radicalise someone towards soulism. Over half of soulists are transgender. Obviously, soulism is more attractive to any trans person than realism, because it offers faster and more complete transition than any realist ideology.
I am not a soulist. In fact, I consider it to be an extremely dangerous ideology. If you’re successful in undermining consensus reality, we’re going to have dragons and vampires running around terrorizing people. The moment reality becomes mutable enough for someone to turn themselves into something with mind control powers, like a mind flayer, we’re all fucked.
I am trans and neurodivergent, and I take offense at this statement:
Obviously, soulism is more attractive to any trans person than realism, because it offers faster and more complete transition than any realist ideology.
Trans identities are not a rejection of reality. I don’t find your ideology appealing in the slightest. I believe in objective science, and the science is 100% on the side of trans people.
Of course the science is in support of trans people. Realism is anti-science. The scientific method points us inexorably towards antirealism. Soulists oppose the manufactured, false consensus reality which denies trans lives experiences. Because we’re awesome. Mainstream movements say pre-transition trans women are female on the inside, but soulists say the outside body is a mental construct, and cannot be taken as fact in any sense.
I watched the whole 20 minute video, just for you. I’m not interested in reading more from him as I was not impressed.
Welcome to philosophy. These ideas are not remotely new, they’ve been discussed for literally thousands of years. Obviously there’s a difference between sensation and perception, and obviously it’s possible for senses to be fooled, and obviously optical illusions exist. No one denies these things.
One thing that he is wrong about near the end is the rather arrogant idea that reason and logic are somehow magically immune to evolutionary pressures. The whole host of cognitive biases we experience as humans are grounded in the fact that we evolved in contexts where group cohesion was important to survival. He doesn’t seem like a particularly knowledgeable cognitive scientist if he either isn’t aware of the bandwagon effect (for instance), or if he can’t see the obvious connection between that and the need to fit in with a tribal community.
But more to the point of his thesis, the reason it’s trash is because it fails it’s own test. It’s indeed possible that, contrary to all evidence and observations, we’re living in a simulation, or whatever gobbledyremoved he said about conscious beings creating reality - the problem is, so what? By definition, this theory is unfalsifiable, and it is not capable of helping us do anything at all.
There is a saying in science, “All models are wrong - but some are useful.” Physicists are well aware that when we draw a diagram of an atom on a piece of paper, it differs from an actual atom in several crucial ways. It’s very large, for instance, meaning that the drawing can absorb and emit photons without really changing. Our mental models of atoms are necessarily imperfect, the only perfect representation of an atom is the atom itself. However, we still use these imperfect drawings and mental models because they help us navigate reality and predict events. This person’s theory does none of that.
It appears that he has conjured up an imaginary, unobservable world, that does not interact with us in any way, and he has, for some bizarre reason, chosen to dub that with the moniker of “reality,” instead of the actual, you know, reality that we can sense and perceive, that is testable and verifiable, that is necessary to navigate in order to survive. Why he’s chosen to call his fantasy reality and reality an illusion, I don’t know.
Now look, this whole thing you’ve come up with seems like a fun little form of escapism, and I don’t have a problem with that in itself. The problem I have is when you start trying to interject it into actual politics, when you actively try to divert energy away from engaging with reality, the thing that actually exists and can measurably improve or harm people’s mental and physical states, and instead towards your fantasy. That’s when it starts sounding more like a cult.
Your kind of thinking is responsible for countless New Age spiritualists telling people they don’t need medicine, that they can just cure diseases, like AIDS, through the power of belief. You can indulge whatever fantasy you feel like, but when push comes to shove, medicine fucking works, the train will kill you if you step in front of it, etc. The speaker in your video at least acknowledged that, even if by doing so, he undermined everything else he said - at the end of the day, he has to submit to that which he labeled “illusory” and deny that which he labeled “real.” And so should you. And that means that you have to engage with materialist and empirically backed theories of psychology, sociology, politics, economics, etc. Which means, get your nonsense ideology out of here.
The benefit Hoffman’s theory does us is that is reveals the universe is governed not by physical laws, but by cognitive laws, of which apparent physical laws are a contextually dependent subset. And we can use that, because it means reality can be manipulated not just by physical technology, but also by psychological technology. Imagine a civilisation only using half of science! It would look to the average person like a society practicing biology and medicine without ever discovering chemistry or physics. That’s precisely the situation our civilisation now finds itself in. We are only using half the science that is available to us, and half of the technologies we could have already invented by now. Antirealists demand that the government pour more research money into developing psychological technologies that alter our perception of reality. And that the public embrace such psychological technologies as have already been invented. For example, the technology to see a trans person as their preferred gender presentation regardless of their physical form. That technology is essential to preventing suicides and many people refuse to adopt it. We are fighting an anti-science platform pushed by transphobes who want trans people dead.
