rottingleaf @ rottingleaf @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

3,026

Joined

1 yr. ago

From the inside - yes, what I meant is that British society is often seen favorably from the outside.

And the comparison to Russia is maybe because this was one of the pictures imagined when thinking "how does a society look when fixed", and the Russian society sees itself as broken, that feels recent, but isn't.

And that picture still affects other societies.

He thought it was a two way relationship, he didn’t understand Russia viewed it as a one way relationship.

That's the problem with Russia's regime.

It's still people born in the USSR with the typical Soviet person's thinking - they say all the right things, but act differently eventually.

You can live alongside such a person for many years and think that their personality is real, but that's because USSR's society was created this way. It took ignorant peasants and workers and street food sellers and taught them professions requiring deeper understanding than they had, by direction, by order. That means those people just developed imitation skills of amazing quality.

Those looking like engineers and scientists can be found to covertly go to fortunetellers and be antivaxxers. Those looking like rock musicians can be found, like Kipelov, to be covertly USSR-nostalgic and conformist. Those looking like artists with some peaceful and humanist themes, like Makarevitch, can be later found in Israel living in a mansion in place of a burnt Arab village.

And so fucking on.

So, in case of Putin, they had that appearance of scary-scary mafia or smart-smart group of deep-state-secretly-serial-murderer-ex-intelligence-KGB-patriotic-brain types, but over time their inner essence too becomes visible, as they get old. And it was all a pretense too. It's all fake. They have killed many people, they do drugs trade, they torture people in prisons, they do everything for it to seem real, but without understanding. They just imitate the picture they saw in movies, books, gossip, of others doing it.

In fact they are a group of komsomol woodcutter team leaders or kolkhoz directors who got to a higher place than was ever intended for them. All they can is to voluntell a bunch of people to go cut trees. They have fewer and fewer people over years and they terribly mismanage the forest they have, but there are too many people and the forest is too big for them to notice. At the same time they are able to steal, which is enough for them.

They don't really understand what diplomacy means, or what war means, or what strategy is. They don't understand why their side of the deal should be fulfilled. They didn't conclude that many big deals in these 30 years.

If they did, then Trump's expectation would make perfect sense.

About appearances there's also that everybody has what you're describing in their stereotype of Britain (if not itself, then the Harry Potter universe at least), but feels that there's something "true", "real", "deep", "magical" about it.

It's the feeling that "yes, that's ghoulish, but maybe in the end that's for the better, how do we even know?".

A lot of cheap fantasy books in Russia in the 00s had that feeling too communicated, it's probably one of the things that prevented the Russian society from being alarmed about the regime we have now.

The worst propaganda tool in my opinion, because it makes a person look at mafia and think "it's mafia, but maybe I shouldn't judge it like mafia, what if they're secretly beneficial", or look at jihadist bandits and think the same, or look at a fascist dictatorship and think the same. And worst of all, because in such it exploits openness of mind, as opposed to most other propaganda.

I mean, when popular movies started getting stupid and neutered, someone should have realized that we're in the stage of bringing the interesting things from older movies to the real world.

Unfortunately they can block services in the Internet, and this federation will consist of Internet services that can be blocked. There's no need to go a level above that.

It's like in the olden days kings couldn't eavesdrop on everyone, so many people could conspire in secret against them. But with time recording devices, listening devices (including some very smart ones not requiring electricity), secret police organization methods emerged.

You can't say that an open federated system will help, just like you can't say that street gossip will help.

What we might need is a resilient multimodal communication system for revolutions of the future. Making weapons is now a bit more accessible than in 1917 or 1813 or ... , but the coordination of any kind of revolutionaries is less competitive against states than then.

With functionality including tracking cops and politicians.

So. We are sheeple after all. Because in supposedly free and democratic countries such mechanisms, which will kill freedom and democracy, are being erected with very good speed.

Also I think the ancap idea that everyone should own a bag of killer drones might seem more attractive.

That Ulysses' pact of people not carrying weapons and expecting the police to defend them, it naturally doesn't limit those who don't take it.

Like elites who use every weapon they can get their hands on to change the world.

The good part is that this thing being built now, it's unstable. It kills itself on the next stage. The solution will have to be found.

It's not anonymous, it in fact exchanges everything else from real currencies' good properties to be hard to control.

I've learned of one interesting pathway from ancap to socialism long ago, as you might have guessed, through Georgism, but more generally - every finite resource that can't be produced, like territory and laws of nature, shouldn't be owned and should be considered common property shared by communist means. What can be produced is private property without limitations.

