kugel7c @ kugel7c @feddit.de

Posts

1

Comments

131

Joined

2 yr. ago

I think the fundamental issue left is just that I don't accept one standard to ever be good enough for all direct message communication, I also hope EU legislation will make the situation better. But I also believe we should know our tech and use it because we have a good reason to.

In the end of the day making good open standards should probably be easier than it is. More generally I think closed tech (IP) shouldn't exist, but neither good standards nor open tech exists in the real world unfortunately.

So as a consequence I just want people to make informed decisions to exploit what already exists in accordance with their own demands, whether I get them there by bullying or teaching or discussing is mostly just semantics to me. And if a group or person uses what seems from my perspective to be a bad tool, it is in my view a disservice to myself and them not to at least try a little to get them to use it.

Ty for the conversation as well, I had a feeling that you were actually trying to understand what I wanted to get across so I just sorta kept talking...

Generally I often notice people here are closer to me in position which makes for more interesting discussion, but it can also take quite some time to get to the actual disagreements because the disagreement are so slight.

I'm not sure how you come to this staggering conclusion, an honest attempt at teaching is completely impossible without empathy, but yes it sometimes involves conflict, the important thing is to be patient, and invest what you can give into people you actually care about. I would hope that includes your parents, but I understand it might not.

Well if someone is stupid and my bullying gets them a bit out of their stupidity I don't think it's too bad. Also this is largely not a problem where I live, my mom asked if we could use signal because she disliked WhatsApp because of privacy, and I just installed signal, my dad still uses WhatsApp, my friends and I use telegram and discord. I've actually never had to do any real bullying because in the real world everyone understands the issue enough for us to get somewhere sensible.

It's neither rude nor pointless to explain software to users who are less adept with software, sometimes it won't work but, it also sometimes does just work, especially with chat apps, it's literally just replacing an icon, because on the UI side they are very similar. And I hate to tell you this but not providing tech support if you are good at it also just doesn't help, it just makes us collectively stupider. Sure don't burn yourself out on users who can get nothing right, but like teach your parents colleagues and friends some fundamentals that you seem to understand, if only because it makes your life easier.

Yes I can't do shit about communication systems not being standardized to the degree I'd like and with the features I'd want.

So what I try to do is try to bully people until they use an app that everyone can be relatively happy with, SMS is essentially the only one I don't accept because it's 20 years old and doesn't behave sensibly for the modern area.

I can understand that standards help interoperability but realize that for SMS, obviously that has failed because apple has rejected RCS for now and developed a default experience that is better. I don't control any of that shit. I can just tell people to install chat apps if they want to talk to me. And I can bully them if they don't.

The network is a network of communicating software so the standard can be installed by default or after the fact, it doesn't make a difference if everyone would just install software. Being angry at apple or WhatsApp or whatever for not writing a messenger you like is sorta stupid, they are companies they'll never do what you want, being a angry at users that refuse to use options freely available to them can at least improve the situation for me because they can install what I, or they want to use.

Obligatory wirtual Clip: https://youtu.be/Vq1iqwGQblo

The thing is it's a specific standard that just hasn't kept up, you shouldn't be married to any software, and you should be able to decide yourself what you use, I can't change what big tech does with their software, but I can call people stupid for not using the ability of their computers to run custom software.

I despise the trend of people not realizing what they legitimately can do with their hardware, because they were just too scared to install software. I so often stumble upon people who can't accomplish simple tasks because they are terrified of installing software, and this messaging thing is definitely one of these issues.

Essentially if you are given a library of software, and you have a problem that is solved by installing software, why would you not install software, it's mostly free, and requires only the briefest thought about what you want and where you can find it.

Because it provides a better experience, weather it's WhatsApp telegram, Signal threema or even discord or teams, they all provide a significant feature advantage over SMS. This starts with properly handling multimedia, not giving your number up to everyone else, proper groups, your messages living in the cloud for proper multi device functionality, your messages living unencrypted only on your device... There is plenty of real advantages with their associated side effects.

SMS as a standard is simply too old for modern expectations, this doesn't make modern expectations stupid just because the standard is not being kept up to date. I have not written a single SMS since 2013 or so, and my life is better for it. Also there is definitely open third party chat apps that provide an open standard that can just be installed as one of a few apps, the problem here is that potentially no one is using them.

The main advantage of a computer in your pocket against earlier phones is that you can fundamentally install any software you want, not just what the device manufacturer deems acceptable, so why would anyone not take advantage of this for messaging is beyond me.

I take some issue with the first point, because the only real competition in $/W is fossil with subsides and maybe wind. If you price carbon so that the externalities are even slightly priced in fossil is much more expensive than PV without PV requiring any subsides. 0.08$/kWh is not a reasonable electricity price to assume for much of the world, even though it might be pretty normal in your country. And along those lines it's shortsighted to assume the US will be at that price forever.