The benefit Hoffman’s theory does us is that is reveals the universe is governed not by physical laws, but by cognitive laws, of which apparent physical laws are a contextually dependent subset.
This is not what he says at all, and if he has any credibility as a scientist and doesn’t want to change careers to cult leader, he would completely disavow what you just said.
And we can use that, because it means reality can be manipulated not just by physical technology, but also by psychological technology.
This is complete nonsense.
That’s precisely the situation our civilisation now finds itself in.
No it absolutely is not.
Antirealists demand that the government pour more research money into developing psychological technologies that alter our perception of reality.
Yes, I figured this was about getting high and seeing pretty colors.
Why do you need the government for this? If you need more funds, why don’t you just alter reality to manifest them into existence?
For example, the technology to see a trans person as their preferred gender presentation regardless of their physical form.
Again, respecting a trans person’s identity does not require a denial of reality or of our physical forms. If the physical form of a trans person wasn’t objectively different from that of a cis person of the same gender, then we would not need any of the medications or treatments that we do - we wouldn’t even have the terms “trans” and “cis.” Please stop talking as if trans identities are somehow a denial of reality.
We are fighting an anti-science platform
If you respond to nothing else I say, then at least answer me this: why have you chosen to term something that is anti-science as “reality?” It makes absolutely no sense. Just say that science is real, that trans identities are real, and that transphobes are pushing a false and unreal narrative.
Try to pay attention to the language we’ve all agreed on.
If you respond to nothing else I say, then at least answer me this: why have you chosen to term something that is anti-science as “reality?” It makes absolutely no sense. Just say that science is real, that trans identities are real, and that transphobes are pushing a false and unreal narrative.
I didn’t choose to term anti-science beliefs as reality. Society did, and then I went along with it so as not to be incomprehensible to you. If by “reality”, we mean “An objectively extant world”, then there’s no such thing, and I oppose belief in such a thing. But if by reality we mean “The world society thinks is objectively extant”, then that thing is anti-science.
It’s much the same language as an atheist might use to talk about the gods. The atheist would say "If by ‘the gods’, you mean ‘almighty beings’, then there’s no such thing, and I oppose belief in such a thing. But if by ‘the gods’, you mean ‘the almighty beings society believes in’, then they are anti-science.
Please don’t begrudge me for accepting your premise that consensus reality is reality. It’s just a matter of convenience. I cannot at the same time believe that reality is true, and that reality is what the realists believe in. I have to pick one or the other.
Why do you need the government for this? If you need more funds, why don’t you just alter reality to manifest them into existence?
Cause the brain doesn’t work like that, you dipshit. Didn’t I say our perceptual reality is governed by cognitive laws? Cognitive laws don’t allow me to just do that. Weren’t you paying attention, or do you just have a kindergartener’s understanding of psychology?
I didn’t choose to term anti-science beliefs as reality. Society did, and then I went along with it so as not to be incomprehensible to you. If by “reality”, we mean “An objectively extant world”, then there’s no such thing, and I oppose belief in such a thing. But if by reality we mean “The world society thinks is objectively extant”, then that thing is anti-science.
That which has the potential to smack you if you pretend it doesn’t exist is objectively real. It is nonsense to say that that is not real or that anything else is more real than that. There is no “world society thinks is objectively extant.” Society contains a lot of people who disagree on a lot of things. Scientists and supporters of trans rights are part of society.
Please don’t begrudge me for accepting your premise that consensus reality is reality.
Never said that. That’s your position, isn’t it? My position is that there is an objective reality that exists regardless of what people believe.
Cause the brain doesn’t work like that, you dipshit. Didn’t I say our perceptual reality is governed by cognitive laws? Cognitive laws don’t allow me to just do that. Weren’t you paying attention, or do you just have a kindergartener’s understanding of psychology?
Sorry, I suppose I’ve only been schooled in laws that, uh, actually exist and are observable and testable. I suppose I do have a kindergartener’s understanding of these magical psychic laws you’ve made up, I know nothing about how they supposedly work, please excuse my ignorance.
I’m familiar with psychology. Nothing about psychology suggests that it’s possible to collectively reshape the physical world through thought if enough people believe hard enough. I’d love to see some academic work that supports that claim.
They don’t want to have a communist revolution. They want to have a socialist revolution and then wait for the state to implement communism on its own. A true communist would act to bring about communism.
