volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@WeirdWriter well, there is the privacy issue.

Even though the guarantee is limited, the walled garden of Facebook can do much more to assure privacy of posts made to a private group on that platform than this platform can.

That's going to be a big deal to many.

@muiren what?

That's simply not true, and the continued success of appealing to very active civil rights law debunks that pretty sensational claim about the state of law.

What you're saying about the laws being overturned or mute is easily debunked by pointing out those laws being applied everywhere from prosecutions through, well, hell the high profile transgender case before the SCOTUS just recently was based on civil rights law! Pretty powerful for a mute law.

You shouldn't surrender, but you should realize that it sounds like you're being goaded into a fight against a strawman.

@violetmadder everyone knows?

I come across SO MANY people every day that believe the opposite, that this guy was doling out healthcare only to some people, which is why he deserved to die.

Sounds like maybe you're shielded from an all-too-common sentiment out there today, held by people who don't know how health insurance works.

@Hex

@pureacetone oh, no. People saw exactly who Harris was and rejected her, no need for leaking compromising materials.

Democrats nominated a rubbish candidate and so they lost.

There's no need to go into any deep conspiracy theories. She was simply not a good candidate.

@Fedi_Champ I just think it's funny that this is effectively an ad for Mastodon.

That I'm seeing on Mastodon.

That's saying Mastodon is great because there aren't ads.

Like this one.

@_elena

@dougiec3 what?

McConnell wasn't dictator of the Senate. He didn't get to appoint judges himself. That's not how the US government works.

The Senate Majority Leader answers to the entire chamber, following their lead, or they will override him if he defies them.

There's so much mythologizing out there about McConnell and he spent years or decades enjoying the benefits from it.

@muiren well right, because for better or worse in the US system the federal courts are expected to offer a large degree of deference to state law.

Those against the policy have to reach a high bar of showing that the policy is in actual violation of federal law. If they don't reach that bar, the SCOTUS has no authority to override the wants of the communities that passed the policies.

@pianoplant well one correction: it's not that every new client needs an initial peer, but that it needs to contact ANY initial peer.

Decentralization comes at a price. It has overhead and complexity. BUT, it also has some benefits that may or may not outweigh the costs for a particular application.

In your case, libp2p might be better than your signaling server if we worry that your server might go down. It might be better than your TURN server provider with global relays if we worry that the provider might close shop.

libp2p provides for higher levels of decentralization and less reliance on different potential points o failure.

But again, for your particular circumstance the efficiency tradeoff might simply not be worth it.

@possiblylinux127

@manton it may feel that way to you, but it might feel completely different to someone else. And in fact that's often the case.

That's why we need to be more concrete than just talking about how one person feels, because often enough that will be a setup to later feeling betrayed when someone else's feelings lead to them doing something unexpected.

When it comes to privacy in particular, we shouldn't go with feelings, we need to spell out the rules. Otherwise, you'll have people being surprised when what they felt was private ended up not being private.

@Cosmic okay and now you've gone back to talking about different things.

Control over capital doesn't have to be interpersonal. It's entirely possible to be a capitalist without any sort of interpersonal control being involved.

@MelMScow Well it's because children often fall into false understandings because they don't have the background to see that the world is more complicated than what they're being told.

It's easy to understand that the world is flat. It's a little more complicated if you start hearing about the long history of evidence saying otherwise.

@Cosmic If you really want to go that far, then the basic act of living day-to-day is managerialist.

When you manage the food going into your own mouth for lunch, I guess you're a managerialist then?

But such a broad definition doesn't seem useful. Such management of basic resources is just universal among living beings.

@Hex except, as much as that sort of story has been circulating, that's not what actually happened.

The CEO didn't provide healthcare. That's not how this system works. He was murdered, and a lot of people are cheering his murder for something he didn't do, which is as unjust as it could be.

He didn't commit those atrocities. Factually, that is not what happened. So here was an innocent man put to death over a sensationalized story that bears no connection with reality, that cannot bear a connection to reality, that anyone with any level of education about the real world would know to be a false story.

But here we are. The same old false stories being circulated by people who apparently don't know any better. Because I guess our education system and our media has utterly failed to inform the population.

And so an innocent man was put to death without due process.

@macbraughton What shit are you referring to?

@mekkaokereke No, what I end up asking is, who is in favor of more police brutality, over policing, and things like that?

Everybody is against that stuff.

Why don't we do it everywhere? Because it's not a simple issue. It's not like there's a light switch to flip to never have police brutality again. Instead, because police are human and humans are going to misbehave, we are forever stuck with it, and we can work to minimize it, but we can't get rid of it.

Why don't we get rid of police brutality everywhere? Because it's impossible. It's not an option on the table.

You list off cities where you say it has worked, but I don't know what you're talking about, having experience in some of those cities, it's definitely not worked.

It sounds like you are promoting this really unrealistic version of solutions that haven't gone the way you think they have.

@cdarwin No that's not correct. That's not how the US government operates.

For very important reasons, he does not answer to we the people. Maybe the most importantly is that the president has to be held accountable for the operation of his branch of government.

We won't be able to hold Trump accountable if we ignore that his employees answer to him, if we ignore that he is responsible for everything they do.

No, he doesn't answer to we the people. He answers to the president which is exactly why the president stands to be impeached if his branch misbehaves.

@realTuckFrumper this is so backwards.

The counseling of the EC votes is exactly the time that they should be putting forward election challenges. That's exactly how the system is designed to work. But the Democrats seem to have concluded that they should have challenged elections in every way except for the one way that matters.

The Democratic party is such a mess. They have really let the whole country down.

@danwentzel when you figure out how to make humans that are not greedy, let us know.

For now, humans are going to follow their incentives. They're going to do what makes them happy. They're going to value the things they like and pursue the things they want.

If you want to get greed out of our healthcare then you're going to have to figure out some new breed of human. Because until you do, healthcare is always going to involve greedy humans, and that's that.

@VeroniqueB99 If pizza was really really expensive to make this would make sense.

@kcarruthers but this is MSNBC basically promoting a conspiracy theory. It's unrealistic, it's out there, it's nutty. And honestly they play into Trump's hands by promoting it.

No, project 2025 is not the Bible they seem to think it is, and all this nonsense about authoritarianism and fascism just makes them look silly, and in the end, helped Trump win as people saw through it.