Idk if you own property 10-20k $ should really not be an issue to come up with, most houses cost at least one order of magnitude more than that, maybe even two.

It also really doesn't matter because with a property as collateral and the bank seeing investment in home solar you should probably be able to get a loan.

The important thing in this calculation is usually more along the lines of, how long does it take to get a return on that investment, and how long can I expect my panels to last afterwards, what kind of ROI can I expect lifetime. Lifetime ROI for solar should be 2-5 while being low ish risk. If your lifetime ROI isn't at least 2, either your government does Energy subsides pretty last century, or your quote is inflated or misconfigured, or it might just not make sense otherwise where you are, this last point only makes sense if installation or grid connection are very expensive compared to normal because of the shape or location of the specific house.

First off as I already said I'm obviously also just some guy on the Internet, who might know less about things than it sound like. But when I say liberalism is destructive what I mean is that the ideology proposes systems of representative democracy, free markets and nation states, systems which are fundamentally not equipped for many of the problems the world is facing. Obviously a big motivator here is climate change, but even if you think there is a path within those systems to solve that, there is a nuclear and general arms stockpile that is currently still growing, there is exploration and alienation of the wage worker in the modern world and so on and so on. And I just cannot see a reasonable path until we collectively move on from liberalism.

That's why from some point of view I find mindlessly regurgitating Chinese propaganda, more acceptable than mindlessly regurgitating cnn or whatever, it's mostly just down to me having read the liberal side so often I got tired of it, with the CCP side there's at least ideologically interesting content there, it's just mixed with( post )empire nationalism, Chinese exceptioalism and whatever. So obviously a nation state obsessed with whatever the CCP is obsessed with is bad, but it's trapped in the same destructive system as a country that other countries make their ideolical foundation. All of them are bad, which makes ranking them just sort of stupid unless you are trying to honestly understand the differences or relationships off these countries.

Also systems and people change over time so pinning a people down for the systematic destruction they cause is a difficult thing to do both practically and ideologically, looking at denazification and errinerungskultur, of post ww2 Germany shows this fairly obviously.

Every people will have an uncomfortable time and a difficult discussion about their commited destruction at some point I hope, especially I Believe the West owes this debt to the global south, but there are countless instances of this debt around the world, weather it's Armenians, Palestinians, Roma, Tibet, Bosnia, Uighur, Natives of the Americas, Religious minorities... but it's hard to force this realization.

TLDR: Yeah everyone in the West has eaten tons of anti China bullshit,

China Bad. China hates brown people

Is obviously too reductive for what is a very complicated and deeply connected world, even taking the UNs stance and looking at it gives us just a single additional data point, because while it is a conceptually deeply radical organization, it also has it's own biases. This is true for almost everything you can think of because everything is touched by politics in some way.

Generally trying to learn more philosophy has helped put a lot of this chaos of ideology into perspective. So read or watch something about that, and let new or foreign things in to the point where you feel an understanding about wether you can accept (parts) of it or discard (parts) of it. Thank you for the reply and if you're as terminally online as me I can certainly collect a few YouTube channels I'd recommend.

No because assets and their place in capitalist enterprise represent control. I.e. an owner has fundamental rights to use workers according to the owners needs, and the owner also has the option to advertise and otherwise facitate propagand and take part in political process, including lobbying and corruption to affect circumstances outside of their direct control for example customer demand and government regulation, all of this control is proportional to the absolute wealth of that person family or group.

Obviously this is not to say the owners are in full control of all of their workers and assets individually, it's just that they decide the system that all workers must use and this has an obvious effect on the things these workers do.

So the useful metric is certainly not pollution per $/person but one that is proportional in some way to the total wealth.

Sure this control can be mutually beneficial for the owner and the society at large, but it's pretty clear now that with fossil enterprise especially, this is not the case, control gained from extracting an unfortunate life necessity from the ground, a resource that is set to destroy life on the planet as we know it, should not be able to be used for anything but to replace itself as quickly as possible, the tactic for the last 50 years from these owners was the opposite.

First off

and you better believe that the comments going against their narrative are getting deleted on their instance

Is just a baseless accusation at this point.

Secondly if

Users from instances like hexbear, lemmygrad, exploding heads etc. seem to have some things in common: -Brigading -Trolling -Spreading misinformation/lies about genocides, wars, etc. -Demanding to be heard because of free speech and "tolerance" -When they face resistance, they get aggressive

were reported so often it'd be untenable the admins here would probably be more up in arms about it. Seeing as they are seeking open discussion about this issue, I'd defer to them in the assessment that the issue with comments of this kind is with individuals and not one of the instance.

Generally Propaganda is pretty much everywhere and everyone also is regurgitating some version of it, you or other liberal users will spew liberal propaganda, leftist will spew leftist propaganda, the Russian state spews Kremlin Propaganda, conservative Christians will spew conservative propaganda. You have it quite right in how that process happens.

