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
@rameshgupta I hold neither of those perspectives.
Thanks for asking, though. Better than just assuming.
Yes, you are wrong.
Or to be more accurate, you are misinformed because a whole lot of special interests are misinforming the public about what happened. A whole lot of people are spreading misinformation about what the ruling was about and what it said.
Which is just, very very sadly that happens every single day today.
No, that's not what the ruling said. At all. And the ruling went out of its way to try to head off that kind of misreporting, but the misreporting happened anyway.
@rberger Well right, that's how democracy works.
@darnell that is incorrect, though.
The question before the court is not whether Trump is banned from being on the ballot in every state, because that is not a federal question.
Every state manages its own elections. In the US elections are state processes.
US Politics
@matt never be sorry to post about politics. It's often the only way we can vent about how horrible things are.
As for #Haley vs #Trump I recently heard a primary voter saying that they were going to vote for Trump because there's no way Haley could win the primary.
...
I hope you see why this is relevant. This person was voting for the guy because he didn't think the alternative would get votes. It was the dumbest, most idiotic position I've heard, but I fear that a whole lot of #GOP primary voters are voting based on that same motivation.
So maybe the results aren't so confusing so long as you don't overestimate the American voter.
@secbox I feel this so much.
#Biden seems to like any particular respectable political philosophy, which in itself is very sad.
I can respect somebody who has a solid philosophy that I might disagree with, but Biden doesn't seem to have any philosophy at all, he just seems to be drifting in the wind, and that is not how a US president should function.
@scottjenson but then, I think Ted talks are generally worthless, so it's like, a forcing function toward mediocrity 🙂
I know, I know, just my opinion.
Give me unlimited lengths. If you have something to say, say it!
There comes a point when it's not so much misinterpretation as gaslighting.
If the meaning of public documents is so malleable then I guess we just should give up entirely. If we can't trust our own eyes to read what we read, then what's the point of even bothering with governmental transparency?
The rulings said what it said. People claiming that it said things that it clearly did not say should not be indulged. That sort of thing is really flat out antisocial.
@Hyolobrika Yes, if I had a switch that would censor all falsehoods that are harming society, I would censor that.
But such a thing doesn't exist, so the best I can do is go with the adage that the best solution to false speech is more speech, debunking the falsehoods.
@jpaskaruk The problem is that this story is a lot deeper than @rameshgupta described above.
The issue is that Willis and her prosecutor seem to have been lying to the court, to the judge, which is a cardinal sin. The professionals standing before the court are expected to be firstly honest with the court ahead of everything else.
And so in the face of the alleged breaking of their faith with the court and unprofessional behavior in these proceedings, the judge will have to think about how deep the misbehavior went, and in the end the entire office might be stricken from the case, which would entail bringing in an entire new team, which would involve starting from scratch, which would be a huge delay.
But let's be clear: Willis brought this on herself.
She should have known better than to open herself up to this sort of complaint, but she honestly just seems outright incompetent.
@Hyolobrika I mean, under different circumstances, where I had a switch that would turn off misinformation, I would flip the switch 🙂
@Nonilex I think a real takeaway from all of this is a lesson about the judicial branch's role in current events, that it's not like either of the other two branches which are better poised to act in a timely manner to address concerns people today are having.
The judicial branch is supposed to be one that takes its time and issues rulings that stretch out into the future, particularly when it comes to appellate decisions on fundamental matters of law.
In particular, when it comes to #Trump, this is why his team was so out of touch when they tried to put immediate election questions in front of courts. They went to the wrong branch of government with their concerns. Courts are not set up to deal with the sort of complaints that Trump had.
It is really key that the court will take its time to draft solid rulings without the pressure of time lines. That is its role in the US system. So this is functioning as it is supposed to, and we should not complain too much about it.
@lawyersgunsnmoney in the exchange that I think you're referring to the lawyer specifically did not answer yes your honor. The lawyer pushed back very hard against that position.
Yes, you're falling for conspiracy theories based on lies, and if you would look into it a bit more you would see that the claims are false, so you wouldn't be so quick to fall in for the conspiracy theories.
@freemo that has been the opposite of my experience.
Well I'm nobody. The best I can do is point to publicly available debunking information and point out how inaccurate journalism is these days.
In my experience every once in a while it will open somebody's eyes. For example, pointing out to a friend who is an expert in some field that reporters are reporting something they know to be wrong will sometimes make them realize that reporters are reporting false stuff in other fields as well.
I wish there was more I could do, but that's it.
@draftexcluder we can read the ruling for ourselves to see that those claims are wrong.
I wouldn't want to work to find explanations to justify claims that we can so easily debunk. Why not just accept what we can see for ourselves?
Ugh, #docker!
This doesn't help me feel any better with my long criticisms of the industry-wide move toward #containerization.
Versioning has always seemed to be especially problematic in those systems.
But mainly I'm half joking with this post. I know a person can't cling to the old solutions while the world moves on.
But you kids need to get [your containers] off my lawn! :)
@Hyolobrika Yes! And it has some really interesting ideas.
@erin My concern is false information spreading virally.
I'm sure the clinics can manage themselves, and they can manage themselves even better if they're not up against villagers with pitchforks who've been fed conspiracy theories.
We really need to push back against false information.
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:
