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
@Sprite I don't know if it would be a HUGE leap forward, but it's a case of might as well.
AFAIK, ActivityPub allows arbitrary fields to be added to the Profile object, so sites might as well add some sort of adult/nonadult tag (maybe not 18+ as ages of majority differ internationally).
It would be as useful as alcohol sites putting up splash screens checking users' ages before they access the website: No, not trustworthy, but checks the box for legal compliance.
And yes, some users might want to have their interactions skewed toward older folks, again yes, not trustworthy, but it would help some.
@sflorg being on the site isn't supporting it, though.
It's using it.
And adding more good content for other users of the site, which is a good thing.
It's about building up instead of tearing down.
@antares but then, an awful lot of electricity is generated using oil and gas.
What in the world?
It's not up to Republicans as to whether there is constitutional democracy or not. That's not their call, fortunately.
Ha, I wouldn't use the word anticlimactic to describe season 1 :)
I guess it really is long enough now to talk about the ending without worrying about spoilers, but I'll stay spoiler free anyway and just say they sure ended it throwing giant bombs.
It was quite the climax, but not in a good way.
@watson@freeatlantis.com yeah Gaetz partnered with Democrats to remove McCarthy, and thanks to this stunt Democrats will probably take back control of the House.
Hope he's really happy with himself.
@freemo season 1 was so bad that between it and discovery and lower decks I just gave up.
I'm just out.
I'm not even interested in giving it another shot at this point. It was too much ridiculously horrible content that I'm just done with the whole franchise that was such an important part of my growing up.
There's a huge difference between suggesting that the child deserves the outcome vs deciding that maybe a slicktalking politician serving in an institution which has lost the confidence of the public might not actually deserve support for his programs.
The two are really incomparable.
Here's the voting roll. *8* Republicans voted for the motion to vacate, not 90, along with 208 Democrats who actually gave the extremists actual voice.
Without the Democrats' backing the extremists would have been rightly laughed off the stage.
This wasn't about saving McCarthy. He's fine either way. This is about whether those 208 Democrats should have worked with MAGA extremists to support their effort to shut down the House and make them a significant force going forward.
See how your own representative voted and judge them accordingly.
@manton the problem is that by magnifying the influence of the GOP extremists like this, the Democrats have set the stage for a speaker significantly worse for them than McCarthy.
Maybe Democrats expect to spin the situation in their political favor in the country, but they're really making it harder to get decent legislation going in the House.
McCarthy's removal was set in motion when he DID reach across the aisle instead of groveling to MAGA wingnuts.
Here's that fateful rollcall vote:
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023513?Page=2
The article misleads on the legalities when it says "state Republicans repeatedly drew maps so that just one of the state's seven congressional seats would be majority-Black"
According to court documents they had ignored race, and the courts ordered them to instead draw maps with racial components.
@andyp@mas.to
Well, it goes the other way in this case.
AL tried to use a map that DIDN'T engage in racial gerrymandering, and the courts said no, it had to gerrymander this district into being.
Policing speech is tricky business.
You say these things are useless, but the people with actual skin in the game disagree, finding that they have so much use that they're willing to spend that energy in exchange for them.
The amount of energy put into Bitcoin mining is a direct measure of the value of Bitcoin to the people trading that energy for the currency.
I get it that you personally don't value it. Great! It's not useful to you personally. Great! So don't spend energy to get any since it's not valuable to you.
But it IS valuable to so many other people, so valuable that it's worth spending a lot of energy on it.
@mnutty you're still misunderstanding the situation.
It's not that I'm blaming the minority party for GOP failure but rather recognizing a bipartisan coalition of 216 representatives who worked across the aisle to successfully shut down the chamber.
It was a success, not a failure.
They moved to shut down the House and they worked together to do it.
Yay.
Drat, still waiting on one!
People value mining.
The miners mine.
Just because you personally don't value mining, which is entirely fair, doesn't mean it's a scam.
I mean, I have no interest at all in the Super Bowl, but I'm not going to call Super Bowl tickets a scam just because I don't value the experience a person gets from them.
This whole storyline is based on people projecting their own personal preferences on others and crowing about results that they don't personally care for.
It's silly.
Right, so that's a matter of personal valuation.
For a person who values privacy highly, they should not use Bitcoin. But for a person who's not so interested in privacy, Bitcoin is fine.
These are matters of personal valuation, so the tradeoffs will or won't outweigh based on the individual's personal priorities.
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:
