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
@magitweeter and what makes a renter a renter is the ability to have their claims on property enforced by the state as well.
It's an agreement. It's not a unilateral dictatorial declaration.
And again, you've never not rented a place because you didn't like the terms? A landlord can't force a renter to rent.
You're really out on a limb with this one.
@Frances_Larina or good writing.
Some people expect better from content producers, and some give them a pass.
@magitweeter have you ever not rented an apartment because the rent was too high?
I think most people have rejected rental agreements in their lives.
But none of that matters because none of it changes that the landlord gives up control in return for rental.
Again, I think it's striking how the original point about wealthy people hoarding has been narrowed to some point about a rental agreement, but even at that point, the rental agreement represents the landlord giving up control, the opposite of hoarding, even under the narrow terms that you are setting here.
Even if we accept the strikingly narrow definition of wealth that comes down too landlord-renter agreement, the landlord allowing a renter is doing the opposite of hoarding, the landlord is giving away wealth, even in that stretched framing.
@mildpeach I don't see that in the public record, though. I think you misread that.
@BlueWaveSurfer@universeodon.com
@magitweeter unless you're living in some kind of anarcho-capitalist hellscape, no, these legal agreements are subject to enforcement by law enforcement. Once the landlord gives up control in return for rent payment, it is not purely up to their free will whether they honor the legal agreements they made or not.
Yeah, it's not necessarily the case that the renter cares about fixing problems. And I am very much appreciative of diversity of values, where some renters won't particularly care. That's just a difference between my values and theirs.
But that still highlights the agency of the renter and the control given up by the landlord subject to the wishes of the renter.
It's not necessarily the case that the renter wants the agreement that I or you would want, but that's up to them. Because they have that control.
And if the landlord wants money then the landlord has to give up their control in exchange for that income.
@AlisonW the US already elected Trump.
The world didn't end.
All of those crying wolf were debunked.
Crying wolf now isn't particularly compelling.
@mildpeach what law was that?
@BlueWaveSurfer@universeodon.com
@mhjohnson I really always want to emphasize that the politicians and others have been lying to us for so long when they treat social security as something that is guaranteed.
If we can be honest about it and point out that social security is just another federal program that can be ended literally any day then maybe people would look into it more closely to make sure it is solvent.
So here's a chance for me to shout it out 🙂
Social security in the US is just another federal program with no guarantee that it will exist tomorrow. So push your representatives to have a solid plan for going forward with it, if you want it to go forward.
@Nazareno yep.
And that's why we need to be so worried about propaganda and getting solid information out to the whole world.
A whole lot of groups have incentives to set up these dominoes, and once they fall it could be bad.
We really need to push journalists to do better.
@Nazareno but it's not clear what the solution is to this.
It's hard to break through when propaganda has so infiltrated people who seek out bias confirmation.
@magitweeter keep in mind that the tenant is also imposing the terms of the rental agreement on the landlord.
The tenant demands everything from access through maintenance as per the rental agreement.
So it's funny to talk about the difference between selling the house versus renting when as a renter, the rental agreement gives me control over the landlord that I would not have if I had just outright bought the house.
If I buy my house then I am responsible for fixing all the things, and that's a trade-off that I might not be willing to make. So long as I continue to rent I can order the landlord to fix things as per the rental agreement.
So there's a difference, but it's a different set. Goes both ways. Both the landlord and the renter give up control upon the sale. That's not necessarily good for either of them, which is why we have rentals in the first place.
@resuna That's a shame because it seems like you had at least an interest in discussing this.
Really it comes down to whether you value voters or political parties as the core element of the political system.
If you really just want a third party for some reason, then sure, we can talk about ways to generate and safeguard a third party even though that is bad for voters under the US voting system, but we need to be clear about that being the goal.
My goal is to improve democracy and improve the representation for voters, and I don't care about whether there's a third party or not when that doesn't benefit voters.
If your goal is just to have a third party for some reason, fine. That's not my cause, but everyone has their own values.
Well I'm not disagreeing with you, but there is the dimension of the story that they are claiming to be decentralized to some level, and a fundamental part of decentralization is that things like moderation and reporting are also decentralized, so technically that shouldn't be a problem for them.
However, to your point, it might remain a PR issue for them that they might not know how to deal with, as none of us know how to deal with it. Even this platform doesn't really know how to do with it.
To put it a different way, technically, they are probably pretty prepared for the moderation issues because technically there's not that much of an issue in a decentralized system.
But PR wise, yeah I can imagine them having some real behind the scenes trouble dealing with the question.
@magitweeter Right, and when a landlord agrees to let a tenant live in his house he gives up control as per the rental agreement.
So this is exactly an illustration of how hoarding is undermined in our society. The landlord declines to hoard control as he gives up control to his tenant.
@trans_caracal I love that I asked whether you are informed, and your reply is basically leaning really hard into ignorance, proudly sharing that you don't know this background.
I don't know whether I am sorry or not that you haven't had that breadth of experience, but if you had more experience in this topic then you might have a different opinion.
Ignorance is bliss, as they say. Confirmation bias is warm and fluffy. The real world is more complicated and has sharp points.
I'd encourage you to expand your worldview, but you do you.
@MisuseCase Hey, you know what? There are more important things in the world than me.
No idea why you want to talk about me. I'm not that interesting.
@magitweeter as you said, the tenant gets the ability to accept the terms as written by the landlord or to refuse them.
The landlord doesn't have the ability to set terms for other people.
In this case, the other people have the ability to accept the terms or not.
At this point you are so far away from the topic of wealthy people hoarding. Now you're down to arguing about the details of contractual negotiations, and really, I think that shows just how tenuous the original argument was.
Yeah, wealthy people hoard things! How do you know? Because a tenant has the ability to accept the offer made by a landlord.
I think it's just really striking how far from the original argument you're going now.
Far from hoarding wealth, you're talking about whether a landlord is going to fix a dryer when it breaks.
@DrALJONES if the hospital is being used as a military base, as claimed, it's not a war crime to attack it.
This is a really important point to discourage militaries from using places like hospitals as military installations, as that endangeres patients, as we are seeing right now.
It's not a deliberate war crime if the accusations are true.
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:
