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
@stefan it's not much of a question since Fediverse DOES have ads right now, so yes, it can, as we can see with our own eyes 🙂
@hexaheximal Oh it is a social problem, but just block the bridge is the social solution.
The technical side is how that block would be put in place, but the decision to block is the social decision that you might decide to adopt if you care about this.
And it all goes back to the original social decision of putting content into a platform that is so focused on broadcasting content everywhere, including to bridges like this.
If you don't want content going to places like BlueSky, then your first question at social decision was to participate in a platform that would do just that sort of thing. Choosing to block the bridge is just the social decision to mitigate fallout from that first social decision of yours
@Rasta Well right.
Don't believe Elon or the politician. Or the Pentagon for that matter.
But that the pentagon doesn't take Elon to court over a supposed breach of contract against its own interests is a pretty noteworthy thing.
If the one supposedly with the most skin in the game isn't publicly complaining, well, that's really between them.
@wesselvalk No, not by design, and that's the point.
Bitcoin was designed to be agnostic as to the rewarding process per joule of energy. Tomorrow if people decided Bitcoin wasn't worth the energy and they stopped exchanging energy for the chance to get bitcoin, the network would react by lowering the difficulty level.
Because it wasn't designed with an increasingly less rewarding process per joule of energy.
That people have decided Bitcoin is worthwhile to exchange for energy doesn't mean bitcoin requires that energy. It just means bitcoin is valuable.
@mennodeij but that's not what's happening with Bitcoin, though, despite all of the breathless sensationalized stories written about it.
It's just factually not how Bitcoin works.
@Rasta you made a leap by going from the article's description of a politician claiming they could be possibly violating to flat out saying it was a violation.
We shouldn't trust these political hacks in the special interest committee in Congress to write the narrative that we accept.
If SpaceX is in violation of a Pentagon contract, that's really between the two of them, and the Pentagon should take SpaceX to court to settle it.
We should not believe politicians so uncritically, though, as they are likely just engaging in political stunts.
@dalfen again, there's a process to nullify all of the other processes, there's a process to skip all of the time limits if the chamber wants.
They police themselves.
I think a major factor in the state of #USPolitics comes down to a generational shift in mainstream conservative media around the passing of Rush Limbaugh, as the void he left was filled by new figures with a different attitude, one that wasn't so much full-throated promotion of conservatism itself but rather aggressive promotion of superficial fact that happened to be simply incorrect.
Whether one agrees with the conservative ideology or not, this has made a stark difference.
For example, the border compromise legislation weeks ago was sunk not by what was in the bill or by ideological disagreement, but by flat out misinformation about what the bill contained, as that information was emphatically promoted to the huge audiences that these outfits command.
I think if people understand that shift in #GOP rhetoric they can have a better understanding of the state of the world.
One really sad thing is that this change is even bad for #Democrats as it means there's less solid skepticism to weed out bad actors in that party as well.
Of course, this also points to the way #journalism dropped the ball and let that void remain empty to be filled by idiots.
@dalfen timelines can be waived as each chamber sets its own rules, including the rules for timelines, and the rules for changing the rules for timelines.
If enough members wanted the bill, they could get around the speaker with a discharge petition. If enough members didn't like the timeline around a discharge petition, they could get around the speaker with motions to change the timeline.
The only way any of that stands, the only way that the speaker gets his way, is if he has the general backing of the membership.
So, we elected these fools and we get the results of those elections.
@Daniel_Keppler I don't think it's going to be a great year for Dems but rather the continuation of a bad, what, decade? For Reps.
With both parties mired in mud, well that turns it into a bad time for us all.
I sure wish Dems had a decent candidate, but so far it's looking like they have a bench that is merely less awful, and only buy a hair.
Heck, even the missteps involved in the different prosecutions of Trump show that Democrats aren't exactly working with world-class figures. I'm afraid they're botching those prosecutions too.
@dbattistella where in the world did Republicans promise to end civil rights if you vote Republican?
@TheConversationUS but that description is kind of self -refuting.
It's not that a second Trump presidency is a danger to democracy but rather a product of democracy.
I mean, I don't think he can win, but if he does, it reflects what the people want. Yay democracy.
I agree that it's more to do with things other than Trump himself, but that's exactly why it is a product of democracy.
@Free_Press Oh come on.
It's Biden who botched the support for Ukraine for a year, refusing to give them the resources they needed even though it was authorized by Congress.
You can't blame Republicans for that, or Trump.
@dalfen keep in mind that the rules of the House allow for a bill to bypass the Speaker if it has strong support.
We really should push back against the stories about congressional leadership stopping bills when really it's up to the people we elect, the rank and file, who don't push the legislation forward but blame leadership instead.
@Daniel_Keppler Yeah but he's going to need a lot more than that to actually win the presidency, which is the whole problem.
It doesn't look like Trump can win it. Folks voting for Trump for Republican nominee might be handing the presidency to the Democrats.
@freemo a while back, maybe last year? I heard somebody propose that these days Republicans tend to err in magnitude while Democrats err in direction or sign.
Since then it's been very interesting to think about current events through that lens.
For example, off the top of my head, you could consider federal government deficit spending where Republicans have been talking as if it's the end of the world while Democrats have been talking as if it's actually a good thing.
So I don't think Democrats are following suit, but they are committing their own errors in ways that are orthogonal to the errors of Republicans.
To put it simplistically, it's almost like Democrats are doing a good job of a bad task while Republicans are doing a bad job of a good task.
I don't know which is worse, but I personally find the Republican side to be more frustrating.
@BeAware@social.beaware.live
You're overlooking that on BlueSky users have a lot more authority so that the federation between servers isn't nearly as important.
And that such an important difference between the two platforms, between the two approaches.
@TCatInReality again, that's not how the US government works.
If the people that we elect to Congress aren't interested in doing something, that's not an obstacle, that's just representative government representing a population as not being interested in moving.
And right, presidents frequently attempt to exceed their authority. We need more impeachments, and we need more presidents removed from power when they do that.
That doesn't mean Biden didn't exceed his authority. It means we are way too accepting of presidents doing that, and without repercussions they will continue to do it.
@SteveThompson I don't think it's a sneaky end run. It's more a case of overt reasoning that the jury conclusion was puzzling, and so shouldn't have final say.
Nothing sneaky about it.
@swanksalot Well it comes down to federal legislation, not something for the court itself to decide.
It's important to highlight that because we need to stop re-electing legislators who aren't legislating the way we would like.
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:
