Show newer

@skyblitz @_elena @Tutanota ‘liberty’ to take life is not automatically a protected liberty

Light boosted

Crazy that you need to video your entire life just to have an alibi and you still have to deal with weeks of police and court dates.

Light boosted

This one sparked a big debate on patreon, that concluded with the idea that their arms would actually be flapping wildly in the wind, making me wish I knew how to animate.

Bonus panel here: www.smbc-comics.com/comic/zod

Light boosted

On the day the EU Parliament passed Chat Control v1 through a procedural coup, I attended #DWebCamp, where activists across the political spectrum demonstrated how their peer-to-peer technologies could protect the universal human right to privacy with a form of end-to-end encryption that could survive any form of terrible regulation.

patrick-breyer.de/en/eu-parlia

@HeavenlyPossum Do you have a source? That does sound pretty insane.

Light boosted

Some of them wanted to go further. Alexander Hamilton, whose reputation was completely white-washed by that musical so beloved of liberals, advocated for life-tenure for Senators and the president. He believed this was necessary to ensure that wealthy elites, the only people capable of ruling, would be completely insulated from democratic demands from the public. He wanted, in short, to recreate the British monarchy and House of Lords on a republican basis.

It’s hard to overstate how much these people absolutely loathed the poor—not just the women whom they excluded from power or the Black people they enslaved or the indigenous Americans whom they murders and robbed, but also poor white men. The poor were lazy; they were stupid; they were greedy; they were wasteful. Above all else, they had to be kept from power, because if the poor exercised power, they would immediately take everything from the rich.

11/

Show thread
Light boosted

Article I, Section 8 of the US constitution is quite explicit about why the document exists at all:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…”

Most people probably skim right over that part today, if they bother to dig through it at all, but that line is the constitution’s entire reason for existing. Washington, Madison, Adams, Hamilton, and the rest desired a central government powerful enough to suppress the American public and extract taxes and debt payments from that public.

10/

Show thread
Light boosted

Player Run Minecraft Servers are “Piracy”, ESA Says

As next generation consoles go digital only, the ESA is arguing that player run servers are "piracy".

freezenet.ca/player-run-minecr

#Copyright #News #California #CallOfDuty #ESA #Minecraft #piracy #server

Light boosted

Shays’ brief revolt was not successful and Shays himself had to flee into hiding for a time, but the revolt had a major impact on the thinking of American elites. The public was opposed to paying debts or taxes to finance those elites, and it had created governments to empower the public to erase debts. Where governments were more favorable to creditors, the public staged revolts. This was intolerable.

Even worse, the governing charter of the new US republic, the Articles of Confederation, created a weak central government that struggled to raise money to finance its operations. The central government, for example, failed to raise an army to confront Shays’ Rebellion; the rebels were ultimately suppressed by a local Massachusetts army that was *privately funded* by wealthy elites in that state.

7/

Show thread
Light boosted

On top of this, recall those promissory notes the Continental Congress had issued to soldiers in lieu of pay. Without any money, those soldiers often sold those promissory notes to wealthy speculators who paid pennies on the dollar. When the war ended, those speculators demanded the US government pay them the full face value—including interest—netting them enormous profits.

Former soldiers lost twice, first by having to accept a fraction of the pay owed to them and second by being taxed to finance interest payments to wealthy speculators.

5/

Show thread
Light boosted
Light boosted
Light boosted

@piglet
I wouldn't fall for that, I think. I would say to the leading-up questions that it depends on the consequences, and when it got to the point where they ask whether I am in favour of national service then I would simply say 'no'.
@JamesBaker

@JamesBaker
Did they ask whether we wanted it at all in a different question?
Do you have a link to the survey?

Light boosted

@JamesBaker I’m intrigued to know what they think “making them more visible online” would entail. Are they planning to force (mostly non-UK) search engines and social media apps to adjust their algorithms? Or are they going to make UK ISPs block “less trustworthy” sources altogether? Or, as usual, are they just completely failing to understand how the internet works?

Light boosted

The UK does authority in a deceptive manner. Do you want Government to control your information sources always, sometimes, or are you unsure? #UK #authority #control #stopkillingtheinternet

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.