P03 Locke

The thing is, it’s not the fear of injury or death, it’s the fact that people have forgotten the idea of public engagement.

Like I said, gradients. If people have a fear of public engagement, they certainly can’t get far enough to get past the fear of injury or death.

Any ethos that includes the phrase “dictatorship of the proletariat” cannot possibly call itself only a “economic theory”. Reducing it to that kind of category alone is inherently dishonest.

Communism makes it so, in principle, you have no reason to overwork yourself, other than if you enjoy what you are doing.

“In principle” is doing all of the work in this sentence. In practice, communism is nothing more than a dictatorship, dressed in fancy idealism. We’ve seen this lesson repeated over and over and over and over again during the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

Communism doesn’t work. It will never work. It’s not realistic, and it doesn’t factor human nature and social instincts. At. All.

The fact that you think that’s sarcasm is troubling.

Name a social problem, and I will tell you how it’s definitely and sanely-proven to be caused by capitalism.

It doesn’t help when you have to share the planet with people who have the same power as you and are half as intelligent, who actually enjoy getting fucked by capitalism.

There are gradients to risk-aversion, and that’s certainly on the low end of the spectrum. But also, those same parents were the ones who were actively rebelling in the 90s or in the 60s and 70s, in some cases for very good causes that were worth risking injury or even a chance of getting shot.

We need those people, now more than ever. And despite it being a natural personality trait, risk-aversion is more pervasive than ever. We risk losing our freedoms to people with far more power than us, because we collectively decided that it’s too risk-averse to fight.

We are frogs boiling in water, unwilling to fix our situation, because there’s a risk of injury or death.

these articles

Article? This is just a shitty blog post.

I think that was sarcasm.

People often don’t care to understand how much work it is to run a Lemmy instance. And the cost. I have my own website and the knowledge/money to start an instance, but I’m certainly not going to actually do that and monopolize the rest of my free time.

Also, they still break the law and ask the question: “What the fuck are you going to do about it? Sue us?”

A terrible idea by the LGBT community to expand the definition, when they thought they already “won” the battle and wanted to expand their scope, completely ignoring how marginalized the trans community was at that point, and how much was still left to fight for LGB rights. People quickly objected and most threw away the dumb acronym.

If only people in your home network are allowed to register

Well, that’s one critical detail you didn’t specify. But, that still doesn’t account for the need for software updates, and hacking attempts. Also, why would anybody subscribe a community on a Lemmy instance with almost nobody on it?

In my opinion, every router on the world should have instances running (and tunneled to not dox themselves) so people are not dependent on big instances.

That would be a security and moderation nightmare. Moderating an instance is a tough job, and not everybody wants to take on that job.

This is why I hate ELI5 for a serious subject like this.

I have seen enough White Savior advocacy for a lifetime, that focuses on the wrong things.

If I had a dollar for the amount of shit opinions from shit blog sites on these technology forums, I would be a rich man.

“I searched Google to find ChatGPT, in order to ask it what time is it. The time is a continued sequence of existence and events that occurs in an apparently irreversible succession from the past, through the present, and into the future.”

And if they say “yes”, if they are blatant and transparent about their business model, that will somehow make it better? This idea of “putting sunshine on a problem” never actually solves anything. The problem company just comes back with “Yeah? So? What the fuck are you going to do about it?”

Why ask when you know the answer is yes?

If the product is free, you are the product. Even when it’s not free, you’re still the product because data is too valuable.

Why does the most reasonable and balanced take have the most downvotes?

This is absolutely the journalists’ fault. It doesn’t matter if its AI-generated or not.

“Tries” implied they failed. Is this provision still on the table?

That’s precisely what I was comparing it to. Transporting somebody in a car for 15 minutes is much different than providing housing, a bed, and a livable space for a week.