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
Well this is one of the better steamed hams spoofs
Is #SteamedHams a hashtag around here? Well it is now!
@stopgopfox@libretooth.gr
Not at all. Prosecute away. There's nothing to stop prosecutors from prosecuting democratically elected representatives.
It's a completely separate issue.
But it just has nothing to do with their being democratically elected, and it is dangerous territory to talk about overriding voters or undermining the democratic process because one would rather authorities bring down a hammer.
@Oldfartrant @stopgopfox@libretooth.gr
Of course it is, because people are still voting those members into office.
You can talk around that all you want but at the end of the day, unless you are saying the voting system is itself reporting inaccurate results, it's still democratic.
I don't think only guilty of some things but not additional things is the huge victory this headline makes it out to be.
Ha! Now that I glance over at my home feed (whatever they're called) I do see your post there since I believe I follow the hashtag of Mastodon.
You'll be glad to hear that!
I was just randomly scrolling through the federated feed on my instance, the little world logo that shows all of the content that this instance sees from the broadcasts from all of the other instances It knows about.
I have similar questions, and I sort of get the impression that it is almost like a social credit system where I will follow you and an exchange you will follow me and the whole point is to mutually boost our follower counts because that number makes us feel good?
Yeah I really don't get microblogging.
@stopgopfox@libretooth.gr
It is about the democratic process because they were democratically elected to the democratic institution.
You are welcome to want to use the state to punish them. But let's be clear that you're talking about applying authority that would subvert the democratic process that elected them.
That happens from time to time in history.
The results tend to be less than ideal.
Yeah this brings up one of the axes I like to grind that #Mastodon actively spreads content throughout the system even to people the author does not intend, relying on good faith to not display it. Users really need to know that this system does not do much to protect privacy securely.
Anyway, I would suggest that you go down the road of encryption. You can broadcast and encrypted message all throughout distributed systems even though only the intended readers will be able to decrypt it, with a good UI handling all of the technicalities of course.
That is, as long as you are okay with it being observable that the speaker has spoken.
I just really wish that sort of functionality had been built into #fediverse
@darlulittledeer@universeodon.com
Wow, that's quite the conspiracy theory they have there.
Whatever you linked here is showing up as not available.
@stopgopfox@libretooth.gr
Well it's about democracy.
You might not like these people, but they were elected by their constituents to be representatives in the democratic institution.
When you talk about a powerful nation being powerless in contrast to these democratic results, well it comes across as awfully authoritarian, maybe even fascist.
I'm sorry you don't like how the democratic process worked out, but to use rhetoric about the power of the state to oppose democracy? That's troubling.
Say I wanted to follow your content and you are posting both micro blog posts through one program and videos through another. I could use your certificate to follow you and know that both the microblogs and the videos are actually coming from the same identity even if they are coming from different instances.
It's not about proving who you are as a person.
It's about your being able to brand your content across platforms, if you want to put it like that.
We really need to push back on this story about the possibility of default. It's fear mongering plain and simple.
The Treasury brings in enough revenue to service its debts, and it is legally obligated to do so. There is no legal chance of a default regardless of what happens with the debt ceiling.
Politicians trying to hold up default as a threat are misleading the public, and we need to call them out on that.
@david @6al@misskey.social @tedcurran
Well it's up to each user. It's up to you. Do you want to see posts from people who aren't verified?
For some users they will say no, they only want to see content from verified people. Other people, myself included, will be interested in seeing even what unverified posters are posting.
One of the main benefits of this is empowering users, giving them more information and more control over their experiences on the platform.
You choose what you want to see. Not everyone has to be verified, and it's up to you whether you want to see only verified people or not.
Right, but the debt ceiling was already raised to cover those bills. They have been taken care of.
This is about finding ways to pay for new spending since Trump left office.
As for the 2017 tax reforms, according to the Treasury they brought in more tax revenue after the reforms, exactly as proponents of the reforms predicted.
@csgordon@zirk.us @gwaldby
Yeah, as I said, maybe in the morning I can pull up specific citations, but in the meantime, do you really doubt the concept of separate but equal branches of the government?
I would think that such a concept is very basic civics education with required to the US government.
And really that's all that's needed to support what I'm saying here. If you have separate but equal branches then that means the executive branch cannot be subservient to the legislative branch.
This is all part of the checks and balances involved in the US government design. To have the legislative branch authorize and the executive branch execute is a check to make sure that both sides are in agreement ask for any expenditure.
@csgordon@zirk.us @gwaldby
You seem to be saying that the executive branch must spend money that the legislative branch authorizes to be spent even if it doesn't exist.
You seem to be saying that Congress can order the executive branch to spend five trillion dollars even if the treasury will only take in two trillion dollars.
Congress is entirely able to pass a law saying such a thing.
And yet, by the design of the US government and simple mathematics the executive cannot be forced to do that whether that deficiency is based on chain of command or the mathematical impossibility.
It's pretty ridiculous to say otherwise.
@csgordon@zirk.us @gwaldby
Well with a post like this you are just talking stupid, pardon my French.
The legislative branch cannot legally obligate spending, and it absolutely can't lead to anything being spent. That's just the entirely wrong branch of government. It's just entirely wrong based on how the US government is set up to function.
But yes, a whole lot of politicians are lying about how it works, and you seem to be promoting those lies. Congratulations. You are being used as a tool of liars.
I'm using harsh words right now because this is a harsh situation.
Those liars need to be called out for misleading the public; their lies should not be promoted.
@csgordon@zirk.us @gwaldby
Congress has no ability to override the Constitution through statutory text. That's really the whole point.
To impose checks and balances between the different coequal branches of government, no branch is able to do something that is not allowed by the Constitution that sets the ground rules for the US government.
And so, the legislative branch cannot force the executive branch any more than the executive branch can force the legislative branch. They each have their role to play, and anytime one tries to violate their limits, the other is entirely right to recognize that overreach.
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:
