flamingos-cant

  • 5 Posts
  • 39 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle











  • “ActivityPub’s API is how client applications interact with the data on a user’s main account server. It lets the user read data on the same or other servers, and it lets them create activities and other kinds of objects on that server that get shared (under the user’s control) with the rest of the world.”

    I can’t see how Apub’s C2S API can realistically be implemented. It’s fairly light on details and if I’m understanding it correctly the only standard way to get activity from the server is to pull from an actor’s inbox, which has to be an OrderedCollection of all the activity the actor has received (likes, notifications, posts, the lot). This shifts a lot of the work to clients which, apart from being being very classist, is very limiting for implementations.





  • I think being indifferent to the suffering you cause on those around you is a moral failing. You said yourself you aim to treat people how you want to be treated, do you not care if those around you inflict suffering on you? I don’t see how indifference to suffering can be universalised.

    Edit: didn’t see your edit before posting, I still don’t think you’ve justified why the unnecessary killing/causing suffering of a person and animal are different. Your argument seems very circular on this, killing humans and animals are different because they are different.








  • living things are in competition and killing is a matter of course. it is natural.

    And?

    i think a special case must be made against killings. among humans, there are many (distinct) arguments against killing. among the ones i’ve heard, the ones which would also apply to animals are not ones that i personally believe.

    What do you believe? From what I’ve been able to gather from your replies to me and others, you put hold the following two beliefs:

    1. That ‘human’ is a distinct category of being that makes us the only thing worthy of moral consideration;
    2. That the practice of killing animals is so widespread, so normalised, that it must be morally OK, because if it were wrong, we wouldn’t practice it so widely;

    I don’t think these are sound arguments.