This could not be any funnier. Please reddit, take legal control of the piracy subreddit, right as you take the experienced mod team out. I'm sure everything will go fantastic.
I've been hoping someone would create a lemmy browser extension similiar to this extension that exists for mastodon: https://github.com/lartsch/FediAct
The one for chrome might be a little buggy as it's an older version, but should update soon. I also recommend using it only on sites where you expect to see the links as it might slow down very big websites.
Do you have any plans to rally the community of r/piracy to come over as an act of rebellion, to raise down the former r/piracy subreddit in a flood of comments and bots in a show of protests - or tis the act done? Onward and upward from here, no looking back.
I think that's how some creators do get paid. Large enough channels will get some form of revenue sharing from YouTube. That's why when a video is demonetised the creators get very upset. As is when YT does some fuckery with their algorithms and their views plummet.
Mind, the rates keep getting worse, from what I hear. Hence more and more pateron and in-video promos, it's a better and more stable source of income.
I’m sure some do, but I also don’t hang out to watch “10 most fatal crashes (#2 will amaze you)” and “here’s a 10-minute SEO-optimized video to tell you something that would otherwise take 20 seconds to read” videos, which are probably typical “creators”.
Not to mention a majority of those channels are content/ad farms that probably deserve to die anyway. AKA you should block their ads or better yet avoid watching them entirely because they are leeching off the platform and hurting legitimate creators because those channels are run by companies who pump out highly produced videos faster than any legitimate creator could to rake in money from ads and sponsorships, their videos are also often filled with disinformation.
I’m talking about channels like TroomTroom, 5 minute crafts, etc. but there are also others out there centered around subjects outside of DIY.
The criteria for getting monetized really aren’t that big. They don’t have to be that large, and most small to medium sized channels will usually make more from direct sponsors and supporters. But also, those are the creators working on the thinnest margins, and they definitely feel the loss of the YouTube ad money.
But the bigger issue is that demonitized videos just don’t get promoted as heavily. The reduction in reach is a major blow to small and medium sized channels, as reach is how creators find new supporters, and it has an impact on future direct sponsorship potential. Plus if you have multiple videos demonitized, you can get your whole channel demonitized.
Edit: Autocorrect believes “deminitized” is a word.
I see a lot of people saying “but that’s how creators get paid”
And they’re not wrong. But they put themselves in this position when they uploaded their videos to servers owned by one of the worst corporations in the world, with massive privacy implications, and no alternatives.
I watch them on other platforms when they make it available.
I think you need 1000 subscribers to be able to monetize your videos. That’s not an issue for the well known youtubers but the vast majority of them don’t make a penny.
Also, you watching hours of ads makes few cents for the content creator. By donating one dollar directly they’ve already made more than they ever would from ads.
id actually love to see the breakdown of channels with content by subscriber count/youtube partnership status. I suspect a very large percentage will be non monetised. speaking from experience it either takes a shitload of work to get the ability to earn literally a few dollars or you somehow get lucky with a “viral” hit. even people in my niche the “big ones” make maybe a couple hundred bucks a year in ad revenue
Yeah, Nebula is an alternative that’s trying to grow. Think it’s creator owned too which is nice. I haven’t made the switch yet, but if I wanted to support creators directly I’d choose Nebula over YouTube. And if I could, I’d send money straight to them via Patreon or PayPal or other.
Creators are victims here too. For most of them YouTube was a very different place when they were beginning their careers on the platform.
Not that it changes your point, I just feel it’s important to keep in mind that the process of “Enshittification” sucks for everyone (well, except shareholders).
Eeeeh that’s wildly arguable. It costs marginally $0 for a creator to upload their content to some other platform besides (not instead of) Youtube. If they don’t, and then they complain that people don’t Monetize Them, to me it feels like they are trying to, in ethical terms, make bystanders feel guilty that they (creators) are whoring out in public.
Their content has better reach on Youtube, though. And has a better comment section which would be relevant to the video (which Oddysee has a problem with)
In my experience Odyssey has that too, even on unrelated videos, and they’re often liked for some reason. Atleast on Youtube you see those comments only on newest
Even with videos I enjoy from channels I really like, I block all ads … and if they have a 30 second spot in their video to plug some product or service, I fast forward it to skip their personalized ad spot.
I don’t want ads … if I want to give you money, I’ll give you money because I like you or the things you do or the things you make … not because of some dumb product that you think makes you look good.
If I like a channel or personality or artist or singer or someone just makes me laugh … I send a dollar, a fiver or even a ten depending on how good it was.
If everyone did that, no one who makes a video would care about ads.
Except they don’t. They get demonetization from literally breathing from Google who treats them like shit, so it’s best to donate to their patreons anyway.
