Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)WN
Posts
2
Comments
125
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Kbin?

    Could Kbin be the UI for this use case? I currently keep the two worlds separate. But I wonder if I need a paradigm shift.

    The other problem for me is that I am way more open about my identity on Mastodon (and post accordingly) but not in Lemmy/KBin - same as I was on Insta/Twitter vs Reddit.

  • The point is not an overnight collapse. It’s gradual rot.

    Reddit (Twitter, Facebook…) all exist because they created a monopoly around their service. Reddit through their incompetence created a competitor. They will have to work so much harder to make their ends meet now that there are alternatives. Worse yet, the viability of Lemmy will spawn other efforts.

    Look at Twitter. Between Mastodon and Bluesky they are eroding. They have to beg advertisers to stick around. At the same time there is a bakers dozen of other efforts underway all creating a new landscape. Twitter was the king and now they are rapidly becoming one in a pool of microblogging services. They will wither.

    Reddit just popped it’s monopoly and will also fail.

  • Funny. That is the fallacy you’re commuting with capitalism. Oligarchy / widespread poverty is a feature of most systems we’ve invented so far. But for you that is deformation of capitalism and a feature only of socialism. Go figure. No true Scotsman for you either.

    And about France - who would have thought that world history and politics is complicated!? (Not Cato. If all you read is Cato bullshit, you get a very simplistic understanding of the world)

  • If they are stagnating it’s despite leaning TO THE RIGHT - and hard - over the past 20 years. There are very few truly socialist parties left in Europe and very few are in power. Definitely not recently in France. Their stagnation and exploding inequality is due to capitalism taking over.

    It’s like California - a poor mixture of hopeful socialism and neoliberal cynical Reaganism.

    To drive the point home Macron is quite a bit pro capitalism right wing politician. Not any other way. P

  • Sounds like your definition of “socialism” is (like Cato’s) “a state that is easy to criticise”. ACS did are some of the most socialist governments. They are clever about it for sure but that is why they are so inconvenient. Hell look as Norway socialising profits a from oil exploration to lift an entire nation out of poverty.

  • Do not take this as a personal attack but your perspective is naive. All around the world capitalists argue for libertarianism or other forms of state stepping back from regulating oligarchy. It’s a feature of capitalism to aim for oligarchy. At least in practice.

    Just like 20th century Soviet/Chinese/Cuban communism did not prevent oligarchs. Neither does the current crop of capitalism. They both - in practice- created easy path to oligarchy.

  • What a croc - never trust anything “left vs right” from the Cato institute. Cato has never seen a problem that capitalist billionaires could not solve and “communism” did not create.

    Either way - capitalism does not care to solve climate change because we allowed the capitalists to externalise the costs. If we prices climate damage into the cost of goods - sure capitalism could perhaps be less than evil. But of course capitalism breed oligarchs and oligarchy and thus markets were deformed to benefit the oligarchs (and socialise risks while privatising profits).

  • This. And of course one way to interpret “socialist” is the same way many fascist parties use “people’s” in their name now == “populist”

    Some socialism can be populism, fascism can wrap itself in populism at the beginning, but there is no relationship between populism and socialism. Not unless you believe government, like corporations, should only serve wealthy shareholders and nothing that serves the people is both populist and socialist.

    Case in point - look at the modern day US fascism distracting the plebes with juicy culture war while stealing from their plates and banks and dismantling the government.

  • See point 1 above. We simply do not know. But I would not expect it to be linear. Just that they gradually forget things from very early life as they form new stronger memories of events and skills.

  • This used to be my field before I quit academia. There are two answers both indicating towards - yes, babies remember:

    1. every time we (scientists) devise a new way to ask even younger kinds (infants) whether they understand one thing or another, or whether they remember, we find out that they do. The problem is how to communicate with a nonverbal infant, let alone a newborn.
    2. A lot of brain development happening in the first 6 years or so is killing a lot of neural connections and strengthening others.

    The leading theory (10 years ago, when I left the field, science can move fast) proposed that this may be why adults rarely remember things before age 3 - but young children have LOADS memories of before age 3 with accounts (anecdotes) of young children having memories of the prenatal phase (“when I was in mama’s belly …”) - I call these anecdotes because I know of of many parents with these anecdotes, but no study that actually looked into validity of these stories.

    The theory then simply argues that as the brain matures and kids learn all the new things they need to learn, they retire these very early memories - they simply forget. But they did have them.