Skip Navigation

Posts
15
Comments
1,649
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I’ve seen some mods power tripping just like good old Reddit.

    The difference is that when that happens on Reddit, you can't go anywhere else. On Lemmy, you can go to any other instance and do it better if you feel the mods elsewhere are bad.

  • I need to perform a magic trick to make my feed “better”. At least it’s not that addicting

    Lemmy's feed is intentionally (or I think it is intentional at least) worse in this aspect than Reddit's feed, in order to not be as addictive. Take that how you will.

  • Maybe what I see as red is actually what I see as blue to someone else.

    This is a very common interesting thought, but what I've started thinking is even more interesting is this related thought:

    Why does red look like it does, to you? I'm not concerned with how other people see red here, I'm just thinking about a single person (me or yourself, for instance). Why does red look like that? Why not differently? Something inside your eyes or your brain must be deciding that.

    You could say "oh it's because red is this and that wavelength" but what decides that exactly that wavelength looks like that (red)? There must be some physical process that at some point makes the qualia that is red - but how does it do that? The qualia that is red seems to be entirely arbitrary and decidedly not a physical thing. It is just a sensation, an experience, a qualia. But your eyes/brain somehow decides that ~650 nm wavelength translates to exactly that qualia. What decides that and how?

  • So what you meant to say is that you don't see a difference above 60 Hz. But other people definitely can tell the difference. Don't generalize on everyone based on your own experiences.

  • Do you think that the conversation around, e.g, python programming or wood turning techniques will vary so much that it warrants many specific flavors?

    I don't see why not. Human culture is like a fractal after all :P. At least I don't think we should discourage creating different places for the same topics, because different approaches is part of decentralization.

  • for the cases where the culture is more-or-less universal

    When is this ever true? The idea of a "universal culture" is exactly what I mean with this encouraging centralization. Even a specific community (subreddit) on a centralized service like Reddit will have a specific culture that is not in line with any "universal culture" (it's likely to be skewed towards whatever culture exists in western english-speaking countries, just to mention an example).

  • I personally am not a huge fan of this idea. Instances are at the end of the day communities of their own in a way. One community may want to discuss a topic in one way and another community may want to discuss it in another way. This seems to be a way to centralize all discussion around a topic in one community, but we should rather go for decentralized communities.

    But hey that's just my opinion, if others like it, go for it.

  • Hyperion Cantos. All 4 books are great, even if the 3rd and 4th are quite different. But it's a masterpiece. It's kind of like the LOTR for sci-fi if you ask me.

  • not everyone’s cup of tea

    What? These books are very popular and well-liked. What is this qualification trying to say?

  • Zoxide, dust, fd, rg, btm, tokei. So many newer Rust tools that are way better than the old stuff.

  • Interstellar is the first one that comes to mind.

  • But how do you know that the human brain is not just a super sophisticated next-thing predictor that by being super sophisticated manages to incorporate nuance and all that stuff to actually be intelligent? Not saying it is but still.

  • Them socks though

  • I mean... you can already kinda do that right? Raise your children to have similar values to you and they'll vote like you when they grow up. That happens constantly. There's just an 18 year latency to it. Obviously you lose the vote once they grow up to vote by themselves. I feel like you're making a bit of a strawman out of what I'm saying here. We clearly just disagree and that's okay.

  • The idea is that the parent represents the child. We don't trust children to make an informed vote, but we trust parents to make all kinds of choices for their children, including extremely personal choices. The current alternative is to not give children a vote at all. I think letting parents choose the vote for their child is better, and fits pretty well with all the rest that parents currently choose for their child. I also think it's better than simply letting children of all ages vote, since again, they probably won't be able to make an informed vote.

  • In that regard, they already have representation by their parents’ votes.

    But that vote only counts as much as one person, so it doesn't give any more representation to the child if you ask me. My whole point is that a parent should have outsized voting power because they represent two persons, not one (okay actually each parent would get 1.5 votes as the child's vote would be split on each parent but my point is the same).

  • Until they reach that point, it’s essentially their parents or guardians getting an extra vote.

    Honestly I've sometimes thought that parents ought to be able to vote for their kids. At least that gives some form of representation to children.

  • I know you're being sarcastic but if we actually look on the bright side, then tools like this could make indie games easier to produce. More and better indie games could in theory bring more competition to companies like EA and that could actually pressure them to make games cheaper.