volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@wjmaggos Why don't you think Bluesky relays are supposed to be independent?

Seems to me that's the whole point.

@justinas It's complicated because there are both engineering and administrative sides to the question. There's the technology, but there's also enormous human factors.

Technologically, I'd say no, it's not resilient at all to mass bot accounts. In fact, the way the system is structured allows bots to impose serious resource costs on others. That's not a good thing.

In theory it's left to the humans to decide to do things like block instances that host bots, and then the humans running those instances have to figure out ways of keeping bots out if they so desire. The human factors side of the system punts the ball downhill without any solid solution.

I've always been a huge proponent of web of trust solutions to this kind of problem, but that just doesn't exist here.

So in the end I would say no, there is zero resilience against it here.

@salixsericea Yes! A little more freedom does include freely joining other workers, but that's the entire point, US labor regulations that are executed by agencies like the NLRB push the pendulum to the other side, not so much allowing free joining but instead imposing membership on workers whether they want it or not.

It would be great if US labor regulations did what you described with the free joining. Unfortunately, that's not how they work on the ground.

@salixsericea Well no it's the opposite.

These organizations have been hostile to workers, interfering in our ability to sell our labor, telling us when we can and can't work.

For once the hostility is a little bit mitigated. Just a little bit. But let's appreciate that.

Workers have a little more freedom right now to sell their labor. We shouldn't let that be spun against us.

@fortyseven Yeah but that's pretty much the standard for this administration.

Trump himself is so addled by dementia that he won't know, so the people around him devote their efforts into keeping him from screwing things up, not towards actually making anything look good.

@denisedwheeler.bsky.social

Keep in mind that, as far as I can tell, Trump was so damn stupid that his people showed him what Russia was asking for and for whatever goddamn reason he misunderstood and thought it was an actual deal.

As far as I can tell, Trump screwed up, and he really botched the whole negotiation process. Again. For like the 100th time. His brain has turned to mush, and everyone around him knows it so they try to exclude him as much as possible from everything substantial.

It doesn't seem to have been a peace deal at all, but Trump was too far gone to know what he was looking at.

This really needs to be called out.

@denisedwheeler.bsky.social

Good news! This administration is so incompetent that they don't even know who is going to be on the list, nor could they actually prosecute them successfully.

Seriously the way to counter Trump is not to promote them as some sort of competent evil conspiracy whatever. It's to point out how incompetent they are with everything they do.

Trump's supporters back him because they think he is competent in promoting their causes. He's not. The way to shake his cult following is to hammer down on how much he fails.

TOFU: Trump only fucks up.

@JazzyKindaFella That's a bizarre definition.

No, the common definition of democracy is a governmental system with strong recognition of popular opinions.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of this, and conflating the two really diminish both causes.

@maeve_bkk

It's important not to chop up the quote:
""I am concerned, as you said, that the combination of campaign finance laws and this court's decisions over the years"

To leave out the laws is to miss a really vital part of the position!

@RememberUsAlways

SCOTUS already pointed to the answer: early history of the US that helps us see the meaning of the Constitution as written.

The Federal Reserve has roots in the early history while contemporary agencies operate very differently from the Fed and have no real analog among the agencies created by those who set up the Constitution.

We could do more to make sure the operation of the Fed matches constitutional guardrails, but your question her has been addressed by the SCOTUS.

@RememberUsAlways I thought by now the general consensus was that Biden was so far gone by the end of his term that he became unqualified for the office.

He's not exactly a reputable source for thoughts at that point.

@RememberUsAlways the folks we elect to Congress are free to remove justices from the bench if they think the justices aren't doing their jobs well.

For better or worse Congress is happy with what they're doing.

So why would Congress vote to change anything? They're satisfied with the justice.

@thisismissem.social

We'll see if the approach stands, or if it's easily rejected as a cute prosecutorial stunt.

@ProgressivePower

But the US system was designed so that Congress couldn't create independent agencies. Congress must fall.

OR we can amend the Constitution to authorize them.

But when Congress is contradicted by the three branch federal system, the system wins.

@rootschange

That's not what Robert said, if you listen to even his entire phrase, much less his entire sentence.

He described Humphrey's as "a dried husk of whatever people used to think it was," saying that understanding of the ruling has dramatically changed over the years.

Adding in that context, he's saying the exact opposite of how you're framing it.

@Nonilex No really this is Jackson being honest about not understanding things 🙂

She really has not brought much to the Court, and often has to be educated on the spot about things that she really should have known already.