Chromium has always existed. Originally it was wrapping web kit and later they forked web kit into blink and diverged from Web kit. Chromium is a level above the engine.
WebKit is a rendering engine which is one of the major components of a web browser. Chrome/Chromium was released in 2008 using a modified version of WebKit as its rendering engine. Eventually in 2013 they created a fork of WebKit called Blink, which is the current rendering engine for Chrome/Chromium.
Pre-Chromium Edge wasn’t even that bad. Sure, the engine had its issues and there was probably a bit of Edge-specific JS on some websites, but I’m sure they would’ve eventually got there.
But seeing that even Microsoft abandoned making their own browser engine, it goes to show how complex it is to make one nowadays and with new web APIs/features coming out every few weeks it feels like, it’s almost impossible to keep up.
But seeing that even Microsoft abandoned making their own browser engine, it goes to show how complex it is to make one nowadays and with new web APIs/features coming out every few weeks it feels like, it’s almost impossible to keep up.
No, Microsoft is just historically bad at making browsers. It was not until Internet Explorer 7 that they finally implemented HTML 4 and CSS 2 without major glaring bugs.
Microsoft was never bad at making browsers, their issue is that they tied browser release to Windows release cycle. IE6 was the best and the most compatible browser on the market in its release date. But it didn’t get a single update during its long life. 5 years old Chrome is completely useless today even if it was a pinnacle back then.
Sure, but Windows Update was already part of the OS and web users were a customer segment that had an Internet connection. They could have pushed patches and bug fixes.
That’s not Microsoft philosophy. Microsoft has strong backwards compatibility. If they would change how border box is rendered on the screen, that would break a lot of apps which use IE engine as a web view. Thus they only push security updates, but ensure that rendering stays the same within one Windows version.
I’m not sure how long you’ve been able to change the user agent in config pages tbh, I just remember Opera had it as an option in the GUI settings and even the right click menu.
My retired parents live with me. I went ahead and put a PiHole on our home wifi. A day later my mother was literally complaining that she couldn’t click on ads on facebook. I told her those are ads and they track her and she says “well everyone likes to use the internet how they like to use it… can you put it back the old way? I want to look at these shoes”. Can’t fucking win.
My wife turns off the WiFi on her phone to avoid the pihole. She does this so she can watch the ads in her games to get an extra life or whatever. You’ll never win on that front and I won’t either.
I get so pissed off when I try to play sudoku on the bus and it forces me to watch 30 seconds of ads between each game. And then during the game I have to ignore the flashing banner ad at the bottom of the screen.
The thing is with a small app ads pay f all compared to the ongoing development costs. $100usd a year for Apple developer license, recent Mac and time spent developing it.
I also really don’t like ads, but I think what’s lately been bothering me more is every short form video that exists has subtitles added to the middle of the video. I can’t even look at the videos because I hate getting distracted by the unnecessary text in my face. Like just let me watch your video, I don’t need you to spoon feed me the words too.
but this means that she would see the ads but not being able to click? I don’t get it. They should had just disappeared, no? Or was she complaining that she wasn’t seeing the ads?
No. Google search results still show sponsored links. But if you then click on them it breaks. Same thing for FB. The links are served from Facebook.Com and so they are not flagged as ads.
So she is likely getting exactly what she searched for and then it breaks after clicking on it
The ads still appear in the facebook feed but clicking them results in a “this site could not be found” or similar error, is how I understood it to work. I know the PiHole basically makes it so the routes from “whateveradwebsite.com” end up not resolving to an IP address. I’m not sure how FB is serving them; so the text/image content might be coming from an FB server and the link is just an ad URL with a bunch of tracking info on it.
I know it’s rare, but there have been times I intentionally clicked on an ad - if it genuinely seemed like a unique or useful product I had some interest in.
I imagine the fake-social-post type of ads are worth blocking though since it’s based in dishonesty and deception.
Some shops I only used once still send me their written newsletters and I don’t mind checking them if they do them entertaining, or about some niche products, even if I don’t consider buying them at all. I miss well-designed full-page print ads in magazines, or just those with a catchy imagery\wording. Now these all feel like a vintage, premium product, akin to vinyl records, if compared to what garbage web serves today. Such a weird thing to be nostalgic about, but I hope oldschool advertisers\smm persons feel it on their end too.
The ads on Facebook (and many other sites) are served from the same site as the actual content. So if you try to block ads with pihole it will stop the website from loading any posts.
Spot on. I was incredulous when they told me they each sent their cheek swabs in to the “free to be me”, the population tracking group 🌊 👁️a. Now I understand that that same company’s entire database is on the dark 🕸️.
I do when it is advertising something I hate. Publishers get dollars for clicks, pennies for impressions. That way I force someone I dislike to give money to someone I like.
I use adnauseum on my computer so it blocks the ads, but also sends a request simulating a click to the ad network. Based on average CPM, I’ve cost advertisers like $300 so far.
That’s because it’s built on top of uBlock. If you click on the extension it even has the uBlock logo. It’s literally just uBlock except it clicks on ads in the background. It even tells you how much projected money you cost them for clicking their shitty ads. And the websites gets paid. Only the advertisers get shafted.
Interesting. But wouldn’t that still decrease my privacy? Advertisers still won’t know which ads I’m interested in, but they will know what sites I visit and can still build a profile from that data.
Some people care more about fucking advertisers than privacy, as long as they don’t have to suffer through the ads themselves. But yeah, blocking is more private than fake clicking.
I got a lot of complaints from family, too. Especially because I block Meta. I just let them bitch and I tell them things like “those ads are broken because of malware” which isn’t entirely untrue.
Yeah for sure. I’m no expert by any means, but I can talk through what I did.
I used the instructions directly from their code repository: github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole/#one-step-automated-in… (I used option 1, the automated install). I did this on an old RPi2B that I had laying around.
After I set up the pi, I got its MAC address. I used this to set a static IP address in my router settings. This is important to make sure the pi keeps the same IP at all times. Then, also in my router settings, I set the DNS server to be the pi’s static IP address.
After all that was done, I just plugged the pi into a dedicated power supply and rebooted the router.
“I’ll try to fix it. Now that I put it in taking it down brings the Internet down. Sorry, let me think how to fix this”
And literally put up excuses until they get used to it. I’m sorry but they made you do stuff you didn’t enjoy for your own good while telling white lies, it’s time for payback.
Yes, by either raising your own farm animals, buying dairy and meat products from known and truly eco producers or going vegan. The last option, though, might get you into another category of chemicals and/or GMOs if you don’t carefully select the products and categories based on labeling and nutritional values and knowledge
I came to say this. I have also noticed a strong trend amongst people from each generation for health.
Teflon was introduced in 1938, when my grandfather was 11. In the 1955, when my father was born, is the last time that we have Teflon untainted blood from. At some point between 1955 and 1985 when I was born, Teflon proliferated to the point that it was being found in every blood sample around the world.
So my grandfather lived ~40-50 years without being massively contaminated with Teflon, my father probably got to adulthood, and I have never been without it. Now an anecdotal sample that follows a larger trend. My grandfather is in his 90’s with pretty good health and is still going pretty strong. My father and both of his siblings are in their 60’s-70’s and all have failing health, and I know so few people in my own age range that are actually healthy without autoimmune disease or other systemic issue that I couldn’t fill a high school auditorium with them.
I have seen the exact opposite as, aside from obesity problems, each generation I’ve seen has had significantly higher life expectancy than the last.
I know multiple people now who have outlived the short life expectancy their health complications in the 80s supposedly gave them. I know a few families who have people living longer than anyone else in their blood line ever has. The heart and lung problems that killed off my grandparents have been dealt with now and my parents and my generation are already outliving them and far healthier at our ages.
This is all thanks to great medical advancement, of course, but the point is this isn’t some dire threat that warrants doom and gloom, but another medical hurdle for us to be aware of and work out like we have all the others.
Scientists are still learning about the effects of PFAS on humans, but studies show these chemicals can harm different systems in the body.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry says exposure to PFAS may lead to higher risk for kidney or testicular cancer, increased cholesterol levels, and damage to the liver and immune system.
My hospital sent an email out that for unknown reasons liver disease is on the rise for non drinkers and people without diabetes.
Well it also looks like PFAS is a big group of chemicals, and brand name Teflon now uses a specific version called PTFE which they (can you trust them?) claim is not as bad as PFAS.
But even if that’s true, the production of it still produces tons of known toxic waste.
Ya know… I think my original notion I got from Johnny Harris…. Whom I’ve actually grown a bit skeptical of lately.
I switched over to ceramic pans, specifically the Ayesha Curry ones, but who knows if that will be bad in the future. I tried the Caphalon ceramic and those were horrible. The nonstick pans are bad for you over a certain temperature where it breaks down. There’s an excellent movie called Dark Waters about the original lawsuit and that man is a hero.
The problem is that it’s so inert, it becomes impossible to remove from a contaminated environment or particularly a person’s blood stream.
The amount that inevitably gets caught in your blood will just stay in your body forever, settling down in a critical organ like your brain or kidneys and giving you cancer or some other horrible problem.
We’re running on theory alone here, but if thats true, then its too inert to be reabsorbed by your kidneys and therefore would pass into your urine and leave your body that way.
We are definitely NOT in theory territory here, there have been studies and reports of people directly suffering from the effects of PFAS, what we are not clear on is how it’s interacting with our bodies.
What is it with these commie types that they believe communism will leave everyone to become hippies who can do whatever they want and all required resources just magically arrive when they need.
It really is watching children believe in Santa Claus
I mean, if they want to, sure. Point is society wouldn’t be reliant on that since everything necessary for society to function would be taken care of during the said 20 hour workweek. I don’t care if somebody wants to set up a tomato farm or a donkey ranch or whatever on the side, as long as they don’t exploit or mistreat anyone.
Logistics would be the job dedicated to moving goods and services around to the place they need to be in. It’s not something that would appeal to most but it is a critical job in any modern society.
Until you spend thirty five minutes explaining to the receptionist for the intermittent carrier why rerouting through Chicago makes no sense when carrying freight from NYC to Hoboken NJ.
You act like there wouldn’t be multiple plans submitted with obsessive communities arguing about best practices and min/maxing efficiencies before accepting routes.
I see you have never dealt with trucking companies before. I had a truck puck up in St Louis in June one year and break down in FL for three weeks delaying the arrival in NY for several months. There’s no need for the truck to be in FL because that’s not a direct route and we had filled the truck but that’s how dispatch directed it.
That’s mostly because the people running them are interested in making money and maybe aren’t doing it with the same passion. Besides, I’d say logistics, being something that critical to modern society, would be one of the things included in that 20 hour workweek I mentioned. People would still have jobs, but they’d be left with so much more free time than they do now, time that wouldn’t need to be spent on side hustles and the likes because society would be geared towards covering needs, not making money.
Why would you need to hire someone? If it’s a farm meant to provide food for people then it’s commonly owned and the people who work there are state employees, the purpose of the farm being to make food, not profits.
If it’s something you do because you want to and out of passion, then why would you hire anyone? Sure, you might want some help, but then you just get people who are passionate about it as well, and you share the produce. Like a community garden.
Are you dense? I said everyone would have a regular job like they do now for 20 hours a week, except with more control over the workplace. The farm mentioned is something you would do in your free time because you want to.
So a farmer just stops working on their farm after 20 hours and then goes home (to their farm, because they live in a farmhouse) and just ignores their starving animals because he has a different hobby and can’t work more than 20 hours a week? Or does he have to hire people to work the rest of the week, which goes against your views (capitalism)? Or does he work for free outside of those 20 hours to not spoil his harvest and kill his animals? Or does he somehow split the work from the 20 hours off and sell those to the government and then sell the rest to another market (which is again capitalism)? Or are you just a dumbass that doesn’t understand anything about how the world works?
What you describe is controlled capitalism. People can decide themselves what they want to do and try to get things done in the most efficient way directly without government interference.
The problem current capitalism faces is that there is too little control, too much allowance for monopolies, that sort of shit. Tax the crap out of the rich, limit what you can do “if you create polluting materials, you have to recycle them yourself”, “you cant corner more than 10% of a market”, etc, but allow people to freely do what they want to do. That would be capitalism, actually.
everything necessary for society to function would be taken care of during the said 20 hour workweek
Yeah that is not how society works, that is not how anything works at all. You don’t work 40 hours a week just to make somebody rich even richer. If they could pay you only for 20 hours, they would. You work 40 hours because you CAN have a job which is because they need somebody to do that work. If they don’t need you, they won’t pay you for nothing dummie. If you work on something not required, congrats, you have a dumb boss that wastes resources and you lucked out. Most people just have normal jobs that NEED to be done. Just saying “lets do communism and we only work 20 hours a week” is beyond naive. Reality is “Lets do communism and half of us will starve to death!”
I would suggest you look into socialism more because it seems to me you are mistaken in some aspects.
Capitalism is the economic system in which individuals can own the means of production themselves, so basically an entrepreneur owns a company and everyone working there are employees with no or very little ownership over the business.
Socialism is the economic system where the workers themselves own those same means of production. What you think of as socialism is most likely the Marxist-Leninist version implemented in the USSR.
Their thought process went like this: the people all own every business, but if everyone was the boss, nothing would get done. So they considered that since people, at least on paper, vote for their leader and the state supposedly represents the people, then if the state owned all businesses it would basically be the same as if everyone owned those businesses. The issue here is that the politicians and bureaucrats who make decisions regarding those businesses, being human themselves, will tend to skew them towards their own interests. Personally, I still think it is better this way than having billionaire leeches that drain the wealth from multiple countries, but that’s besides the point.
This isn’t the only socialist system imaginable, though. It could be as simple as the workers that are employed somewhere get a share of the company for as long as they work there instead of wages. That way, you get paid a portion of the profit, and as a shareholder, can vote on decisions about the business. It’s important though that only people who work there get those shares, no outside investors or sketchy things like that to take away the power from the people. There’s no business owner in this since everyone basically owns their workplace and bosses are democratically elected. This is market socialism, you’d still have market forces and all that entails, and I think it would be the easiest change to make if we wanted to give up on capitalism.
Then there’s syndicalism, in which unions and syndicates own their sector or industry and manage them themselves. Every worker joins the union when they get hired, and they vote for stuff like leadership, rule changes, charters and the like. These syndicates then coordinate with eachother to ensure everything is working as intended and produced at the rates they are needed at.
As for the 20 hour workweek… it’s very reasonable if you look into it. Each one of us not only has to work hard enough to earn for ourselves, we also have to earn for those who are unfortunate and cannot work through taxes, which is a good thing, but we also have to work hard enough to earn for the leeches doing nothing, like the billionaires on top. Every employee has to get paid less than ehat they’re worth, since if the employer would give them every bit of money they produce, they wouldn’t be profitable. And that’s not even getting into people working jobs that don’t help society at all, such as landlords, insurance agents, marketing people, etc. If everyone worked in fields necessary for society to function, we would all work 20 hours a week.
Capitalism for when there is scarcity (building hi-tech for example) state controlled “socialism” for things needed by everyone (schools, hospitals, roads, internet) seems like a smart start.
Food could go under capitalism if heavy regulated, govt can sponsor art etc. Vote for what suits you.
Yeah and no more lobbying or mega rich(like 10M€ max until at least everyone can eat, read and go to the hospital for free).
Historically socialists have been better at utilizing scarce resources. Look at the 50 percent economic growth per decade achieved by soviet centralized economic planning before calculators and machine learning were a thing.
IDK but I feel like the winners of WW2 didn’t really need to put a strain on anything to go forward extremely easily compared to before.
I don’t think you can judge how the superpowers advanced in the 1950-60-70 having the control over about everything versus how it is today. Also personally I’d like everyone to be included, not just the west + this or that but Africa, south America, etc. etc.
Pretty sure I got it from growth crystal, a very dry economics book. I dont remember by which metric but you could probably find it within the first few chapters.
I think you need to look in his ass, where he pulled that number from. These communist types really believe all this nonsense and just handwave all the famines, civil terrors, or just the fact that no communist system ever became a success. its all just for the common good, right?
I’ll partially repaste a reply I posted to another post for you. Communism SUCKS at resource management because one centralized corrupt system doesn’t know shit about what its doing whereas capitalist systems allow individual people to get the most efficient solutions possible. IT. WORKS. Yes, there are problems, fix those problems. Read the following. don’t TL;DR; because if you do then you just don’t care about reality, you just want to should slogans
why are so many people starving?
There are loads of reasons for people starving, but in democratic capitalist countries, people typically don’t starve. Don’t agree? Name one. There is poverty in the US for sure and capitalism in the US is an absolute shitshow, nobody would deny that. But people in the US rarely starve to death.
Wanna talk starvation? Lets talk starvation! Warning: All following links are wikipedia but have stomach churning content. Here be dragons, but please do read because you need to learn. Also note: All the following is from within the last century.
Quote from that page: The famine resulted from the combined effects of economic disturbance from the Russian Revolution, the Russian Civil War, and the government policy of war communism (especially prodrazvyorstka). It was exacerbated by rail systems that could not distribute food efficiently.
Fun quote: canibalism
Communism is awesome!
2: North Korean famine: estimated between 600,000 and 1 million deaths
Quote: Economic mismanagement and the loss of Soviet support caused food production and imports to decline rapidly. A series of floods and droughts exacerbated the crisis. The North Korean government and its centrally planned system proved too inflexible to effectively curtail the disaster.
Fun quote: uses of words such as ‘famine’ and ‘hunger’ were banned because they implied government failure
Quote: The major contributing factors in the famine were the policies of the Great Leap Forward (1958 to 1962) and people’s communes, launched by Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party Mao Zedong, such as inefficient distribution of food within the nation’s planned economy; requiring the use of poor agricultural techniques; the Four Pests campaign that reduced sparrow populations (which disrupted the ecosystem); over-reporting of grain production; and ordering millions of farmers to switch to iron and steel production.
Fun quote: Cannibalism, AGAIN
Communism is awesome!
Want to know more?
Communism wouldn’t have an upper class of “bosses”.
… I don’t even know where to begin with this one. What are you? 5?
Communism sucks and causes nothing but suffering. There is not even a fucking silver lining about it and people need to stop hippy-dippying communism. Its fucking evil.
Yes, capitalism as it currently runs is fucked up with problems. But at its core its the driver of success that got you your mobile phone in your hands. Use that mobile phone to fix those problems instead of dreaming of perfect mass murdering societies.
You’re literally blaming all these societies for famines where intense external causes are cited. And capitalism kills 20 million people a year, currently. Also, read Victorian holocausts
Yes, capitalism as it currently runs is fucked up with problems. But at its core its the driver of success that got you your mobile phone in your hands.
20 million deaths a year.
You know the Soviets came up with a lot of the tech that led to smartphones, with the rest of it coming from publicly funded research?
Use that mobile phone to fix those problems instead of dreaming of perfect mass murdering societies.
Isn’t trying to reform capitalism dreaming of perfect mass murdering societies?
The thing is, when someone starts getting very wealthy, they inevitably errode the checks and balances put in place to curtail their power and to protect the poor. For example, electricity used to be nationalised in my country until a few years ago. The state company in charge of it would seek to stay near the floating line, not to make profits, and power was very affordable. Before the pandemic, it got privatised and prices went through the roof, we’re talking 1000% increases in some cases, because now they had to make money for the shareholders.
This could only work if the people were very conscious and politically educated, so that they could prevent these things from happening. But just one bad generation can see those hard earned protections and rights erroded.
Exactly. That’s why simply regulating capitalism won’t work. It has been regulated before, and eventually, little by little, greed wins out, politicians take bribes to lower regulations, and this tension raises again until we earn back what we lost. Rinse and repeat. It’s not sustainable.
when someone starts getting very wealthy, they inevitably errode the checks and balances put in place The solution there is to not let ANYBODY get that wealthy. Tax the shit out of the rich until their net worth is in an acceptable range. Let’s say that we set a minimum level. If you don’t meet that level, government helps you. Helps you with a house, food income, etc. Then allow the richest person to be worth 10x that of the poorest. If your worth goes over that, taxes will rise to 100%. You simply don’t earn anything more until your worth lowers.
