ALostInquirer @ ALostInquirer @lemm.ee

I like to ask a variety of questions, sometimes silly, serious, and/or stra

---

Read more

Posts

218

Comments

706

Joined

2 yr. ago

I think this is all pretty good advice, thanks!

However, this & the other replies, have made me realize I should have taken more time with the body text of this question. What I was a little more interested in was less the one-on-one interactions, and more something like..."How might one co-opt bad faith methods to spread helpful, good information?"

It's so easy to to toss out bad, harmful information, but might there be some ways to more easily put out good, helpful information that sticks with people? Or at a minimum, more benign info that doesn't gradually push people down darker paths? 🤔

I follow ya. I feel like busywork is probably one of the better words to describe what many in antiwork communities are getting at. Unfulfilling, often for someone else and to their greater profit/benefit over yours and others' own with seemingly no other purpose than that.

In a lot of ways it's a more familiar way of talking about alienated labor without putting people off.

As a lil' heads up, this post is from an antiwork community. That aside, which kind of work are you getting fulfillment from? Another comment here makes a good point that these terms are sort of loaded with different meanings for each of us.

Personally I don't find much of my work satisfying because I find it difficult to keep it from helping big businesses in some way.

I see where you're coming from, I think. In my experiences with trying to follow tutorials though, I've found the difficulty to be between rough explanations and the examples given feeling a little too simple and isolated from how they might be applied in a working program.

Thanks for clarifying! So it does work roughly as I was thinking, that's cool!

This gives a brief overview of Scuttlebutt with a link to a more technical breakdown.

That said, I remain confused by the other person's description, as I'm not sure how it's accumulating posts while "disconnected from the Internet". I follow how it works when connected, but not so much how it would work as they've described it, at least in the disconnected circumstances, unless it's sorta how I asked.

It was designed such that a Usenet server could spend most of its time disconnected from the Internet and accumulate local posts that would then be federated in a digest when the server dialed up and connected to other servers.

...Would this have been local posts of an individual, or sometimes a group in a LAN or something? The way you describe it here puts me in the mind of recent stuff like Scuttlebutt, albeit that's more clearly individual-focused.

Then this person is the problem and is projecting harder than a drive-in cinema.

Do their bulbs also burst far too easily?

If they're already manager what do they need leadership coach for?

Another big, lingering question is why Meta wants to do this in the first place. Lambert says Meta wants to give users more control over their posts and followers, with easier avenues to engage across platforms.

So will they be implementing a method to export this data in ways that could be imported to other platforms? Otherwise I don't see where federation fits in here all that much.

Extending reach isn't really the same as control imo.

How would one use it if they're struggling to understand it to start with? 🤨

so it’s not usually financially viable to limit the audience like that [...]

Aren't they already sort of doing so by largely directing them towards children? 🤔

Have any publications zoomed out further on this subject to include the book publishers trying to squeeze libraries with the costs of ebook lending? And the attempts to funnel money to private schools via vouchers under the auspices of "school choice"? I'm sure there are many other examples to include, but these are a couple that came to mind.

Written well, it could be a great overview or deep dive, and I suspect there are likely a number of books covering different aspects of this as were relevant at the time of their writing.

How's the pudu du(ing)?

What if we all started billing the big businesses under influencer services any time we discussed or mentioned them explicitly? 🤪

Whatever happened to just doing stuff because it was fun, or because being helpful was the right thing to do, and not worrying about how to prevent other people from somehow making a sliver of a penny off of it without recompense? Why care that someone might be able to find some way to make a tiny little bit of money off of it?

For what it's worth I generally agree with you, the proposition is to prod at where one might go if one were to take the capitalist mindset to a logical extreme. It's not so much that someone might, as it is that an already profitable big business might. Nevertheless, the exasperation you're expressing here, I share, and I've sort of inverted what you ask here out of dismay at how one's supposed to go about things without serving to further help some big business' profits.

Obviously the better and more practical solution is to leverage governments to break up pseudo-monopolies, regulate and tax businesses, and support unionization in every industry. However, this sort of twisted scenario I'm asking about here? That, to me, seems like the bizarre sort of logic that a staunch, honest capitalist would prefer instead despite it being to the detriment of society.

If someone else is getting rich then they feel like that must be making them poorer somehow. But that’s not how the world actually works. It’s entirely possible to create value without taking it away from someone else.

Just caught this in your other reply and decided to address this here. While this is possible, it also isn't how the world actually works that this is consistently the case, and it is in those inconsistencies of value production that influence the mindset of others, don't you think? Supposing that it is strictly a zero sum game is wrong, but supposing that wealth accrual isn't sometimes at the cost of others is also wrong, I think it may be reasonable to say.

Wealth accrual often creates economic inequality, and in turn while the original action may not directly make people poorer, it can cost them in other ways of which I imagine we may all be too familiar.

Isn't it more that that was the original point of word of mouth? When I've asked others how they've found out about new music/movies/games, some have also said through word of mouth, hence why I mentioned it in the OP.

Regardless, I agree with your conclusion, and on my worst days I feel we've already hit that point when trying to reach out to others only for it to be a setup for some scam.

Ooh, I didn't realize that's what chinchillas look like! I was going to guess a quokka, which it turns out is only similar in terms of also being a relatively small furry creature with a fun name 😅

What is this creature, and does he have a name? 👀

Might it be better in future to screenshot the post, quote the text and cite the author/poster, supposing one wants to avoid any linking to Twitter?