But firstly, you me and everyone, can learn to recognize types of propaganda, and decide which propaganda to accept, and which to reject. Many people here are probably quite adept at this already, but I think the ones that look at the hexbar front page and see a united front of foreign propaganda have likely accepted a certain type of liberal propaganda, and reject much everything else as propaganda, and as such are not properly equipped for a more honest understanding about what the users there are saying.

To that point, I'm obviously spewing leftist propaganda by defending hexbear, but my argument can still be good, and you should be able to accept or reject it despite your biases, by trying to understand it.

And secondly ( and this is roughly following the admins thoughts as well ) liberalism it's propaganda and followers are very common and in my view extremely destructive, sure not as destructive as conservatism or fascism would likely be, but definitely destructive enough to reject it in favor of leftist(communist, anarchist, socialist) ideology instead.

The large majority of (newer) lemmy users likely grew up under liberalism and so surrounded by it's propaganda to accept it at least partially. This includes me, but throughout my life I've learned to reject a lot of liberal propaganda and accept different propaganda instead, because even though liberalism is so common it tends to explain and predict things less accurately and less completely, than socialist or anarchist theory does at least as far as I can see.

No I'm describing the world and how I understand Political progress. Protests, strikes, riots, civil war, terrorism, assassinations, police and military violence and war can all be used, and are primarily used to further political goals. Politics is, viewed from some perspectives at least, the struggle about who can use what kind of violence for what reason. Specific to the landlord example, the police will use violence to enforce the landlords property rights through eviction, sure there is a system that justifies that violence, it is still violence.

Looking at what Abes assassination did to political development in Japan. especially toward Abe and the Unification church seems to provide good reason to assume terrorism to be pretty effective at the moment. ISIS, black Panthers, the end of the British Raj, the existence of the country of Turkey its all violent power struggle for political goals all the way down. If you are a freedom fighter or revolutionary or a terrorist is literally just a matter of perspective.

I'm just trying to get you to realize that Violence is used by all political sides and that their own justifications for it are never perfect. You might find yourself supporting violence by the(your) state and violence from other groups on different issues, both are violence nonetheless. I generally agree executions for achieving political goals shouldn't be needed, at the same time they do happen regardless, and you can separate good political goals from bad ones, and welcome the executions that further your political goals, without endorsing executions generally.

Yes violence can be both successful and unsuccessful but to begin with the state likely used violence against violent supporters of bad drug policy and bigoted marriage laws, or alternatively against covid deniers and what not. On the other hand people did riot for weed and gayness 50 or so years ago and continually violently defended themselves in their continued (political) existence for these years. Political change, even if the laws change relatively non violently at the end, needs violence or at least the threat of violence to come about.

Every single laundry rack I've owned so far I have found on the curb on my street. Three different places every single time in the first few months of living there. By now I think I'd feel bad actually buying one of those things.

The idea is that air exchange mostly happens through a heat exchanger, so the air leaving the house warms up the air that is entering the house, for this to actually work all other parts of the place need to be airtight, because otherwise your heat escapes.

To put this into perspective. Wikipedia text only is under 100gb uncompressed.

For this question it's important to understand that there are positive and negative rights, a positive right might give you the ability to do something like shoot a gun, a negative right might be a right that forbids killing you, both are very important and are often in conflict with one another.

Knowing this a 40h work week and paid vacation of 5 weeks is a negative right forbidding your employer from exploiting you for more than that time. On the other hand social security and similar things are positive rights allowing you access to resources where otherwise you wouldn't have any/enough.

Keeping this in mind and assuming that economic rights are generally the most important for freedom under a capitalist system, because fundamentally almost every positive right you want to use also requires you to have money. And assuming freedom is greater if more people are reasonably free than if few people are completely free.

wealth Gini

Europe I'd say.

This culture/philosophy has been created over time and is called liberalism, it follows follows from the reformation (of the church) and feeds off support from capitalists(and political allies) themselves. This culture that upholds hard work as virtuous and discourages compassion is being taught to almost everyone even though it doesn't mesh with the real world all that well. Especially what is commonly believed to be the result of hard work is more often than not inheritance or sheer luck.

Yes we all propagate this culture nowadays, but it isn't actually part of humanity(in some human nature way) it's just very ingrained propaganda.Some mainland Chinese people might have a very different ingrained culture regarding these things.

If you don't believe this instance is also spreading it's ideology I don't think you understand the word ideology, actually stating the express purpose of the instance is a very good faith way of doing that, as opposed to doing what every liberal org will do and spread it's ideology while pretending it to be just factual/just how the world works. Your Pepsi point, and the fact Pepsi would never do it like that, they'd likely just use accounts on some genpop instance, makes it pretty obvious that communities stating what they are doing at least have a chance to engage in good faith.