Its a very rough idea, but its just to, well, get the idea. Communism does NOT work, never has, never will. It requires stripping all freedoms, loads of coercion, lots of horror and terrorizing of the population to make it work. Too many people always dream of working in a vegetable garden under communism. Are they really THAT naive? Are they 5? Dear god, read some history.
I fully agree with you that capitalism, as its currently running unhindered, is a BAD thing. It needs to be limited, curtailed BY A LOT. But in its core its not bad. It gives people the freedom to trade directly, unhindered by government to get things done in the most efficient way. And like it or not, its a success story. Its why the west became as dominant as it is. Leaving people free to do things the way they want to do it is nice AND efficient. Problem is that you need to put limits, like “Don’t dump industrial waste, you make it, you recycle it” which now we don’t. THAT is the problem
Capitalism didn’t get the west wealthy. That was all the colonialism and imperialism taking wealth away from other places through slavery and exploitation. Capitalism just profited off of the fact Europe was already rich and powerful to further that divide.
You mean its impossible to tax people? Because it is. You just need better politicians. “There is no middle ground” is no argument, because there is. You just have your fingers in your ears shouting “LALALALALAA I CANNOT HEAR YOU”.
Communism is a laughingly naive argument. There are no communist success stories. There are loads of torture horror porn stories though, if you’re willing to read history. Maybe watch a good movie! Get “The chekist (1992)” somewhere. Then sit in a closet in fetal position for about a week or two (I never managed to finish it, its horrible, but a great movie nontheless) and when you come out maybe, just maybe you can understand a little bit about what communism really entails
We’re a dying species on a planet that will heat up until we’re all gone, do I really need another horror story ?
You mentioning the chekist is just the old and tired whataboutism where you point out horrors committed by the Soviets to justify your point of view. I could give you horrific stories where people were tortured and/or killed because of corporate greed and/or imperialism. What good will that accomplish?
Will hearing that people were locked inside a sweatshop while it caught on fire change anything about your view of capitalism ?
People falling in poverty because they can’t pay medical bills, killing themselves because of their job, getting tortured for information they don’t have, seeing their leaders get overthrown and living in a military state because of that.
Are you capable of seeing the horrors wrought by capitalism, not just those in the past but also those we see every day, and answer the question “Would that have happened if the redistribution of resources was fair ?”
If you want a movie recommendation “Sugarland” (2014), it’s just a fun movie about sugar, showing how insidious and pervasive capitalists can be, don’t worry no torture porn here but you’ll still feel like shit at the end.
They I have good or bad news for you, depending on your stance. We don’t. You may, depending on the company which you work for, but generally speaking most people don’t.
Yes, yes, YES. Capitalism is evil, pitchfork and torches! Reality check: Capitalism is also the very big reason why you have a computer on your desk or in your hands in the shape of a phone to write about the evils of capitalism. Capitalism is at its core about the freedoms to share and acquire resources in the most efficient way possible. Does it have big BIG problems with runaway effects where a single person can suddenly pheewwww shoot into the sky and start resource hogging? Absolutely. Should that be legally limited and curbed? Absolutely! Is that currently done well? Absofuckinglutely not!
But none of that means that “communism will save us”. Dear god, please please don’t be THAT naive, don’t believe in santa claus.
If you want to spend your free time in a commune to help hippies or whatever it is that you want to do, I applaud you. Seriously, well done. But you WILL have to work for a home. You WILL have to work for food, and that computer you have in your hand to curse the evils of capitalism. And you have to work so that when we all do that, that resources get moved over the world so that the farmer gets his equipment that he needs to farm the grains that he sends to a supermarket that gets bought by a baker which you then buy in the shape of a bread loaf… We all work together.
Again, is there a shit tonne of abuse going on? Of course. Nobody denies that. Is that abuse being curbed? Nope. Should we hang the ultra rich that have been abusing this system? Nah, lets not hang people. I’m not for violence. But should we tax them 100% of their income until their posessions are within a reasonable range? Absolutely.
But communism is not the answer, please learn some history about the “successes” (meaning ALL failures, no exceptions) of comnunism. Read about the famines, the suppression, the torture, the corruption and the crap that comes with that to make it work. I like my freedom. I don’t need piles of cash and people generally should not be allowed to have piles. You do that with laws and taxing and enforcing. Lets focus on that instead.
Look, capitalism clearly does not work. Everything Marx and Lenin ever wrote about capitalism has come true. It is destroying our world more and more every day. Whatever you might say about communism, we do not know for a fact that it will ruin the lives of everybody, involved or not. No matter how bad you might claim communism is, it isn’t the thing that’s currently destroying our societies. So it is by definition better than capitalism.
Ah yes, because everything you do is to meet societal needs and not to make more money for the 1%. That’s why 34% of wealth in Canada goes to the top 1%.
Then tax the crap out of them. Communism is NOT the answer, its the cause for an order of magnitude more suffering than capitalism will ever be able to cause. These sesame street types that really believe that communism will give them a vegetable garden to work in just should stop using the internet. You are using a frikkin mobile phone, a device that is the frikking epitome of capitalism and science to bitch about the evils of capitalism (and loads of people do the same with science too).
Turn in your mobile phone and go live on a hippie farm (or in a cave) and die of horrible preventable diseases, if that is what you wish, but you don’t get to have it both ways.
Yes, capitalism has a shit tonne of problems that MUST be solved, totally agree. The wealthy should be taxed up to a 100% of income once their income and net worth surpasses a certain level. Just cap it. We should have free education, free healthcare, basic rights on homes and food… A socialist system BUILT ON A CAPITALIST SYSTEM. That is because capitalism, at its core, is allowing people the freedom to trade in the most efficient way possible by themselves. THAT IS STRENGTH and that is the very reason why the west currently rules just about everything. Yes, having it run loose with no restrictions (as we currently try to do for some fucked up reason) is bad, VERY bad. Still not communism bad, though. I 100x rather have our current fucked up capitalist system over living in the fun communistic countries of the USSR (hello famines!), China (heeelllooooo famines with millions of victims!) or Korea (helloo!!!) or… Well, you get the gist. I’m not even talking about the government policing that comes with it.
Captialism has problems, absolute. FIX THEM. Don’t go jackoff over systems that are known for misery, famines, death camps, and just general failure.
How many famines do you think occured in China and Russia prior to communism? How many people do you think died because of famines in the decades prior to communism?
Famine in late 19th century/early 20th century China and Russia were a fact of life. They’d come ever few years, kill a few million, and then leave. That had been the case throughout history because subsistence farming isn’t exactly a very robust system. How many famines do you think occured in the decades before the communist party took power?
How many famines would you guess occured in the decades after the communist party took power in Russia or China? What do you think the odds were that those famines would have occured with or without communist party intervention?
If production stays low, we WILL be forced to lower the age of workers from 9 years to 7 years. Work harder, your kids lives depend on it (if you’ve been given a permit to have kids, of course!)
What is it with people over on lemmy.ca with the most dense, thoughtless takes on everything? I swear I’ve never seen a comment from someone who’s on lemmy.ca that made me think, “this person’s head is screwed on properly.”
Meaning? You think that the world should be communist and then we’d all be happy working in our vegetable garden? I’m responding like that because I get so many facepalmingly stupid responses from people who actually really believe that with communism they would get freedom. I don’t even know how to respond to that, because its so mind bendingly stupid. They complain about all the starvations in capitalist countries.
WHERE!?
I can point to countless famines in communist countries with millions upon millions of deaths. But capitalism? Its currently riddled with problems, yes, we need to do better, tax the shit out of the rich until they are at normal levels… But famines? In a democratic capitalist country? Where?
Its just mind blowing that people can be THIS dumb. Read some frigging history for your own sake.
In all likelihood they would be neither. With modern technology, we don’t need a large percent of the population farming. I realize communists typically eliminate the intellectuals and kulaks—those who would actually have useful knowledge—first, but the smart things would be to have the current farmers keep farming. You’d likely be assigned to a factory to manufacture widgets for the rest of your days.
The system encourages those people to engage in the arms race for the next killer app to earn boatloads of money and win the game of capitalism. Finding people who are genuinely interested in maintaining the infrastructure that makes any of that possible is the problem.
Do they eliminate intellectuals? The USSR and China seem to have avoided this. I don’t believe most nations did this other than Cambodia and I will never see that shitshow as socialist.
In the USSR it was kind of mixed. If you were at all associated with the old regime you were fucked but tbh a lot of them weren’t super sympathetic anyway.
In China, lol. They fucking murdered everyone who knew anything and then suffered horribly for it. Of course, even then they might have been somewhat okay except Mao thought he knew better so they got the Great Leap Forward and stuff like the Four Pests campaign.
No it’s a “theory” that has not been demonstrated to hold up and isn’t granted a lot of respect in political science circles.
While certain aspects can be shared, such as a greater appreciation for authoritarianism, the actual beliefs are so incredibly different and the people drawn to them are so different that the “theory” doesn’t work.
At what point does it discuss horseshoe theory? They seem to talk about the holocaust vs the soviets which isn’t really what horsehoe theory purports to be about (and again the horseshoe theory is complete bullshit)
That’s not what the Horseshoe theory proposes. It suggests that the tactics used by both sides are similar, which is often true, and that either ideology could appeal to the people that get involved with far right and far left groups which is the part that is completely unproven and is absolute bullshit.
The guy who joins ISIS because of how their views of Islam are not honored who thinks the degeneration of society is due to the movement away from Allah is not going to become a communist under different circumstances much like a Marxist is unlikely to adopt a pro-monarchist POV.
Again Horseshoe theory is bullshit but your source says nothing at all about it.
Dont think so, as one is offensively violent and authoritarian out of fancy while the other is defensively violent and authoritarian out of self-preservation
Wouldn’t owning cows as an individual be a form of theft in the USSR of the 1920s? Wouldn’t they be the collective’s cows and if you made them “yours” you were stealing?
You are unfamiliar with the altright if you think hexbear is at all right. They are leftists and many are revolutionary leftists but no one there for long is altright.
For fucks sake this al, comes about from the ChapoTrapHouse subreddit getting banned.
I see the world in a two dimensional way where people are placed into one of two camps based on a single characteristic;
Have they called for my death.
So I don’t give a shit what they (or anyone else) has to say about their political leanings. It’s all the same trash, and I lack the respect necessary to differentiate them.
So yea I say they’re alt right. If that upsets you, too bad.
It just means you don’t know what the right is and are proud about that fact. It doesn’t upset anyone but why make obviously uninformed claims like that?
If you really think I don’t know the difference between left and right political camps instead of using the wrong terminology as a sign of disrespect you may want to try seeing this conversation less literally.
To be clear, you not recognizing my style of trolling isn’t me getting “dunked on”.
If I kill its because I’m defending myself, if you kill its because you are violent!
Say both sides…
Are you seriously trying to say that communist governments haven’t committed mass murder on an industrial scale just to fortify their power structures?
If you use one “communist” government to slander all of them then we can reasonably say that England is proof that capitalism is violently evil and invasive and Spain is proof that christianity is a violent and murderous ideology that should never be allowed on the face of the earth.
This sounds like some bullshit said by people who cant understand the basic difference between right and wrong. Or by a fascist. Whichever.
There IS A DIFFERENCE between offensive and defensive violence. The only ones who say otherwise are the offensively violent ones…who also lie about their violence.
Both can be offensively violent but the types of people drawn to either vary widely. For example I cannot say I know any socialists who were individually racist (as opposed to racist by virtue of being American as structural racism runs deep).
And the part where they believe to have any freedoms whatsoever IS realistic? Or the part where they believe to actually be alive and not die in the next famine is realistic?
Animal farm wasn’t specifically about communism, though. The lesson was that any well meaning revolution/societal restructuring will inevitably get hijacked by a smaller group that wants to use it as an opportunity to grab power and seize control. No matter what said group calls themselves, they’re most likely going to end up as the same aristocracy/oligarchy that the revolution fought against.
It’s exactly what happened in the Soviet Union but it’s also potentially what could happen in any other revolution.
Exactly. It’s not an anti-communist book. It was written by a left-libertatian/anarchist, Orwell, who though alongside anarchists and communists in Spain.
Dude literally took up arms for socialism. Reactionaries have no critical thinking and historical analysis skills.
We had a middle ground but it was voted away by a bunch of shitheads screaming “socialism doesnt work!!”… And who never read any scifi futurist content whatsoever
The Christ was a literal bearded, sandle wearing, hippie that told y’all to go live in communes and protect each other and The Earth, but I guess your omnipotent, omniscient God doesn’t know what he’s taking about.
I love how you just assume that capitalists/socialists are all Christians lol
The fuck do I care what a 2000 year old prophet claimed about an even older warrior god from the middle east?
Im sure that 6000 year old ancient Jewish patriarchs definitely knew the god of the entire universe and it just happened to be the god they selected from their pantheon to be the best god. It’s almost like everyone thinks their god is the biggest god, and none of them have ever proven to exist.
The Christ also is fictional, as is whatever god you’re talking about Were you talking about Apollo, perhaps? Mars? Shiva? Khaless?
In any case, you’re talking about people living in the stone age, dying every day of horrible preventable diseases. Things that were resolved mainly through capitalism, but I guess nobody likes to think about that, can’t admit that “bad thing” can do something positive too, now can we?
Yeah, and distributing resources efficiently is one of the core strengths of capitalism, its the reason why capitalism is so successful.
No, I’m not saying capitalism is perfect nor that it doesn’t cause suffering, nor that it does not need a shitload more limits than it has right now, but communism is NOT known for its efficiency, nor for letting people just do whatever the hell they want to do. Communism forces people to do what the boss says, if you don’t like it you can go to a gulag. If you’re talking about “Communism gives people the freedom to find the most efficient ways of distributing resources” then you’re kind of confusing that with Capitalism.
There are loads of reasons for people starving, but in democratic capitalist countries, people typically don’t starve. Don’t agree? Name one. There is poverty in the US for sure and capitalism in the US is an absolute shitshow, nobody would deny that. But people in the US rarely starve to death.
Wanna talk starvation? Lets talk starvation! Warning: All following links are wikipedia but have stomach churning content. Here be dragons, but please do read because you need to learn. Also note: All the following is from within the last century.
Quote from that page: The famine resulted from the combined effects of economic disturbance from the Russian Revolution, the Russian Civil War, and the government policy of war communism (especially prodrazvyorstka). It was exacerbated by rail systems that could not distribute food efficiently.
Fun quote: canibalism
Communism is awesome!
2: North Korean famine: estimated between 600,000 and 1 million deaths
Quote: Economic mismanagement and the loss of Soviet support caused food production and imports to decline rapidly. A series of floods and droughts exacerbated the crisis. The North Korean government and its centrally planned system proved too inflexible to effectively curtail the disaster.
Fun quote: uses of words such as ‘famine’ and ‘hunger’ were banned because they implied government failure
Quote: The major contributing factors in the famine were the policies of the Great Leap Forward (1958 to 1962) and people’s communes, launched by Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party Mao Zedong, such as inefficient distribution of food within the nation’s planned economy; requiring the use of poor agricultural techniques; the Four Pests campaign that reduced sparrow populations (which disrupted the ecosystem); over-reporting of grain production; and ordering millions of farmers to switch to iron and steel production.
Fun quote: Cannibalism, AGAIN
Communism is awesome!
Want to know more?
Communism wouldn’t have an upper class of “bosses”.
… I don’t even know where to begin with this one. What are you? 5?
Communism sucks and causes nothing but suffering. There is not even a fucking silver lining about it and people need to stop hippy-dippying communism. Its fucking evil.
Yes, capitalism as it currently runs is fucked up with problems. But at its core its the driver of success that got you your mobile phone in your hands. Use that mobile phone to fix those problems instead of dreaming of perfect mass murdering societies.
We just removed the child tax credit which made child poverty soar. The most “pro-union” president forced railroad workers to take a shit contract in December instead of allowing them to strike.
I have already addressed the Soviet famine. The root cause was a crop blight and Stalin’s lax response ultimately worsened it.
As for china and north korea - any reason to believe the communism they don’t live in is the cause of that? Your own quote claims north korea mainly suffered because the USSR failed to supoort them.
Efficiency in economics has a particular technical definition.
Pareto efficiency or Pareto optimality is a situation where no action or allocation is available that makes one individual better off without making another worse off
Free markets are great at producing outcomes that are efficient in a particular technical sense, but not especially equitable.
Capitalism is good at raising production, generating lots of products very quickly and efficiently. But it’s notoriously terrible at actually distributing resources in a fair way. Like, that’s it’s biggest weakness and the things it’s worst at.
Communism has the opposite issue of not usually being able to make enough things in the beginning, which is why Marx thought it would happen in already industrialized nations, not poor peasant states like Russia or China.
Wasn‘t Marx idea that communism can only exist once industry has been automated to such a degree that an individuals contribution is not mandatory anymore?
We might reach that point of technological advancement. within the next 50 years with the raise of AI. What we make of it is a completely different matter…
Comrade, we all know lead poisoning and the need for safety gear are capitalist propaganda! Now, get back in the mines! Production must increase 50% this year, and your state-appointed union representative says it can!
Capital successfully fought to put lead into American’s blood and lungs for a century after it was known to be poison. To this day they’re still fighting to keep it there.
And this isn’t whataboutism (not that it matters). The first commenter ridiculed socialism by using a hypothetical scenario. The second commenter showed with evidence this hypothetical scenario is actually real under capitalism.
I have formulated this little definition for a couple years now.
Whataboutism claims are a good sign of pseudo intellectuals dog whistling to attract mob attention, usually a last resort card played by people when they never have good discussion or argument skills.
Marxism is so easy to destroy, but the reality is that modern day Marxism literally cannot exist without fallacies and propaganda. The ideology is so shallow that it can’t stand on its own merits.
Lol Marxists calling anybody an idiot is peak irony. You’re subhuman trash. You’re just as bad, if not worse than nazis. You’re just as hateful, violent, ignorant, extreme, and irrational as nazis. You’re ideology is just as failed, just as murderous, and just as delusional. The scum of the Earth trying claim moral superiority is comical.
You definitely sound like a sane individual. I didn't even propose anything lol. How is it wrong to think greedy people should be kept down for the benefit of society?
EDIT: based on another commenter, OP’s claim isn’t even factual.
And it took the US until 1996 (after fall of USSR)? Not to mention that it was capitalism (General Motors) that spread the hoax about leaded gasoline being safe, under the guise of scientific research in 1921.
Okay? And? The USSR was the center of a massive empire and exploited the hell out of that empire. They definitely had the resources to be the world’s scientific runner up.
Nevertheless, the Soviet Union took effective action to protect the population from lead exposure; it banned lead-based (white lead) paint and it banned the sale of leaded gasoline in some cities and regions. While leaded gasoline was introduced in the 1920s in the United States, it was not until the 1940s that leaded gasoline was introduced in the Soviet Union (5). In the 1950s, the Soviet Un- ion became the first country to restrict the sale of leaded gaso- line; in 1956, its sale was banned in Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Baku, Odessa, and tourist areas in the Caucasus and Crimea, as well as in at least one of the “closed cities” of the nuclear weap- ons complex (6, 7). The motivation for the bans on leaded gaso- line is not entirely clear, but factors may have included Soviet research on the effects of low-level lead exposure (8), or sup- port from Stalin himself (5). In any event, the bans on leaded gasoline in some areas prevented what could have been signifi- cant population lead exposure. In the United States and other OECD countries, leaded gasoline has been identified as one of the largest sources of lead exposure (9, 10). Lead-based paint is another potentially significant source of population lead exposure.
Bonus: a great example of capital at work,
Along with a number of other coun- tries, in the 1920s the Soviet Union adopted the White Lead Convention, banning the manufacture and sale of lead-based (white lead) paint (11). In the United States, however, the National Paint, Oil and Varnish Association successfully opposed the ban, and lead-based paint was not banned in the United States until 1971 (12).
Two generations. I encourage everyone reading this to look up the effects of lead poisoning.
The first commenter is talking a hypothetical scenario of socialism being bad, so the second commenter (the one you responded to) responded with actual example of that same hypothetical scenario happening, but except by a capitalist power (the US). I don’t think your response makes sense at all here.
