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
@wjmaggos If you want to make that parallel, then you could equally make your own relay if you wanted to.
The difference is that in the BlueSky model you're not limited to a single relay subject to the censorship decisions of the relay owner. You can absolutely subscribe to multiple relays to make sure you're not under their thumb.
Under the ActivityPub model you are subject to the decisions of the instance owner.
@wdjorth when people say BlueSky is a corporation of any sort, it's akin to when people say Mastodon when they really mean Fediverse or ActivityPub.
What most people see as BlueSky is a distributed platform not owned by anyone and able to operate completely independently of any one owner, corporation or otherwise.
It's a system that is specifically developed to avoid such control.
You can set up your own BlueSky system today if you wanted to.
@Beachbum
@lexi You're not aware that good people get blocked too by bad people?
You think transphobic instance operators are happy to let trans supporters bring their content over?
It's two sides of the same sword. And honestly, I think it's the problematic people that are more likely to block the good content than the other way around, which means it's that much more of a problem that this platform supports censorship.
You may hope that you're going to be on the right side of the censorship. Unfortunately, that's probably not how that's going to work out.
@Beachbum BlueSky is not a corporation.
It's a project that frees people from having to deal with corporations or other centralized administrative setups.
BlueSky is fundamentally anti-corporate.
@wjmaggos except #ActivityPub DOESN'T give the people total say over what stories go viral.
We see so much consternation over instance owners censoring what people can see, and that's one of the huge criticisms of this platform that needs to be emphasized.
YES, people can shut down hashtags and links here, and I think that's problematic.
We can't address it by denying that it exists, though.
#Bluesky doesn't just retain that resistance to being shut down. With its relays it does a better job of having the features you're promoting here.
BlueSky comes much closer to giving the people total control over what stories go viral. #Fediverse falls short, empowering instances over people.
@wjmaggos except #ActivityPub DOESN'T give the people total say over what stories go viral.
We see so much consternation over instance owners censoring what people can see, and that's one of the huge criticisms of this platform that needs to be emphasized.
YES, people can shut down hashtags and links here, and I think that's problematic.
We can't address it by denying that it exists, though.
#Bluesky doesn't just retain that resistance to being shut down. With its relays it does a better job of having the features you're promoting here.
BlueSky comes much closer to giving the people total control over what stories go viral. #Fediverse falls short, empowering instances over people.
@NMBA Indeed!
After the past decade or so, he probably deserves a vacation.
@justpassingthrough what?
The issuance of pardons is a lawful authority granted to the president. This isn't lawless; it's abiding by the law.
It's not anti-Constitution; it's implementing a role spelled out specifically BY the Constitution.
@DRPNL wrong branch of government, really.
This speech needs to be given to lawmakers, not the one bound by oath to implement their laws.
@NMBA it's so funny to see people equating neutrality with fascism.
It really undermines that term to see supposedly powerful people declining to impose on the population.
@thetruthaddict that's not what your citation said.
That's a weird projection for you to be putting on it, though. Have you considered that maybe that says something about yourself?
Why would you be projecting this America second meaning onto something that wasn't? It really reflects your own perspective, since it's not the one they offered.
@thetruthaddict What in the world are you talking about?
Notice that I didn't even say anything about them, much less anything positive.
I did, however, question your reasoning. And after you responded that way, maybe it's more of a reading comprehension issue that you have? Not sure.
Of course, I care as little about that as I do about them.
@solarbird No, that's factually not what the order says OR how it might be applied.
I'd encourage everyone to go read the order directly. It's not that long, and it's much different from so many of these hot takes.
@manton lashing out in general is counterproductive.
Build up, don't try to tear down. That only throws fuel on the problem.
@Asafum that wasn't the Republican key witness...
If you kept up with it, there were so many other witnesses and so much more evidence brought to light about the scandal.
@toussaint Oh no, a TON of people in America were hugely supportive and celebratory about the #SCOTUS ruling.
Unfortunately, the Court didn't understand the technology, so it came to a ruling that was wrong on fact. But I suppose this was a more democratic ruling since so many Americans are just as confused as to how technology works.
Not to mention, the democratic process passed the law on a bipartisan basis.
The Court deferred to the people in this case. It shouldn't have, but let's not blame that on conspiracy theories.
@toussaint Oh no, a TON of people in America were hugely supportive and celebratory about the #SCOTUS ruling.
Unfortunately, the Court didn't understand the technology, so it came to a ruling that was wrong on fact. But I suppose this was a more democratic ruling since so many Americans are just as confused as to how technology works.
Not to mention, the democratic process passed the law on a bipartisan basis.
The Court deferred to the people in this case. It shouldn't have, but let's not blame that on conspiracy theories.
@toussaint Oh no, a TON of people in America were hugely supportive and celebratory about the #SCOTUS ruling.
Unfortunately, the Court didn't understand the technology, so it came to a ruling that was wrong on fact. But I suppose this was a more democratic ruling since so many Americans are just as confused as to how technology works.
Not to mention, the democratic process passed the law on a bipartisan basis.
The Court deferred to the people in this case. It shouldn't have, but let's not blame that on conspiracy theories.
@PaulWermer election misdeeds can't be categorized as official acts as they wouldn't be authorized by law.
This was core to the Supreme Court ruling that so many miss.
@TCatInReality oh no, seems to me they're rejecting the magical sources, perhaps by recognizing the realities of real people responding to tax policies.
Magically the money will keep pouring in? No, in reality once you tap it out, there won't be more.
You can't slaughter the golden goose and expect to keep getting eggs.
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