Have you by any chance read The Communist Manifesto or Critique of the Gotha Programme? Both are very short reads, and give some level of idea of what Marx is directly advocating for, as opposed to his general critique of Capitalism or his philosophical work on Dialectical Materialism. Marx was no Anarchist, he advocated for building Communism over time. This didn’t mean “waiting for the state to one day turn on the Communism switch,” that ignores his entire philosophy of Historical Materialism, whereby societal contradictions are worked out over time, as nothing is inherently static and everything is in motion.
None of this requires any of Lenin’s work to be read at all.
If you’re saying that a “True Communist” would somehow magically create Communism directly via revolution and not over time, then Marx was not a “True Communist.” At this point, you’re deeply silly, and simply redefining Anarchism as “True Communism” to win a game of semantics and label all non-Anarchists as conservatives.
Edit: oh, in another post you directly out yourself as a Soulist, and thus you disagree with Marx not only on his advocacy for Communism, but also his philosophy of Dialectical Materialism. At this point, you’re content to deny science and Materialism for the sake of pushing forward the idea that ideas create reality, which is deeply unserious.
Dialectical materialism is a misnomer. I’ll give you an example. Suppose Alice’s boss pays her one dollar an hour, while Bob’s boss pays him a thousand dollars an hour. A dollar is not a material object. It’s a social construct. These quantities are, material, simply numbers in a bank account. Less than that, because numbers are social constructs too. Materially, these are magnetised bits on a hard drive. There is no material sense in which Bob earns more than Alice. The fact that Bob earns a thousand times as much is purely social, not material. Yet, as a result of the exchange of social constructs, Alice lives in a slum and cannot afford medical care for the tumor that will kill her in a year’s time, and she is driven by necessity towards revolution. While Bob lives a life of privilege in a mcmansion with three healthy kids from three different ex-wives, and Bob is incentivised to maintain the status quo and oppose revolution.
If the dialectical philosophy of marxists were aptly named, it would be called dialectical determinism. Alice and Bob’s lives are governed by cause and effect, not by materials. They are governed by the cause and effect of social constructs. We can say that materially, Bob is more wealthy because he has a mansion, but why does he have a mansion when Alice does not? Because of a social construct. Not a material. It is wrong to say Alice’s desire for revolution is driven by materials. It is in fact driven by cause and effect, which is much more universal than mere matter.
Being a soulist does not make me the enemy of dialectical determinists, which is to say Marxists. But it does make me the enemy of realists, who misunderstand the lessons to be learned from Marx’s writing and fixate upon the physical to the exclusion of truth.
Oh, it appears I was wrong. You reject all of Marxism, including his critique of Capitalism via rejection of the Labor Theory of Value. Money is a representation of Exchange-Value, it doesn’t simply exist in our minds. Recognizing income differences is not an anti-Materialist take, pretending these happen for no reason is a rejection of attempting to understand Capitalism itself, and reality.
This is Idealism at its peak, and is a complete misunderstanding of what Materialists mean when referencing Social Relations. If you genuinely want to understand Dialectical Materialism, please read Elementary Principles of Philosophy by Politzer. Materialists understand social relations.
Alice’s drive towards revolution is due to her material conditions, which are caused by the material reality of Capitalism.
You are an enemy of Marxism and Marxists because you reject all 3 pillars of Marxism: Critique of Capitalism via the Labor Theory of Value, advocacy for Socialism as a way to build towards Communism, and Dialectical and Historical Materialism. Pretending to be the “One True Communist” while completely disavowing history’s most important Communist in every major manner is just anticommunism.
Yes, your beliefs about Marxist beliefs are wrong, and your beliefs about your own reality are wrong. Avoiding actually engaging with the points I made by replacing them with a “no u” and attacking me personally is again deeply unserious behavior.
The part where you completely misunderstood both Marx and my own arguments. But no, no, go ahead. I’m sure everyone at the clown college is very impressed with you.
Seems to me like you just have no way to address the arguments I raised and just resort to endless ad-hominem as a frustrated way to deflect, but whatever. Have a good day.
This is the worst thing that I have ever read, so bad that it made me make an account just to tell you how wrong you are.
First of all, if you even, for a second, thought about what you were saying this immediately crumbles. You dedicate a significant portion to talking about the material differences in the lives of those individuals, the property they own, the health care they can access, but then proceed to deny that it is the material conditions, that you have just laid out, that drive people towards certain ideas! You utterly contradict yourself.
Secondly, you just completely ignore how reality works and draw an arbitrary start line where everything just begins in a highly developed manner. The workers are not preordained to be workers, the bourgeoisie are not preordained to be such either. The people in your thought experiment would be in such a position due to a very very very very long history of subjective action arising from objective material conditions and social relationships (those relationships also arising from material conditions). So, dialectical materialism is very aptly named!
Thirdly, you have no idea what dialectical means and it is agonisingly obvious. A dialectic is the relationship between the opposite aspects inherent within a thing. So, with any morsel of philosophical thought it is readily apparent that “dialectical determinism” is an oxymoron. And I know you lack that said morsel of philosophical thought, so I’m going to explain it to you. The dialectic in question is the subject-object relationship, otherwise known as historical materialism: so if you remove subjectivity (which is a necessary consequence of a deterministic world view) you are debasing the subject to a mere object; and if there is no subject, there’s no subject-object relationship and thus no dialectic.
To wrap things up, stop trying to talk about things you’re beyond clueless about!
And large parts of .ml, which is the bridge for hexbear to all the instances which defederated with them.
It really does feel like hexbear users are probably high fiving each other over their cubicle walls in Vladivostok. The admin openly states their goal is information warfare.
As if they needed to check for ““compatibility”” at all - just let the users try their makeshift coded-in-a-weekend browsers, or their 2008 version of IE.
The better question is why some websites even bother checking for the browser when the vast majority of people uses mainstream options that follow web standards and self-update.
Checking the browser version kind of made sense 15 years ago when updating the browser depended on the user’s awareness and willingness of doing so, and the lack of standards across browsers was blatant. Nowadays that’s pretty much useless. The maximum these sites should be doing is displaying a banner letting the user know their browser might be incompatible (because it’s likely not in a way that prevents usage), then fuck off.
I had a client once who used to be obsessed with this. By his logic, if a potential customer visited the website and had a bad experience because the site didn’t work properly in their browser, they’d think the company was unprofessional and wouldn’t come into the store and we’d lose them as a customer forever. Analytics showed that 99+% of people would visit in one of the big three, and he wouldn’t pay for someone to test the site on the less popular browsers, instead he insisted on fingerprinting logic that broke all the time and probably caused more bounces than any possible rendering quirks from niche mobile browsers would have caused
It’s ridiculous some people even consider blocking a browser completely and having a near 100% chance of turning away the customer that uses it instead of just letting the user browse and have a significant chance of nothing bad happening.
People are not going to change browsers to visit this website unless they absolutely have to - in which case they’ll hate this company for it.
Checking the browser almost never makes sense these days.
Sites should be using feature detection instead. Rather than checking the browser version, instead check if the browser supports the features they require.
It’s more practical though, from a more general UX perspective where the U is often a non technical person. If you throw a “ur browser doesn’t support webserial(or whatever)” message up on the screen, you’re just gonna confuse tons of users who won’t even know what the hell you’re talking about. Easier (for everyone) to tell them to just use what you know works.
The message doesn’t have to be technical and can still mention browsers - just say “your browser isn’t compatible with this site. Try updating it or switch to Chrome or Edge”. The idea is just that if someone with a non-Chrome and non-Edge browser tries to load the page and it supports the feature, they won’t see the message.
The problem is that there are still features missing from certain browsers. For example, Mozilla does not like restrictive licenses, which is why many media codecs are not available in Firefox. Google does not care, pays the fees and provides the media codecs for free. As soon as we get rid of shit like h265 and switch to av1, the world will be a better (and more open) place where everyone can use any browser.
That‘s the problem. If you show a damaged or non working website, the user assumes it is a problem of the website, then thinking negatively about it. Unfortunately the world is not as easy as you see it :)
Kinda agree, but from a software developer perspective, there is no reason to maintain multiple code bases or exceptions just because 2% of the users might profit from it. The same thing happened in the past, when everyone had to have special CSS exceptions for IE6. But in that case it was worth it, as the marked share of IE6 was huge.
laments the slow pace of new material in the communities.
Participation. We need more of it. Like…a lot more of it.
Lurkers shouldn’t lurk, and people should give others the benefit of the doubt far more often than they ever did on Reddit, if they ever did at all. Make Lemmy a community where engagement is valuable and fun and actually useful.
Is that true though? I used to be a major lurker, but now I post relatively often. I think having other people post about stuff you care about, rather than just screenshots of other websites, can be a big factor.
On Reddit I usually didn’t comment anything, even if I had something to say. I do comment here, and a big part is that more people actually engage here.
This is daunting. I don’t want to make one. I have a full-time job and a house to take care of. I haven’t had a day off in over a month. I’m not set up to moderate a community. I’m not even set up to vet moderators. People say this on Lemmy all the time like it’s the easiest thing in the world. It’s not for everyone.
That’s just the state that Lemmy is in right now. It’s not a massive community like Reddit is. It’s not easy! It’s very time consuming, and probably not a very rewarding experience. However, if you want to use Lemmy that’s probably the best solution. Either that or come back when it’s a more mature software. You would have had a similar experience in the early days of Reddit.
To add to this, artificial engagement is disingenuous. It’s akin to corporate-owned comment sections inviting people to “speak their mind” which, of course, no one does.
It’s a balance that should be kept: being willing to contribute, but not feeling forced to contribute. Quality begets quality, and if we compromise on quality chasing quantity, we would end up copying the worst of Reddit.
That’s what I did over on kbin. I’m responsible for posting 95+% of pro wrestling news on Lemmy/kbin, and another person sets up most of the discussions. The community wasn’t picking up speed back during the early redditpocalypse. Now we’re getting tons of activity.
So I was wishing that r/korea woukd be a thing on lemmy, I found an instance hosted in Korea and subscribed. I started posting, now after like 3 month it’s full of only my own posts, each gets 3-7 upvotes and every 5th gets a comment from someone outside of Korea ^^.
I feel that if I’m the only one posting anyway I perhaps should bring it to my own instance which I have controll over and could moderate if it became necessary. I have no idea who is the admin of that one.
The instance is a little small and the community doesn’t have many users. It could help advertising it a little so interested people find out about it. Looks like someone even made a post after your comment.
This is a community I help with, but there are others like it: !communitypromo
perhaps should bring it to my own instance which I have controll over and could moderate if it became necessary. I have no idea who is the admin of that one.
I agree. I’ve been shying away from some instances. Since that community is small anyway, you could make it on your own / find a different instance for it.
Very much this. Every time you see something interesting make a post about it please. It doesn’t need to be polished. You don’t need to worry about it.
Save hot takes and negativity for posts made by bots. Pay attention to who is posting what, because the poster has to see that negativity and it is not sustainable. You are making every comment to a person. When you bitch about a title or article, it is going to a person that gets a notification and has to see it. Everyone that has tried to do this regularly with the goal of just making regular posts has quit, myself included. It is straight up unhealthy from a mental health perspective to have to read or see what the bottom 5% sludge post. This is one reason why we have so many bots and memes.
The single biggest change that would make this place better would be a negativity filter to wreck the few mental health patients that are always on here down voting every new post. Simply filter for the 0.01% of users with abnormal negativity and sandbox them so they are the only ones that see their own negativity. Posting something here for the first time and seeing this kind of response right away is totally disenfranchising. People that troll the world like this belong in little sandboxes of their own sadistic self gratification. I think down votes are useful and important, but their abuse should be eliminated systematically.
It took a serious change in attitude for me to not become a lurker anymore. I always figured that if I have nothing interesting to say, I should just be quiet.
Eventually I realized that people are often happy to just get some feedback and interaction, even if it isn’t the most interesting or original response. As long as it’s done in a positive and friendly manner, you’re creating a sense of community.
I’m a lurker, but want to contribute. It took a lot to get an account (and then got a bunch of hate because I picked lemmy.world), but I can’t find any guidance on how to create a new sub. Is there any advice on that?
That was rude of them. I usually recommend people start with lemmy.world, and then move to something else if they want to, once they get a feel for what they want.
Is there any advice on that?
I’ll see if I can find a guide, but it’s fairly simple. On desktop, you click on “Create Community” at the top. This will create a community (the equivalent of a subreddit) (for you it will be on lemmy.world). After that, you should pick a good name since you can’t change that (it’s the thing that goes in the url, like if you did cats: lemmy.ca/c/cats. Everything else you can change up later on. I found it easier to learn by doing.
If you want to make a community on a different instance, you will need to create an account on that instance, make the community the same way, and then add your original account as a moderator. This is more annoying, so I’d recommend just making communities on your home instance for now.
Sometimes (probably most times) people don’t have anything to add to a conversation. In these moments it’s better not to comment at all. Just look at how shitty reddit is with dozens of people making the same stupid joke in the comments on any popular post. Quality is better than quantity.
I think giving the benefit of doubt is extremely important. Being welcoming to newcomers, slowly integrating them into the different culture here, will help a lot (FTR I’m new myself, only been here a few months).
That’s not to say we should give every jackass a soapbox to stand on, but at least learn if they’re willing to converse in good faith before shouting them down.
kbin.life
Top