No, his response is calling out the whataboutism fallacy. The US doing something bad does not in any way, shape, or form make socialism any less shitty. It’s poking fun at the delusional people who still think it’s a good ideology despite the overwhelming evidence.
No, you’re just an idiot. Whataboutism is simply a fallacy. It doesn’t infer anything outside of inconsistent logic. If you feel threatened by it then it just shows that you’re disingenuous.
You clearly don’t understand what the fallacy is if you’re actually dumb enough to post an article to try and justify it. Here’s a quick run down for your own benefit. Whataboutism is the act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse (This is the Merriam Webster definition). There are three reasons why this is fallacious:
The “what about” part is irrelevant to the original statement or argument. By dismissing the original point and entirely focusing entirely on the “what about” part, the person gets to use the “what about” as misdirection to avoid directly addressing what was already said. If you know your fallacies well, you would know that this sounds eerily familiar to the red herring fallacy. Not exactly the same, but very close.
It implies that because entity B did something just as bad or worse, that justifies entity A doing the same thing… when that’s not the case. If I stole a bike three years 3 years ago, that doesn’t justify you stealing a bike now. You criticizing me for stealing the bike 3 years ago doesn’t make your criticism wrong even if you stole a bike this morning, but it also doesn’t justify you stealing the bike. The point is that both actions are wrong, each entity is responisble for it’s own actions. One doesn’t justify, excuse, or negate the other.
The whataboutism fallacy is a variant of the Tu Quouque fallacy (that’s not a bonus, that’s literally what it is) which is a subsection of the ad hominem argument. An ad hom becomes fallacious when an a character attack is used in place of an actual argument. Which is what happens with whataboutism. The person using it is replacing an actual argument with a charged accusation of hypocrisy and nothing more, which is basically just a character attack.
In this case, the OP of this comment thread made a hypothetical scenario poking fun at the authoritarianism, poor working conditions, and the corruption that is so often found in socialist states. You can agree or disagree with that statement, but if you want to make rebuttal against it, you have to actually address it. The second commenter in this thread did not address it. Instead he brought up a random point about American companies promoting lead. Not only is his comment an irrelevant non-sequitur, but it doesn’t disprove the point that OP was trying to make. That second commenter is clearly a Marxist who got offended by the point that the OP made, and so he quickly resorted to the “what about the US” fallback tactic to both avoid addressing the point that was actually made and to pull a weak “gotcha”. It’s the ol’ classic “oh yeah? but look at the US is bad therefore Marxism is good/not as bad/excused/justified in doing shitty thing”. It’s inconsistent logic.
Then again, Marxism is truly a brain dead ideology. Without propaganda about the US, the entire school of thought would collapse. What is there left to a firmly failed ideology that failed in both theory and practice? Nothing.
wow you sound like an expert in logical fallacies, you must have studied them really hard.
Can you put the fallacious statement you identified in this thread into a logical statement, and then explain how it’s fallacious? Feel free to use formal symbols!
It would really help me understand the fallacy, and it must be easy for you to do as an expert.
Calling out whataboutism is perfectly acceptable when it is being used regardless of its origins.
It is in no way a logical fallacy and in fact the use of whataboutism is itself a logical fallacy.
The flaw in gorilladrum’s argument is that the hypothetical example demonstrates the flaws in that specific situation and does not address problems in socialism as a whole yet they suggest it dismisses the ideology completely.
That’s literally whataboutism, I criticized people using the vocabulary of “whataboutism” and then you said “but whatabout people who are doing whataboutism!”
To be clear, I dont believe whataboutism is a fallacy, but you do, so why are you doing it?
No it isn’t. I am explaining why whataboutism is a fallacy itself. If you have a valid counterpoint to a claim there would be no need to engage with whataboutism.
I am not engaging in whataboutism but based on your view that it isn’t fallacious Im not sure you will understand that. Not everyone is good at logical processing.
You’re literally advocating for the concept of a fallacy which is basically whining “no you can’t just provide context nooo that would defeat my point.” Which was first used to excuse British colonial brutality and later used to defend lynching.
Whataboutism is an actual fallacy even if you din’t recognize that.
If we were talking about the vast amounts of crimes the British East India company was responsible for and you chimed in with “whatabout the Dutch East India company’s crimes” that would be a fallacious point because it is unrelated to the discussion and is only a diversionary tactic.
That is why whataboutism is a fallacy. It is used by people who cannot address the argument being made which you have done here.
The fact that the initial use of the term was to defray from atrocities doesn’t make the use of whataboutisms logically valid.
If you mention that the soviet union used tear gas in rare instances and therefore they’re authoritarian then I mention that the US frequently tear gasses protestors and BLM organizers keep showing up having shot themselves in the back of the head twice and you dont call them authoritarian that’s “whataboutism” and it isnt a fallacy, it is providing context that points out hypocrisy.
You dont want to understand yourself to be a hypocrite but you don’t want to change, is what it boils down to. So you do the though terminating “whataboutism” and you can ignore it.
In my Dutch/British East India Co example it is whataboutism because the purpose of brining up the Dutch East India company is to divert from the subject at hand. In your examples you ARE providing context and are not trying to change the subject so your examples are not examples of whataboutism and that is why you are not understanding what “whataboutism” is and why it is a fallacy.
If I said the USSR was authoritarian and therefore did not represent the will of the masses and you said “what about British the monarchy” and then tried to focus on that discussion then that would ge whataboutism.
Whataboutism is not about providing context through contrasting examples. It is a diversionary tactic for when you cannot address the claims made.
Im not being a hypocrite. You just don’t understand what whataboutism is as you have proved with your examples which once again are not examples of whataboutism.
That’s a shitty way of separating it though. It relies on knowing authorial intent which is impossible. You can project whatever you want onto the other person and based on that theyre either doing a logical fallacy or not.
No it doesn’t. The intent is obvious as a counter example works in context and isn’t a diversionary tactic.
If the topic is Donald Trump’s role in the insurrection on 1/6/21 and you say “but whatabout Hilary’s email’s?” that’s whataboutism because Hilary’s email scandal is unrelated.
If you instead said “what about the fact that Trump never appeared with the crowd outside the designated permitted spot and never told anyone to riot?” that would not be whataboutism because it is relevant.
Context is everything. Whataboutism is a fallacy and that is why. It does not make an argument flow from premise to conclusion.
Whataboutism claims are a good sign of pseudo intellectuals dog whistling to attract mob attention, usually a last resort card played by people when they never have good discussion or argument skills.
I’m not sure that using the entire QA staff of the world’s largest agglomeration of Dev studios on a single game only qualifies as “not cutting corners”. That’s surely going above and beyond.
If that's what it takes to ship a game that doesn't have multitudes of game breaking bugs like they're known for, perhaps the company has bigger problems. Like still using an engine that is this bad.
I really don’t like the word agile since everyone I ever met who had this in their job title was blowing up steam someones butt. Is that the job description or what is it with these agile types?
Agile used to refer to a very specific way of developing software, but then it got coopted by the mainstream where companies kept doing shit the same way they always had but calling it “agile”. It’s basically like when early Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
Biden has already released a statement announcing he’s caving to them. I’d say they’re ‘finding out’ that they can do what they like and the Dems will fold without a fight, but they already knew that.
Well that sounds very bad. Giving the president emergency power to shut down the border? When does that expire? What conditions are required for it to be executed? Does it mean that Americans can’t leave or come home too? This doesn’t sound good at all to me. I really dislike that every administration rules through emergency and executive orders now, instead of legislating intelligent and long-term solutions.
Yeah, that’s not caving, that’s DARING Congress to refuse to pass the bill.
See, they were going to pass a budget bill that has some border funding in it, and Mitch McConnell was telling the Republicans to pass the darned thing – but then Trump said it might be nice to use the border mess in his campaign, and Poof! McConnell spun around so fast, his heels were smoking! (no, not literally) Here’s a link: news.yahoo.com/trump-thrown-wrench-mitch-mcconnel…
The statement from Biden is a double-dog dare to not pass the bill. Every time Republicans cry, “Waaahh! Border scary! Biden’s fault!”, Biden is going to hold up that statement and point out that he was ready, but they refused to sign it.
He’ll say it, but only newsy Democrats will hear him. The Republicans will say the bill didn’t go far enough, cost too much, and blah, blah, blah, glossing over the crazy powers it would have allowed. This isn’t any special ‘5d chess’, this is standard politics. Biden knows Congress won’t do ANY border deal now that Trump told them not to, so it doesn’t matter what concessions it has.
Many immigration and border requirements are clearly spelled out in law. Laws the administration is enforcing as written. Like many other issues, Congressional Republicans have chosen not to update these at any point over the last couple decades, while also complaining about border issues, simply so they can blame any Democrat President.
This isn’t a new issue. It’s an issue the Republicans clearly plan. As soon as a Republican is in the White House the “imminent” border issues disappear, or the President enacts some over the top fascist solution that doesn’t actually do anything for the cause. And Congress then ignores the causes again so they can complain when the Democrats inevitably regain control and are stuck spending time fixing the fuck ups instead of handling the actual causes.
You know that game 6 degrees of separation, where you find 6 people you and a stranger have in common? You can do the same thing with your job and MIC spending by the government.
No kidding! Glad someone gets it. A couple I know who Instagrammed their entire cross-Europe vacation last year couldn’t understand why I don’t want to travel at the same time as them this year even though we’re going some of the same places 🤦♂️
Not yet, but it’s not a chance I’d be willing to take. They have at least one neighbor who’s supposedly been arrested for theft. He used to watch their dogs for them but when they found out they changed the locks.
Printers are the text book examples of why device manufacturing shouldn’t be left to big companies. You have tracking dots, spyware infestation, subscription for ink/toners, reporting of the cartridge as empty when you still have much left in it, refusal to print when unused color cartridges are empty, intentional bricking if 3rd party cartridges or ink is used, and utterly crappy firmware in general.
Inkjets require precision manufacturing. But assembling it or other types from components should be possible - like how desktops, mechanical keyboards, etc can be. We really need to ditch filthy mass market printers because DIY printers will be much better than anything they offer.
I do think it shoukd be left up to (potentially big) companies; however, we should put restrictions on e.g. ink cartrige compatibility, just like what the EU is trying for smartphones and messagin right now.
It’s insufferable that the answer is always “build your own.” Lemmy assumes that every single person on the planet is an engineer with enough free time to design, build, and troubleshoot every device they own.
It’s based in rugged hypercapitalist bootstrap thinking. If something is broken just do it yourself! Even though that’s never realistic, and even if it were, no one person can or should be expected to do everything.
It was requested by the secret service as a countermeasure for counterfitting. More frequently it’s been used to “catch other criminals”, at least that’s what they say.
I went to a major medical university and studied humanities. The amount of soon-to-be doctors and nurses complaining about why they needed to study things like ethics, philosophy, or history astounded me, it’s like these people didn’t want to deal with the human aspect of medicine and instead just wanted to make money.
I wouldn’t be shocked if more medschool students dropped out from the humanities courses than the medical ones, they hated it
Unsolicited petulance like this is why, instead of being empathetic about a situation we both share, I will never not laugh myself to tears as I watch the NHS deal with its massive backlog by killing brits via slowly privatizing.
You're like the weird kid on the playground, pulling our hair because you have a crush on us
I had a professor that said a good student will study Monday to Saturday the amount of hours a day as the amount of credits you take. Take Sundays off. We all had 15 credits a semester.
I was interested in the humanities, so I interacted with that material very deeply. I would say that most of my classmates weren’t interested in humanities, but they weren’t really interested (as in curious, questioning, interacting) with the STEM classes either.
Did any of those courses succeed in teaching empathy, sociality, ethic? If it’s similar to what I experienced in my university, it didn’t do jack shit. University is great at teaching scientific knowledge but horrible at teaching philosophy. I learn more about ethics, philosophy and history via YouTube than from university
Students have an obligation to respond and receive the materials. If you chose not to engage with the classes, then that’s on you, but it’s generally a good thing for doctors and people working with the public to have an education on things like empathy and history (specifically the history of discrimination against marginalized groups).
I learn more about ethics, philosophy, and history via YouTube than from university
Why do you have to be rude? They were simply claiming the classes were not effective at their apparent goal of making students more ethical. It doesn’t mean they don’t think doctors should be ethical.
I also had to take a required ethics class, and it was the worst taught class I ever took there. It wasn’t effective at teaching me about ethics, it was just a pile of bad tests, and it certainly wasn’t effective at convincing me and the other students to be more ethical in our respective careers.
The free website where many people put up easy to access high quality educational resources is a great way to learn stuff on a budget. Not all of youtube is great but being rude to people who watch youtube videos to make yourself feel bigger is shitty.
I had more fun studying the required courses than CS at my university. I read TAoCP for fun in high school I could sleep through most classes. If I could do it again, I’d do geology as my profession.
Noticed the same when I studied computer science. My fellow students complained about having to study the history of computers, ethics, social studies and especially ex.phil. "I just want to program all day, not study things I will never use!’
I switched bachelor programmes after a couple of years
Thats what happens when you cheap out on map designers and have one old guy do everything that grew up in a time before computers were a thing even. Oh and of course he is also the only guy programming and maintaining the engine, has to do all the character conception and management demands some immersive sandbox experience with particle physics down to quantum level.
No wonder the updates just get shittier and shittier.
Nah, they didn’t grow up before computers: they were programing mainframes in the 60s. Those programmers can write you an absolute masterpiece of software … in COBOL. Also, they don’t bother with documentation because they’re intimately familiar with every line of code considering they created the whole system from scratch 40 years ago.
The point at when you’re “screwed” is when they retire and some poor bastard inherits an inscrutably complex system, written in a 60 year old language no one uses anymore, and with zero documentation.
Maybe they’re testing out hypersonic mail planes. You lose a box somewhere over Fort Wayne and you’re just goin so goddamn fast it doesn’t land till it hits the gulf
Congratulations, you got me. The Appalachians don’t go all the way across the entire North American continent. I apologize for daring to make such a suggestion.
To be fair, I initially wanted to comment about how clever you were because even most Americans would forget about the Ozarks being in the way, but then I checked a map and realized they were too far west.
There are two locations: Fort Wayne, IN and an unspecified point in the ocean. Of the paths between Fort Wayne and an ocean, the ones people are most likely to think of (e.g. from the Atlantic or the Pacific) involve crossing mountains, but others (e.g. from the Gulf of Mexico or Hudson Bay) do not.
I have seen so many thread saying how bad that instance is but every time I ask for links proving how bad they are I have never see anything worth the hate.
No you may not have a link. Linking to bad things makes a person bad. Providing evidence of bad things makes a person bad. Anything other than belief makes you bad. In fact I think you must be one of the bad people, because evidence of righteous claims supports the idea that righteous claims require evidence, which is bad.
I went to a link below and honestly, as another commenter succinctly summarized as “whiny butthurt Nazis” was a giant “freedom” murica style. Seriously, my eyes hurt, I left.
Not to mention unironic Russia shilling. When I called out a mod he responded with “oh yeah well America worked with nazis.”
Cool. That’s bad too. They’re contrarian to the point of parody. Literally any wrong by China Russia or north Korea is justified by “well America did the same thing” as if leftists as a whole aren’t already on board with that thing being bad, but it still doesn’t excuse that bad thing now.
Just throwing out the word tankie is pretty much meaningless at this point. It might as well be “woke”. If you have specific issues explain that rather than just trying to shut down a conversation with a word. Some users might be a bit too sympathetic too China but I’ve typically seen them more come from a reasonable non US propaganda viewpoint and have been open to actual criticism about China. Some of it can seem like whataboutism but to be fair a lot of the complaints I see about China are shit the US does as well so it can be a fair point.
In terms of the "tankie problem", it's mostly supporting Russian aggression in Ukraine pretty much solely to "own the libs" and "get back at the evil NATO". Most "tankies", a term that has become effectively meaningless from overuse, are more accurately political contrarians who care less about things getting better for more people and more about Owning The Libs.
There's honestly a good chunk of them on most fediverse instances just due to the general community vibe, with Hexbear having more than, say, lemmy.world, but less than lemmygrad. Hexbear stands out moreso to being the successor to Chapo Trap House, a community notorious for being so utterly vile to interact with that nobody wants anything to do with them.
No, but they're absolutely the lesser of two evils here. I'm generally not sure how people justify a war of territorial expansion to stroke the ego of a geriatric dictator in Ukraine, then turn around and get angry about a war of territorial expansion to stroke the ego of a geriatric dictator in, say, Afghanistan.
It's hypocrisy. You dronestrike a children's hospital in Kabul and everyone acknowledges the evil of it, but Russia dronestrikes a children's hospital in Ukraine and suddenly it's justified as "retaliating against western imperialism". Sure, and Iran had nukes Uncle Sam needed to find, too.
Lesser of two evils? Please. How old do you think I am, ten? I’m not at all sure they’re the lesser of two evils, but then I’m pretty critical of things like imf, World Bank, allying with Saudi Arabia “ccp bad” garbage. Humans are animals and I’m here to learn and the western narrative is rather sanitized so no thanks.
You are a political contrarian if you think invading a sovereign nation is justified by "the western narrative is rather sanitized". You don't care about people's lives or welfare, you care about Being Special and Being Better Than Other People.
To be blunt, you disgust me with your callous disregard for the lives of innocents solely to be cool and edgy on the internet.
Nah, you’re just trying to bully me to agree with you, with zero sense of irony in a thread ostensibly about the same behavior; unless that’s not why you’re upset with that behavior, per se.
I don't particularly care if you agree with me or not. What I find interesting is that what motivates your political positions are effectively identical to, say, an American christofascist. Disdain for the mainstream media, performative cynicism, conspiratorial thinking. If it goes counter to The Mainstream, it must be good. The idea that people may be harmed by your position doesn't matter to you at all. People """are animals""", after all, and they matter to you only as props in your self-aggrandizing personal narrative.
I'm genuinely not sure how you're intending to sell your position of "Empathy is for losers, the only thing that matters is Being Right On The Internet" as anything other than repulsive, or how you're not demonstrating why people dislike hexbear users (i.e. spitting on the concept of basic human empathy due to political contrarianism).
What? You just made a bunch of knee-jerk accusations of which nothing I said could reasonably lead you to conclude.
Take every claim you made and prove it like you went to high school English classes because frankly, you just made up claims attacking me, personally, because I dared say I want to hear what someone else has to say and form my own opinions. And accused me of being “just like the Christofascist” with zero sense of irony.
Also, please let me know when humans aren’t in the animal kingdom. How old are you? Ten?
For me, I don’t support what Russia is doing. I just don’t want to further empower the US military industrial complex. Every couple of years there needs to be a new evil enemy for us to be scared of so that the money can keep flowing into weapons and so that we have excuses to extract value out of other countries in conflict. It’s obvious we don’t do this for humanitarian reasons or we wouldn’t be allies with countries like Saudi Arabia (or see the entire history of US intervention since WWII). Whether Russia wins or loses the war, people in Ukraine aren’t winning, they’re just seeing which imperialists are going to be exploiting them for the near future.
In the abstract I don’t oppose assisting countries against imperialist aggression with military force. But playing into US warmongering doesn’t really do that and in the process is further making the world a worse place.
A good deed done for the wrong reasons is still a good deed. The reason why NATO is the lesser of two evils in this sense is that between two brutal authoritarian regimes, NATO is significantly more hands-off and more open to being manipulated by civilian interest than the more brutally right-wing Russian regime. One of these exploitative imperialists will probably let you get gay married, the other one will kill you for it. The US military industrial complex will pick a target regardless. It may as well be a target that ends up counteracting Russian imperialism; I'd rather have those bullets in Russian corpses than, say, whatever country Saudi Arabia has decided needs bullying this week.
Anyways, the core of the issue is that it takes a LOT of hand-wringing and "b-but both sides" to justify active warfare to sit back and let an imperial power shit hellfire down civilians' throats. Anyone who actively supports pulling out of Ukraine is, bluntly, just kind of an idiot.
Contrarian? Hardly. I’m just aware that Western Europe and the USA have their own agendas, engage in propagandizing their own citizens, to greater or lesser extent. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous. Notice how lacked the behavior, not the person, without knowing more? Try out sometime.
I appreciate you actually explaining your position behind the use of the word. I have a lot of issues with NATO and some with Ukraine but I agree that Russia is the aggressor in this situation. I have noticed that some of their users are pro-Russia but most of what I’ve seen is more anti-NATO which I can understand. As I said in another comment I definitely see some of the users troll more than I agree with and I personally prefer to deal with things in a different manner but overall I’m fine with being federated with them.
It's not everyone on the internet's responsibility to change their opinion to match yours. It is incredibly narrow minded to assume that someone would just do "research" and end with the same opinion of a group of people as you.
If you see someone express an opinion, and you don't know why, you ask them, not go to other sources to find why.
Yeah, I'm sure you formed that opinion on a factual basis that you found through no help from what others posted or said. When I want to learn something, I do research on books and online media. When I want to understand someone's opinion, I ask them. If you don't know the difference between those two, your problems stem way earlier than "after school".
You sound like the closeted book nerd that doesn't understand public opinion. Like all the people on Twitter who once read something about "blacks are more violent than other races", and if you ask them why they think that, how many stats they read that confirm that, possibilities of other reasons for a study's conclusion, they respond with "It’s not the rest of the internet’s responsibility to do your research for you"- sound familiar?
If you want to accuse this "intensely human" person of lying, just do it. But claiming that anyone who hasn't seen an example within thousands (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands? Only been around for 2 months, but millions of site uses) of posts of users being "tankies" just needs to "research" is obtuse and moronic. If someone makes the claim, surely they have an example, and don't expect everyone who sees this meme to read thousands of messages before continuing on their journey through !memes.
Except you, of course, who has clearly learned after school not to rely on others, so you must have read all of the comments from various hexbear users yourself, and not taken that opinion from some other poster's list, right? You did waste all that time before suggesting others do the same for no reason, right?
I haven’t really had any issues with them. That said, literally the thread above this one in all top hour has a bunch of people hoping Biden gets COVID and dies…so there is that.
For sure, I’m not advocating blocking or defederating at all. But you asked for examples of hexbear being unsavory and I provided one. That is all. It would be more of an accumulation instead of one singular instance that might push some over the edge.
You just have a very high tolerance for jackassery. You've seen plenty of evidence of hexbear hostility, i.e. the "dunk tank" that would justify not wanting to interact with hexbear users and have actively chosen to disregard it.
This is because you're kind of a jackass. Disregarding people engaging in good faith with "just trust me bro" is exactly the kind of thing people really hate hexbear users for. Not because of illegal activity or moral failing, but because they're assholes. While you may think this isn't worth de-federation, unfortunately moderators aren't some kind of legal authority, and if federating with hexbear means instance admins or community moderators need to put in triple the work to prune all the arguments and """shitposting""" hexbear users love, nobody is legally or morally required to put up with it.
It's legitimately that simple. Hexbear users are jerks and nobody wants to hang out with them, and that's enough to ban them from any given community or instance.
This whole thread is about the historical context around the summary execution of the romanovs. While the tzars absolutely needed to end, in the context of the 1910s and absolute monarchy, if the children didn't die there would have likely been civil war trying to reinstate the line into power.
Is a much better receipt. User doesn't understand the winnie the pooh reference, also doesn't understand the PRCs effort to stifle discussion about TSM and the pressure that firsthand witnesses are under.
even with this guy, I don't understand how a user being an idiot is worth defederating. If he's going into other threads and spouting the same nonsense, sure ban him. If many people are going into other unrelated threads and injecting that kind of misinformation into conversation, that's a pattern that makes defederating a consideration.
Is there this pattern, of other communities being disrupted in this way?
Yeah the communities dedicated to screenshotting posts in other instances are a really fucking odd thing I see show up routinely.
It has always appeared to me there is some kind of side squabble between various communities in the Fediverse against a couple instances in the Fediverse. I pretty much see two flavors: overly personal grudges or hypocritical trolling. Or I guess the swirl option for both, so three flavors.
It’s kind of nostalgic really, for the old days of forum flame wars.
Please include references to the context. If those users are spouting this crap on other instances and they do nothing about it defederating is a good option.
If they are having private shitbird conversations within their own community, block the communities on your instance.
I’m also probably kind if a jackass, because hex bear doesn’t bother me. Would I appreciate a civil conversation to better understand their POV? Totally. Will that happen? No. So I just don’t interact. The fierce protection of LGBTQ communities is something I appreciate however.
Basically the whole Hexbear most upvoted consensus was that all US presidents deserve to be executed, the DNC and GOP are the same, but Trump at least is funny, kind of authentic, and triggers the libs.
Also lol that observer article aged like fucking milk. Clinton couldn’t have found a better way to self-destruct her chances at winning the election.
The real consensus seems to be that he should be hanged just like all the other presidents, and that they find him funny because he is not as subtle as past presidents at doing the evil stuff.
The point I have seen being driven through is that they don’t care to just mock people for their ideas and they really love to criticise without offering solutions besides violence and letting it all burn, which is a non-answer to most non-tankies, so there’s an impasse.
I just find it very funny that on one hand people say they offer no solutions but on the other hand people say they want to discuss it too much and it’s exhausting, they clearly have solutions which is Marxist-Leninism, that has been made abundantly clear over and over so how can one say they offer no solutions?
Marxist-Lenisnism is not really an answer since its not like you can change such a core design of a society overnight, and since they want it fast, their arguments tend to resolve into violence / letting it all burn (which tbh will also come with violence), and again for several people that’s a non answer since they don’t want violence, so there’s an impasse.
For me that answer is like cool it won’t happen while I’m alive so what’s the point, either you tell me about something practical that people living in the situation can relate and/or act on (without violence), or I’ll just answer with something like “cool, that’s nice” and not contribute more since suddenly we are talking about something that’s so radically overboard from the current society that it’s pointless for me, and the vibe I get is that I’m not alone.
Sure it’s not an answer for you but that doesn’t mean it’s right for you to incorrectly state they have no solutions.
I do find the Accelerationism that some on the far left push/advocate for to be a poor idea overall, I do think we need to slowly push people further left via things like social democracy and improving the lives of working class people via more social programs of that nature to be a better alternative, even though it will definitely take more time.
The problem is capitalism and the powers that be are constantly fighting against ANY progress on that front and are doing a damn good job of convincing people to fight against their own interests via various forms of propaganda.
On the other hand we’re having a revival of unions like I’ve never seen in our country before, so it’s not like there is no hope that things can improve, just the overall situation we find ourselves in makes it really easy for people to fall into more extreme views and apathy or anger about the system we’re currently living in. I think a Marxist/leninists/left viewpoint is miles above the fascist/nationalistic alternative
I want to reiterate what I wrote. I said that they propose no solution besides X, that doesn’t mean that they have no answer, but that their only answer is X. What I said is that their only answer is X and people find that answer problematic.
For context, I don’t live in the US and I vote for the left parties of my country, which work for social programs within the status quo, not for breaking the status quo. I get that what the US has is way more extreme, but this is a global forum and there’s people from countries where is not so bad. When the conversation is almost binary (you are the west or not, no middle point) and their context is not applicable to all, you get this kind of antagonism. And I get that everyone is not that way, I have had several positive and negative encounters with them, but people remember negative experiences more easily that positive ones.
we think its funny that libs are mad at realizing the system is shit, so obviously we are the only ideology in existence besides democrat= a republican
A HUGE PORTION OF HEXBEAR IS TRANS. OVER HALF THE MODS ARE TRANS. THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE FOR THREE YEARS PRIOR TO FEDERATION. FAE, PEOPLE HAVE POINTED THIS OUT TO YOU BEFORE. PROBABLY MULTIPLE TIMES NOW.
We’ve never “pretended to support lgbt”, why would we? What would be the point of a load of alt right channers roleplaying as queer communists for years on an incredibly niche social media in the hope that eventually redditors would come to the site? And even supposing we did, and we were all just alt right types, if we’d spent years doing reading groups of queer theory together and kicking out transphobes and creating the most queer friendly space on lemmy just as an incredibly long extended bit then would the supposed communists we’re impersonating even take issue with that?
Like just use some critical thinking, at this point almost half of the sites users are trans and most of the rest are queer, most new users cite our radical opposition to queerphobia as their reason for joining, what evidence is there that we lie about being queer friendly? Like just check out !traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns or !anti_cishet_aktion or !transenby_liberation and tell me in good faith that all these people have been lying for years about being queer
Identiy politics is so silly. It’s possible for a black person to support systemic racism, it’s possible for a Jewish person to support Nazi’s, it’s possible for LGBTQ people to support anti-LGBTQ politicians. Case in point - Jessica Watkins.
“I am x-identity” is lazy, superficial, irrelevant.
I don’t think anyone is lying about their identity. I do fully expect that the trans men and women of Hexbear would throw their LGBTQ brothers and sisters in front of a firing squad if it meant a chance at a bloody revolution over the bourgeois.
But THEY DON’T SUPPORT THOSE THINGS! YOU’RE MAKING SHIT UP. THIS IS EASY TO SEE IF YOU GO LOOK AT WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAY ABOUT FASCISTS AND TRANSPHOBES. YOU HAVE BEEN AT THIS FOR AT LEAST A FUCKING WEEK NOW.
You have support for Trump and Russia in there, which is an unholy alliance stripping LGBTQ protections in law, funding transphobic and Neo-Naxi groups, and spreading fascist rhetoric online.
“support for Russia” — opposition to NATO is not support for Russia. This isn’t a fucking football game.
“support for Trump” — The other day I sent you a huge thread where they all fucking hate Trump and agree he is an odious fascist.
Hexbear does not support Trump. The consensus view on hexbear is that Trump is more dangerous domestically, but Biden is more dangerous internationally, and they are both monstrous people who are terrible for the planet. Many hexbears voted for biden as harm reduction but it barely felt like harm reduction, and when you look at the whole planet, maybe it wasn’t. Trump is a fascist but also an isolationist. Biden is not a fascist, although he does virtually nothing to combat the fascists, but he is also more likely to start wars, coups, or inflict austerity on the global south, which is something people should care about. 9 million people starve to death every fucking year and America has huge international influence to make that worse or better. America supported the fucking siege in Yemen. America destroyed Libya — and that was the fucking Obama administration. I saw a study that tallied it all up and concluded that America has caused the deaths of 4.5 million people in the middle east since 9/11. And for that matter, Biden’s not great domestically either! There’s been virtually no pushback from the Biden administration against any of the fascist bullshit happening in this country. Florida legalized kidnapping children for forced conversion therapy and Biden won’t even say the word trans.
support for Trump" — The other day I sent you a huge thread where they all fucking hate Trump and agree he is an odious fascist.
