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
@hasani If you want to charge Tesla with false advertising, then great. But keep the false in false advertising.
If they falsely advertised a product that they weren't selling that just highlights that the customer bore responsibility to use the product that they did buy as per warnings and instructions, not treat it as if the false product was what they purchased.
I blame the drivers because at the end of the day, on the road, we need to emphatically put the responsibility on drivers to operate their vehicles safely. Anyone getting behind the wheel must bear responsibility for their decisions as they operate their multi-ton, high speed machines.
Tesla's product seems to have done exactly what it was sold as doing, including relying on drivers being prepared to take over at a moment's notice.
You can charge Tesla with false advertising, but it's ridiculous to go down this road of decrying a product as not doing something it wasn't supposed to do based on advertisements that you say were advertising something not being sold.
Yeah, let's blame the driver because at the end of the day they made bade decisions.
@tess Reminds me of the old joke, Yeah we lose money on every sale, but we make it up on volume!
Really, there's a bright lining to this: I look at my Roomba that's been churning away for, what, fifteen years now? With only a few trivial repairs, and that's impressive to me.
So I end up laughing that the quote should be, "We SOLD vacuums to half the population," and for better or worse the robots may not be in need of replacement.
I'm a huge fan of #iRobot but at some point mature means solved, and there's little point allocating more resources to a project that's done.
Those resources are needed to work on the next problem, and it doesn't seem like iRobot has much to contribute there.
@OkayKay@ottawa.place
I think it's one of those things that depends on what experience a person wants out of the platform, one of those minor ways in which a person can influence their interactions.
Personally, I think it's too much of a firehose around here to keep track of different people, so I don't look for personalities, but substance.
If an account is publishing interesting things, then it doesn't really matter to me who might be running the account. It's just a faceless account in the river of posts.
But if the posts are worthwhile or informative or thought provoking, I want to see more of that.
And if the stream posts uninteresting stuff later I un-follow.
But I know others want different things out of their time.
@TimWardCam well, it's mainly something politicians have to say when they have to say something but have nothing substantial to say.
@jpetazzo I've been watching the company--and occasionally owning stock in it--forever. I was and am a big fan.
And what you're saying is exactly the picture I get.
They broke on to the scene with some really clever innovations, some approaches to machine control, some algorithms, really interesting solutions to problems that go beyond simple product engineering.
But now the rest of the world caught up, and their areas of innovation are no longer the ones that really matter. And that lightening didn't strike twice--they didn't find a new way to tackle a new problem.
That doesn't take away from what they did.
One way to think of it by analogy is as if someone invents an amazing algorithm to operate computers with limited memory but a few years later the market is churning out RAM so cheaply that it becomes effectively limitless.
Still a brilliant solution, just to a problem that no longer looms.
@hasani but not as it was sold or as instructed.
A person overlooking their particular instructions as they try to emulate their own interpretation of some advertisement is, if anything, still their own bad decision, and not the product going off to kill them.
You left off the rest of the sentence, " for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities."
So their consideration here is not to speak generally and tackle all possible circumstances, but only the situation as they describe it.
That doesn't mean it's not precedent setting. Other similar situations would be expected to follow the same disposition.
By cutting the sentence in half and only looking at the first half, much less the following paragraph that lends further clarification, people are able to twist the meaning.
@MugsysRapSheet @philip_cardella@historians.social @TonyStark @axeshun
@CivilityFan the amount of time these justices spend citing precedent would suggest that precedent does, indeed, mean something.
They don't ignore precedent as meaningless. Quite the opposite. They spend a ton of time and ink addressing it because it has such meaning.
@MugsysRapSheet @philip_cardella@historians.social @TonyStark @axeshun
@hasani Tesla FSD didn't kill customers.
Customers misused FSD to their own detriment, against warnings not to use it that way.
I know the description of FSD killing customers is sexier and gets more clicks, but the facts matter sometimes.
@jikodesu one problem is that so many stories that scare us and get us so excited end up debunked by the actual investigations when they come out months after the fact.
But by then the narratives and conclusions have been set in concrete, so nobody goes back to revisit them.
Boeing in particular has been dealing with that, and it's not clear what any company PR department can do to ask the public to slow down, ignore the rushes to judgement of reporters, and wait for the real investigations to conclude.
@StephenRamirez@universeodon.com there's an awful lot that Eric Swalwell doesn't understand...
@MugsysRapSheet when I search the opinion, the phrase "specific to this one case" turns up no hits.
It's not in there.
@CivilityFan @philip_cardella@historians.social @TonyStark @axeshun
@lauren part of my point in saying that Trump voters are not monolithic and often have exact opposite viewpoints is to emphasize that they're not all cultists, and the non-cultists can be pealed off for the greater good.
But that peeling off is much more difficult if nobody's engaging with them due to buying into the stereotype of them all being the same, all in the same cult.
@CivilityFan if you read the ruling, it puts that line in context that suggests not the lack of precedent but rather the lack of generality.
Either way, no, they didn't "specifically qualify the ruling as not setting precedent" even if some might have read between lines to propose that meaning.
In other words, even if that's the correct interpretation--despite it being missing from the clear text of the opinion--it certainly wasn't specifically qualified. At best it was innuendo.
@MugsysRapSheet @philip_cardella@historians.social @TonyStark @axeshun
@mima some of that is pretty baked in, engineering choices made in the past that can't really be fixed with an update.
ActivityPub is fundamentally bound to instances, putting all of the power in the hands of instances instead of users.
So things like instance migration and moving posts and all require the cooperation of the instance that a person is leaving, which has little incentive to help out.
This instance focus is a criticism I have of ActivityPub, and there's just no real way to change it without building a whole different system.
volkris
boosted
@Bwee I don't know. For me Mastodon seems to gather the worst people in the world and I get a lot of anxiety.
I've been here for two weeks and I've never seen so much bs on any social media before.
Mastodon is for people who need to really show other people how good they are by posting, what they think, is humanist and social justice crap. That is of course my opinion.
I've never seen a place where people are more afraid to say what they really think about stuff.
I hope we can change that
You give them more credit than I would.
Heck, I was hearing MAGA types yesterday talking about how Swift's people would abandon *her* if she gets political, which says something about their understanding of that relationship.
@lauren
My experience with #Musk is more interesting than just he's a liar or he's a capitalist or most of the other stuff being thrown at him, and in a really important way:
Over years I watched interview after interview where some reporter or fan would press him to answer questions outside of his level of expertise, and he would tell them they'd need to ask an engineer, but they'd demand an answer from him until he sheepishly gave in and told them what they wanted to hear.
I think over time Musk largely decided it wasn't worth trying to resist and started playing along a lot more.
But this is something we see with many public figures. They become caricatures over time, becoming the thing the public wants them to be.
This isn't at all to let Musk off the hook for anything. But since I personally really don't care about Musk, the larger picture is more interesting.
@lauren C-suite? No, I'm a line worker.
And heck, right now we're all pretty annoyed with a particular fellow worker who's not doing his work and holding back the rest of us.
There's no generalization here. Only the realities of what win-win
associations require: mutual benefit.
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:
