volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@sevignes@mas.to @supernovae@universeodon.com
But that's exactly why I would want QT, because it's often not clear what interests us about a post we want to boost, and a QT lets us speak volumes by amplifying the interesting part.
The intentional lack of #QT in #Mastodon prevents us from giving context to help others see through our eyes the beauty and value in someone's post.
Last I heard they were a platform that was compatible with Fediverse but had actively turned off federation, walling themselves off.
My quick glance looks like they still have their wall up.
@J12t@social.coop
Well, keep in mind that the responsibility is on the Mastodon side of things to present a good user experience.
So long as Tumblr interacts with ActivityPub in a reasonable way, then it's up to Mastodon to also interact with ActivityPub to take it from there.
They don't directly interop.
It's kind of a "First, do no harm" situation.
If the House (ALL members of the House) is so bitterly divided that it can't even choose a Speaker to manage its functions, then it's kind of hard to see how it can produce legislation of any sort of quality.
An idea is that it's better not to act at all than to act badly.
So the House will stay gridlocked until its members decide that it's better to act than not to act.
One amazing thing is that so few reporters asked these questions during the actual race.
Considering the number of non-Black candidates they've put forward for that challenge, and the number of non-Black votes they're needing to get, this story seems to be cherrypicking to try to support a stereotype.
If you think I was belittling you, you misunderstood, and I'm happy to clear that up.
No I'm not belittling you. I'm just pointing out that this use of language is kind of funny, defining conservative in terms of conservative plus terms like fascist which have even less in terms of substantial meaning.
I assume you were expressing exactly what you wanted to. It's just the art of how you did it that's interesting.
It could be he simply thinks he's the best person the party has for the job.
Occam's Razor and all
@timbray I think the key, and the drum I keep beating because more people need to realize it, is:
#Mastodon, #Fediverse, and #ActivityPub were built on the assumption that you have no #privacy here.
Anything you post is available to the world, no matter what settings you might choose for the post, no matter if you try to delete content, etc. That's just how the system is designed for better or worse.
(And I think for worse)
People should not post on such a fundamentally public place and expect privacy. That they do is a really big deal to me, that they're not informed about how the system works in this regard.
But since they are posting so publicly, well, public is public.
When I clicked I got an unauthorized error message.
But they're different user interfaces to the same content, to the same universe.
That's what I'm trying to emphasize.
So you DO go to PeerTube to consume everything on the Fediverse, including those 2,000 word essays, even though you might or might not skip over them because the interface isn't very good at displaying them.
It's all the same content, so no particularly different corners.
We have different interfaces to empower different users to consumer all of that content in the ways they each prefer.
It's like, a book vs a book on tape: same content, just different interface because one person prefers to read the physical paper while another listens while driving.
@LumiKlovstad your comment is really funny to me as it takes some poorly defined terms and throws in a few more just for the fun of it.
It's simultaneously a bit circular and insubstantial, except for the mud it slings.
@jayrosen_nyu
That's the opposite of my take.
Again, as I said, their strategy might be for the best.
They just can't pose as if the House shutdown is a terrible thing that the Republicans are doing when they're aligning with the hardcore Republicans to vote against the appointment that would open it.
If keeping it closed is a good thing, then great, they should own it.
Except it's not just Republicans' mess since until a Speaker is chosen Democrats don't get to work on legislation either.
The lack of a speaker impacts all aspects of the House of Representatives, and at this point Democrats are complicit in any mess caused by their disinterest in resolving the vote.
They could have easily voted for McCarthy and gotten their chamber to work yesterday, but instead they effectively voted with hardliner Republicans against resolving the House's issues.
They voted to maintain their own mess.
If Democrats were really sad as they say they are about the lack of a Speaker delaying procedures in the House, then they could have easily either voted for McCarthy or simply abstained in voting against him to allow the election and get things going.
For better or worse, Democrats' votes are complicit in the delay of getting to work.
Again, maybe that's even for the best, but let's not let them get away with pretending they're not part of this process.
@victorwynne@ruby.social
Ha! Wow, that took a turn there at the end...
I hardly think a convenient way to directly attribute and build on content on the platform will so precipitate fire and brimstone.
There's an important detail to understand about #USPolitics : the Senate leaders don't have nearly the power we're told they do.
However, you can see the alignment of interests to promote that myth: the leader gets a feather in his cap while other senators get to duck responsibility for their (in)actions, blaming those pesky leaders.
Today's drama in the #House over #McCarthy strikes me as members of the lower chamber trying to glom onto their own version of that myth, just in a stupider way, as befitting a lower chamber.
Oh no, it would be a whole term with Republican dysfunction out front and center as a moderate Speaker is unable to wrangle the reps who both disagree with him AND are then personally insulted in how it went down.
Meanwhile, the House could get to work on a moderate course despite the ongoing Republican party dysfunction, which would only hurt the party in the next election cycle.
This is actually sounding like a better idea all the time...
What, he thinks elevating a moderate Republican above the wishes of ideologues in the party would solve party dysfunction?
Seems to me that would help them find that partner while leaving Republicans squabbling even harder. But it would at least reopen the House.
No.
See: checks and balances.
Intention to undermine other aspects/functions/pillars of government was a core part of the system.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