Lol, not really. We can dig it up and look at the highest rated posts again. Hexbear wants to execute him along with the rest of the US presidents, which is obviously just a fantasy. “All presidents are bad, both sides are the same, Trump is at least funny and kind of authentic and triggers the libs” was the overwhelming sentiment.
Trump is a fascist but also an isolationist.
Lol, no, he’s not an isolationist. He’s a globalist business man, and a wanna-be dictator imperialist, who is happy to be friends and allies with the other dictator imperialists of the world.
(Biden) is more likely to start wars
What? According to who? Are you just going to pretend the assassination of Qasem Soleimani didn’t happen under Trump?
Biden is very pro-Ukraine, which drives the pro-Russia people insane. I don’t know what else you could be talking about.
There’s been virtually no pushback from the Biden administration against any of the fascist bullshit happening in this country.
Trump rolled back LGBTQ rights and stacked SCOTUS with people to roll back women’s and LGBTQ rights, DeSantis leads the war on Trans people. It does NOT help LGBTQ causes to blame this on Biden. It does not help to say “well both sides are bad”. Fascists LOVE the “enlightened centrists” because it almost always benefits fascism.
Yeah, lets, instead of you cherry picking shit and distorting the intent behind it. Here’s the fucking thread. Holy shit, the consensus view is fucking exactly what I said it is.
As for thinking Trump is funny, the overwhelming view in Hexbear is extremely bleak. People struggle with depression and doomerism. They laugh to cope.
Here are hexbears talking about why they laugh at Trump
Yeah that’s exactly how I remember it. “All US presidents bad, at least Trump is funny”.
As for thinking Trump is funny, the overwhelming view in Hexbear is extremely bleak. People struggle with depression and doomerism. They laugh to cope.
Maybe this is a real intention that I’m misinterpreting. It looks a lot like edgy Heath Ledger joker “just wants to watch the world burn”, fine if the fascists are the ones to do it. I’m willing to consider it’s just misplaced doomerism.
if you think anyone on hexbear wants to watch the fucking world burn, you clearly have no fucking idea what any of these people think or believe or care about. I’m honestly struggling to even respond to this. It just shows complete ignorance, and then that you would go on and on for days slandering this community you know nothing about, with complete confidence, even after people contradict you and argue with you… I mean what the fuck do I say to someone who thinks a community whose entire set of political beliefs orients toward defending the poor and the marginalized from the monstrous psychopaths who rule this planet — wants to watch the fucking world burn? Please stop saying shit about hexbear when you do not know anything about these people.
I’ll take the L that I only have a week of exposure to Hexbear, and it might be the worst week, given that Hexbears were all excited to “dunk on the shitlibs” and actually doing real life helpful productive things for marginalized and oppressed groups took a back seat on the burner.
In my not-very-important opinion from my short exposure, y’all have completely lost the plot. You would say edgy shock factor things for an internet point circle jerk , even if you’re giving ammo to the right. I think you all would rather LARP being leftist revolutionaries, fantasize about executions, you like driving people away from leftism because it reinforces your identity of being the most left.
If you really wanted to protect the poor and marginalized, I think you all would take the clue and reevaluate if you really value making the world a better place, and what you’re doing to achieve that.
if you’re saying that being a too-online leftist is not really doing anything, hexbears are self-aware about that and riff on it pretty often. but plenty of hexbears are also involved in orgs, unionization efforts, and volunteer work. and the ones who aren’t are self-deprecating about it. this is where the “I will never log off!” riffs come from, they all know they should log off. that said, the community is also sort of a support group for people to share their stress about the world to other people who understand it and share a similar perspective. that’s the main purpose of the community, no one sees it as some “change the world by posting” platform. if they did, it wouldn’t make sense for them to stay defederated for three years.
Heard. You’ve successfully made the points for me to not give any more of my opinions on Hexbear to anyone who isn’t from Hexbear. I’ll stand down and give everyone the fair chance to make their own opinions.
I think having a space to destress is really important. If you’re fighting for rights for minorities in your local area and you need to shout “death to America” in a friendly space online, you earned it and you deserve it.
Please explain how wanting to see trump hung drawn and quartered for being a disgusting imperialist fascist is a pro Trump statement. Frankly if hexbear users could bring him back to live afterwards we’d happily want to see him brought back then hung, drawn and quartered a second time.
If you don’t want to see Trump hung, drawn and quartered you are more pro trump than hexbear is.
But also, “Identiy politics is so silly” is a massive fucking red flag, scratch a liberal and they start complaining about the woke mob
If you don’t want to see Trump hung, drawn and quartered you are more pro trump than hexbear is
I care about real life policy and results.
I don’t think living in a fantasy of fetish violence makes you left or a left ally.
“Identiy politics is so silly”
Let me frame it in a way helpful to your confirmation bias. Zelenskyy is Jewish, does this automatically mean in the Russia invasion of Ukraine that Russians are the Nazis and Ukrainians aren’t? Identity politics.
lmao, this you?
100% yes, and I have learned that thinking neopronouns are unnecessary and silly makes me a transphobe, and transphobes deserve the firing squad.
I have not heard exactly how many and which neopronouns I have to learn before I’ve hexbeared hard enough to not get the firing squad.
There’s a big difference between wanting trump to die and thinking that trump will actually be executed or suffer any real consequences for his crimes beyond a slap on the wrist and maybe some house arrest - of course Trump won’t face justice, like Bush, like Clinton, like Obama and like Biden he will only ever fall upwards and live comfortably for the rest of his life. Wanting awful people to face justice isn’t “living in fantasy land” it’s just being dissaffected with the reality that evil people will never face any kind of justice - I also want my country to be actually accepting of trans people and for the NHS to work as it should and for the police to not be institutionally racist, but I know it’s not going to happen.
And regarding the identity politics thing, I agree regarding liberal identity politics when Im talking with a materialist communist who’s criticising it from a left wing perspective but you’re not a communist, you’re a “”“liberal”“” criticising it from a right wing perspective because you’re mad that trans people are daring to criticise Biden and to call you a transphobe for being transphobic.
If your “allyship” that is entirely conditional on trans people being respectable and heteronormative enough for you to accept entirely consists of talking down to those trans people you do accept and telling them that they’re not allowed to criticise Biden too much or your fragile “allyship” will be retracted then it isn’t worth shit.
::: spoiler relevant MLK quote
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Honestly, the pages of well thought out responses are reward enough, but all the sweet time yall waste typing is what really makes it worth my time (all 10 minutes of it).
Getting you folks a taste of what it’s like to share a space with you… well that bit is fucking priceless.
I was called a bigot because I dared to say that a person finished transitioning is no longer trans.
Because they’re done. They’re a man or woman now, and apparently treating them as such means I’m a bigot.
This isn’t defense, this behavior actively makes things worse for trans people. This is the exact type of behavior conservatives want you to think of when they say “trans people bad”.
This is why, this statement means that you don’t view trans people who haven’t “finished transitioning” as their actual gender. This is a transphobic and pretty reductive understanding of how transition works (albeit one that some trans people hold themselves, usually transmeds). I won’t write an entire essay on why but here’s just a small bit to chew on: consider that a “finished transition” is very different from person to person and some people might never consider it finished. Some people only want to socially transition, others have to medicate for their entire lives, both could consider reaching their ideal state “finished” or they could consider it a continual work in progress.
Also,
This isn’t defense, this behavior actively makes things worse for trans people.
The idea that pointing out someone’s transphobia will somehow support the transphobes is laughable. If being called out is seriously enough to make someone stop supporting trans people then their support was conditional and only surface-level.
Staying civil, as you suggest, is what actually helps conservatives since it allows their views to go unchallenged when their views are bad and should be challenged. Part of this includes challenging people who may think they are supportive but harbour transphobic beliefs that they haven’t analysed fully. And these wrong beliefs can have actual harm. As a simple example, there are a lot of “allies” who say that trans people are their gender but not their sex, which is a belief that can harm trans people when brought into a medical context where our bodies are (if on HRT) closer to those of our actual gender than to our AGAB.
If you are not trans shut the fuck up right now about what is or isn’t good for trans people, trans people do not need a cis saviour to come in and tell us we’re being too unpalatable for liberals who will only support us as long as we don’t get too uppity
Would I appreciate a civil conversation to better understand their POV? Totally. Will that happen? No.
People have actually had that conversation. You just have to seem curious and not too accusatory. Also — depending on how skeptical you come across — it might help to keep your questions specific so they don’t feel like they have to defend their entire perspective in one fell swoop, although some might be up for that.
They’re aware that their perspective tends to be vilified and poorly understood, which both makes them wary of people but also enthusiastic to respond when they find someone they think is actually interested in what they have to say. If I showed them your comment they’d probably be like “hell yeah, send him in.”
*I made a thread and I was going to link it to you if you wanted to ask questions, but I realized you’re defederated
As a bi guy who has spent decades fighting for my rights Im not sure that their “defense” is beneficial. If you are a fucking piece of shit to everyone you interact with you might be surprised that people don’t want your help.
How about flooding a meta thread that’s not on their own instance to insult people who disagree with them?
Part of the drama with that incident included hexbear folks straight up saying “I thought the whole point of federating with other instances was so that we could dunk on liberals”. Majority of folks on hexbear did not see any issues with the behavior of their members on this post.
Oh wow, there’s more hexbear comments than blahaj comments. Almost every blahaj comment has like 3-4 responses. I read a comment of someone saying that the thread looks wildly different if you see it from an instance that defederated them, and it’s so sad that it is completely different.
why didn’t you post the second one after the admin of hexbear and the admin of blahaj talked where they agreed hexbear wouldn’t do that in the second one.
Lol, that’s because the mods of said threads already had to delete all the bullshit they posted once they “accidentally found this on all” and then descent on it like locusts (but they’re totally not brigading!!!1!)
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.