Thus you can own guns, tanks, jets and air carriers, but you shouldn't be able to fully own territory and patents, because that eventually leads to legally reinforced monopoly.

I think there's a logical connection from that to what our future looks like and how it will have to be resolved. Unless we want a caste society.

It's not just that, it's also that psychopaths are the subset of people who'd do such things. How do you make them remove themselves?

90s were such a fruitful time for art, really.

Everything happening I've seen predicted in Star Wars EU, they are literally building the Empire the way it existed there (not this particular article, but the whole moment of history around us).

But somehow I don't feel too happy about owning trekkies.

He'll get servicemen killed. It won't be funny.

That's what we had with xulrunner. Unfortunately Mozilla dropped XUL and didn't offer a good replacement.

You could make any kind of browser with xulrunner.

Ladybird is nice, but has a long way to go.

I personally think just tracking today's Web is useless. It's dying. It's a system that went from conscious development to malicious growth of standards for the purpose of capturing the field.

There's a need of at least search, payments, hosting and CDN (and pooling in there, and paying for a resource and selling a resource) being integrated into the system for the new Web-like thing. So that siloed services solving these problems weren't needed. I'm thinking lately of a system with some kind of "resource market", where it's seamless to globally sell and buy storage and computing resources, and transparent routing to those resources, with the market itself reminiscent of MMORPG markets, like in EVE. With search and payments being uniform, so that your client would aggregate results of many automatically retrieved indexers from a pool, without dependence on a single search engine.

I dunno if this looks stupid. Just - paying for things with ads seems to have been a bad idea retrospectively.

At some point in time FF was a normal project. A good project even. It could be in theory forked as easily as INN, or LibreOffice, or Xorg (oops, never mind), or whatever else big and "classical". It was open to contributors, open in leadership. It was kinda anarchist.

Like a good FOSS project, they considered all the tinkery\hobbyist use cases, having xulrunner and XUL in general. Like a good FOSS project, they didn't treat what's now normal there as normal.

They had a sane UI. They supported the SeaMonkey project, because why be a jerk when you need not.

But then at some point they made a deal with Google. So that's a lesson - any deal works both ways.

For me dropping XUL was the first firm sign of FF's death, because they didn't replace it with anything as good. It almost felt as if the main technical merit of dropping XUL was inability to tinker with it, and XUL's problems with security and parallelism were used as excuses. They could have made an incompatible, but just as functional replacement, not just for my convenience, but for their own too.

So, IMHO, if FF hadn't died, they'd just split paths with the commercial web as far as a decade ago. Probably come up with something like what's Gemini project is doing now, except much more.

BTW, FF was a big enough browser to even affect de facto web standards, were it a good thing to use while ignoring Google's bullshit. Instead they decided to track the bullshit and make the FF itself crappier and "more like Chrome" to compete for Chrome users.

And that's good.

It's literally a political franchise.

Despite the stupidity of looks, to be honest - this looks from outside very US-American. Not like cowboy movies, not even like 30s, but like something written by Baum.

Yes, the issue is that those loud people are also distracting you from work.

It's not about remote vs office work, but working remotely all the time reminds particularly painfully about not having a SO or many friends. When working from office, covertly texting a good acquaintance 2-3 times a day kinda replaces that. When at home, you could do much more of that, or probably bunch together to work, but you don't. Just sit there, smell your socks, sip tea, get distracted for nothing good, and feel how your life passes into abyss. When in office, you at least have the stress of many loud people around to distract you from that.

The problem with the statement from the title is that a non-violent movement that big won't happen in many countries, or sometimes won't happen without turning violent. Both should be accounted for when talking about this.

I've been fed up with logic, common sense and such as opposed to stats at some point, because I was mostly reading ancap stuff and ancaps are a bit too detached in that direction.

But it's rightfully said often that throwing stats is just another kind of lies. Interpreting statistics is too complex, most people can't do that, common sense and logic are indeed more important.

Ah ... As someone with clearly different expectations (living in Russia) I'd say everything except being unable to march in lockstep and showing Coinbase ads was kinda fine, the big costume show in Russian parades doesn't really cause any feeling of reverence and such.

US military doesn't have to show anything big on parades, because it, ahem, has modern jets, nukes, air carriers in bigger numbers than some countries have infantry vehicles.

Probably a military ceremony should be organized better, but ... it's a theater anyway. A kind of that falling out of relevance, too.