Yeah, just recently I rewatched Apocalypse Now. And I’ve never been to the U.S. or Vietnam. I agree, this is pretty much alive in cultural memory, not forgotten.

I … oh. Hey! Ow.

I agree that Hitler should have been assassinated. Therefore, I am as much of a hero as those who tried.

I asked myself, for a moment or two, what a “foil bomb” is. And why would the police do that to Gaga, or to a farm plot at her concert?

Such a FLOTUS. It’s all lies and empty promises, coated in idle boasting. What a fucking loser.

I believe we (as in, people) all have a responsibility to hold each other accountable. But we can also only do so much, and inserting yourself into a toxic community …

Me too, both. That we have responsibility for others and that we are not obliged to put ourselves at harms risk.

But this is a particularly shitty, maybe wicked problem. There are three groups: A bullies B, and C could stop A, but isn’t bothered by anyone. Now, is C obliged to pick a fight with A, or is B just in bad luck to be born as a B?

I think here, it is very easy to have strong opinions, while very hard to formulate a concise moral argument. Things get muddier/harder the more we factor reality in.

There always is. Everything in life is only temporary …

A debate between people who read the source and others who project preconceived narratives onto facts. Before this sadly popular meme, I thought the latter was a misdeed of climate “skeptics”. It’s quite painful to see how long-lived this meme is. It makes us look as bad and post-factual as the opposition. What do we do about this? Accept it as human nature? In consequence, stop blaming “skeptics”, and people who rather believe what they want and don’t look up, because we do exactly the same? I think we can and should do better, hence my effort here.

The core point people make and take away from this meme is “It’s not us, it’s them!”. Meaning, consumer emissions don’t matter, because corporate emissions are so much bigger.

And in exactly this core point, this meme is misleading. Because “our” emissions are included in “their” emissions (that’s what phase scope 3 is about). It’s like a child blaming their parents that they spend so much on food, while living off their purchases.

Probably, yes. Which means, this post is quite misleading.

Carbon majors is about fossil fuel producers. Drilling oil, mining coal. This is the first misleadioning: Big and popular companies like Apple are not covered. They also count whole national sectors as one producer, like “China (coal)”. Not what the average reader might think when reading “company”. Misleading.

Further, the report includes IIRC 3rd phase emissions. Meaning emissions caused by end consumers using the product. Meaning you burning coal to use electricity, or fuel to run your car.

That doesn’t mean these companies (producers, sectors) are guilt-free. But we should hate them for the right reasons, of which there are plenty.

Confirmed. At first I was confused about the comments. Good idea, an obvious opportunity!

I heard that early childhood (first weeks, months, maybe years) are vital for development of emotional intelligence. Neglect could lead to life-long struggles. So I’m happy to hear you favor the idea to stay and care. Good for you, you both, and all of us.

burning teslas owned by random people when it seems it would be easier to burn this fucking nazi asshole?

Because simply in practical terms, it’s the other way around. There’s a Tesla right next door, but only one Musk somewhere, probably not where you are. And mostly, one has personal bodyguards, while the others just sit on the road.

Offering a slight damper / correction:

This is about two things (design and ownership), which are correlated, but not identical.

Malicious design can be things like:

• Algorithms to keep people engaged
• UIs to confuse users (luring them to purchases, or making ‘cancel’ hard to access)
• Using intermediate currencies to make it harder to assert value
• …

Obviously, these patterns and practices can also be applied to a FOSS instance you own. There is less incentive to do so if the profit motive is removed - which makes a huge difference.

These design patterns are fundamentally about making user numbers go up. Attract more users, keep them on your platform longer, make them leave less. And a portion of user guidance mixed in. None of that is inherently evil, to some degree even desireable, and to some extent unavoidable to offer a functional service.

Some users may expect a feed like lemmy to browse indefinitely, since they find it inconvenient to have to click to go to the ‘next page’. And because they got used to this feature elsewhere. Others already see this as a dark pattern.

I just wanted to highlight how some of the malicious stuff may still be present in the fediverse, without any company involved. Here, we’re kind of in charge on both sides: Each is responsible for their own user agency (like controlling your online hours, or what sites you visit), and collectively to decide what user experience we want to shape (which might include controverse patterns).

I spent way too many words on this. Mostly I agree with you! And overall, users will encounter far less malicious patterns on FOSS.

[Edit: Formatting]

Same here. My max is about 5.5’’ and 160g. Otherwise I feel it’s too hard to carry and handle, or even just hold. I also want to be able to reach the opposing screen corner with my thumb.

Wouldn’t it be reasonable if another administration get in power and then need to purge all these positions of pro trump people?

Oh no! You have a great point for horror fans there.

I’d even say, it probably is somewhat necessary in order to resume administration. What a beautiful, postfactual dilemma:

The Reps fear an ideological, systemic witch hunt, which they use as an excuse to replace government workers. The new workers are ideologically aligned with the Reps, encouraged to assist the dismantling of non-Rep institutions and carry out the King’s will above and beyond the law.

Now when votes swing the other way, the new administration kind of has to revert some of this damage to assume functioning.

Which is where the circle closes; the prophecy fulfills itself. Now the Reps have evidence for their previously baseless claims. The whole system is locked in a back-and-forth mud wrestling of replacing workers based on ideology.

That really is a stark contrast. What do the apologetics say about this?

So is social media, and the openness of free societies to internal (the rich owning the media) and external (foreign adversaries) tampering. Spreading misinformation, eroding trust in institutions and truth itself, poisons like that.

Many democracies are crumbling this way. We yet have to find an effective antidote.

Regardless of the voting system, there still is a worryingly large portion of voters who were corrupted to serve other’s interests. And that is true to all (?) countries. That not just any two democracies fall first, but GB and US, kind of shows us that it could be anyone.

So while it is easy to look down on the fallen, or feel ashamed to be that - we’re helpless in this together. Hate to end like that.

There is so much in this direction. For a fraction of the budget, you could obliterate both the Russian army and economy, without losing any soldiers. What an opportunity, what a deal. Unless you’re owned by Russia, of course.

Oops, thanks. Meant Transnistria (to which the answer would be Putin, although I guess you would not have asked if I had not made that mistake). Sometimes, the letters in the middle of a word do seem to matter.

Very nice, exactly the signal The Free World needs now. Now, that the previous leader vanished in a puff of Kreml propaganda.

It’s now more than ever at stake wether Ukraine can fend off the invasion (the outcome of which is another signal to autocrats eyeing future invasions, for example Taiwan, Transnistria*). It’s a question.

One answer, one possible scenario is that each individual EU country feels overwhelmed to shoulder the additional burden. Or that the Union cannot muster enough support to replace the U.S. This scenario can be self-reinforcing. If it seems likely that the combined response would still be insufficient, a plausible outcome is everybody holding back, which already would favor the Russian aggression.

So this is why I want to highlight how much good news this is, because it’s exactly the opposite kind of example. Literally stepping up.

*) Transnistria: Edited thanks to a comment, original wrongly said ‘Tasmania’.