The RIAA and MPAA are the driving force behind the copystrike behavior. I do think Alphabet has the resources and standing to resist and battle it in court, but that’s clearly not their business model. Alphabet is not invested in protecting content generators, only in what metrics they can sell to ad agencies.
It’s not a copyright problem. You get demonitized for saying “suicide” for example. They want an artificial happy place where no bad things happen and we can all have fun watching ads forever.
And not the usual “wrong opinion”. Some platforms demonetise you for the wrong opinion “hitler had the right idea” but youtube demonetises you for the wrong opinion “right to repair”
In the words of TomSka: “Ayy it’s Youtube. We’re going to demonetize and age restrict this video.” “WHY?!” “Ohoho we ain’t gonna tell you. But don’t do it again.”
That’s not even always the issue though - like recently Veritasium had an ancient video demonitized for mentioning that the subject of the video committed suicide, so now their most recent video is a censored re-upload of it. They include a new segment talking about the frustrating demonitization scheme Youtube has.
If they just had copyright owners use the DMCA process, creators could counterclaim illegitimate takedowns and Google would have no liability for leaving the content up as proscribed by the claim process.
They choose to do their far more aggressive alternate system instead. It's not out of any obligation or legal exposure.
Not even, though. Practically all the YouTube “creators” these days have [this part of the video is brought to you by scandanavian interwebz to keep out teh hax0rs] sponsored segments that are [Have you shaved your fuckin’ nutsack lately bro? Check out this ball hair trimmer from clipyerjunk dot com] littered throughout [zzzzzzzzzip … ^reecrootah ] their videos.
That being said, some of them at least put effort into finding and vetting content-relevant sponsors that can actually be helpful. I can kinda just barely tolerate those.
Memes like this, at least to me, mostly accomplish two things:
some people get to enjoy mocking a group of people that align with their values in more ways than they don’t.
some people feel dissuaded from doing anything.
We don’t know when small actions added up will make a difference or perhaps even lead to bigger actions. But I just don’t think, as a general rule, we should sit at our computers mocking those who spend their time doing something productive or at least attempting to make things a tiny bit better.
So in this case: help get Pikachu a firehouse. Or go find a squirtle to help. Perhaps you have a better solution on hand and you two can work together. Either way, pointing at him and mocking his attempts to be helpful, even if they maybe won’t solve the issue, just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
those who spend their time doing something productive or at least attempting to make things a tiny bit better.
Except what they do is only productive towards maintaining the status quo and enabling the oppressive systems that exploit us to continue chugging on regardless.
I would have enjoyed a conversation about this as I am generally in the "big problems need big, often radical solutions" camp and we'd probably agree on more than we'd disagree. But given the other comment I just am not convinced we can have a fruitful discussion so, as I said, have a good one man.
Refuses to engage with you when you try to interact on their terms, then goes ahead and tells a mod/owner to ban you 🤔
[Sarcasm] Sounds like some honest, good-faith behaviour to me! I'm glad the ComMagazine (/not-subreddit/whatever we're calling them) owner's on their side 'cause clearly you're some kinda rabble-rouser or something!
the picture is ofc just a meme. In reality (if we stick to the methaphor) there is a whole barrage of Hypnos’ (media conglomerates) behind Pikachu, telling everyone this is the best we can do to solve this situation, while a bunch of Machamps’ are tasked with blocking the path for the fire trucks (bourgeois democracies being designed in a way to prevent meaningful change) and beating up anyone who dares to try turn off the gas to the exploded pipeline (police and military protecting the exploitative economic base that accellerates all and is the cause for many of our problems)
So no, supporting or even accepting the machinery behind Pikachu is not making things better “little by little” but actually enabling things to stay as they are at the core.
there is a whole barrage of Hypnos’ (media conglomerates) behind Pikachu,
I get what you’re driving at and don’t entirely disagree but you’re also sort of implying most people trying solutions you don’t think will work (or know won’t work sometimes I imagine!) have no agency and are just mindless sheeple/puppets. I imagine this isn’t actually how you feel about other people who don’t fully align with you!
And we both know it’s never “just” a meme. Memes influence opinions, they often are a culture driver/reflection of culture and attitudes. It was posted to make a statement, so we should assess it critically.
First of all, thank you for reading in good faith and staying constructive (unfortunately that’s not a given -_-). Regarding the “just a meme”: I was getting at memes being limited in their expression of opinion, thus often lacking a lot of nuance. I agree that statements and positions should always be assessed with constructive criticism in case of inter-socialist discourse (so thank you for doing that).
Back to the subject: I don’t think that most progressively-inclined liberals are mindless drones. But that, thanks to capitalist (sur)realism (post-modernism being the most prevalent example) and manufactured consent, the actions of the majority remain limited and inside the scope that is deemed as “safe” by the exploiting elites (like “tax the rich” being a slogan that has lost any meaning of it’s original radicality). Ofc it makes a difference whether liberals or outright reactionaries are in power; my point, however, is that regardless of the paint job, the mask underneath remains the same. The reason why the constant critique of liberalism is so important imo, is that the energy/motivation of the progressive inclined populus going to waste there prevents (or at least hinders) the potential polarization/radicalization of those groups. Meaning that disillusioning the populus (instead of working together with the leaders of liberal movements) should be one of the primary goals for socialists of all stripes.
Tell me about it lol just had an discussion with someone that unfortunately soured pretty quickly despite my best efforts but it is what it is.
I was getting at memes being limited in their expression of opinion, thus often lacking a lot of nuance.
Ah that makes sense, I missed that entirely.
I feel you on a lot of what you're saying, but ultimately we are dealing with people and people don't like to be wrong, so we have to be more gentle than we'd like sometimes in the service of "buy-in." For example: in another thread there was a discussion about libertarians. Now among friends, I'm the first to throw out (tongue-in-cheek-ily I might add) "Libertarians are Republicans who like drugs" and other little quips. Probably shouldn't, but meh, I'm not perfect and it feels harmless enough. Now if I'm actually talking to someone who is a libertarian, my rhetoric shifts. This came up because someone in the thread was being pressing about firefighting and how libertarians (allegedly) all want it privatized, a line they hear all the time. Whether the person is right or wrong about the libertarian's position is honestly pretty immaterial. The goal should be discussion and understanding the libertarian's position then addressing what they believe in an effort to convince them maybe their stance is problematic or straight up incorrect (assuming that is sort of an agreed to conversation across the board, otherwise it just feels like a lecture). But you open up telling people what they believe then attacking those positions, you're basically just backsliding into strawman arguments.
So how is that relevant here? We should not walk up to people before they've even had a chance to talk about what they think and say "all your ideas are dumb and ineffective" with a meme that created a discussion without nuance. Not if we are trying to do something more than get like-minded people to nod along and piss off those who feel to be the subject. If we want them to do the things we think are effective, which is an achievable goal because ultimately we all want more or less the same things (stop climate change, fix income inequality, etc), then we have to abandon those kinds of tactics. Does that make sense?
To maybe pick up on you describing how you make the “Libertarians are Republicans who like drugs” joke: This is what I intended this community to be for. A place for socialists to joke among one another and maybe vent a bit through those memes. After all, reality can be quite harsh - even depressing - for those disillusioned with the “easy” solution provided by career politicians (at least in my experience).
If my goal was to spread Agitprop (read: Agitation + Propaganda), I’d have an entirely different rhetoric and would behave differently.
I might get to actually doing constructive Agitprop with the help of memes and social media in general once I am organized politically (as in start a work group to read up, maybe develop and then synthesize concepts for doing so). Unfortunately, due to (mental) health reasons, I haven’t been able to do that and probably won’t in the foreseeable future.
What I do in the meantime is reading up on theory and trying to keep up my revolutionary optimism and maybe help others with doing so as well… (My motivation in creating this batch of communities)
To maybe pick up on you describing how you make the “Libertarians are Republicans who like drugs” joke: This is what I intended this community to be for. A place for socialists to joke among one another and maybe vent a bit through those memes. After all, reality can be quite harsh - even depressing - for those disillusioned with the “easy” solution provided by career politicians (at least in my experience).
Honestly, I have no good response to that. I think it's unproductive but this space isn't really designed for productivity I guess, so yeah lol. I don't mean that in a loaded way. As you said, some folks just want to vent. Whether I agree or not, it's a reasonable way to feel, so do your thing! Appreciate the good discussion.
Not everything has to be productive, we don’t have to be full time revolurionaries 24/7 :p
Having, or even reading, conversations like these was a rarity on Reddit, but also the thing that brought me to the platform. So thanks to lemmy and you of course, liked this as well.
(am curious btw: do you ppl on kbin see PMs sent from lemmy?)
Also, while I saw the notification, I can’t read the other message you sent me but I’m assuming because I blocked the dude so it’s just hiding a whole chain from me. You probably made a decent point for why you should not boot the dude and if that’s the case, then totally understand! If I’m way off the mark my bad lol. I used to mod a relatively medium/large sub on Reddit and I’ve always felt I should’ve handed out bans like 10% more than I did. They were people who became incredibly disruptive and I allowed them to linger for too long causing chaos (or even get a rise out of me). That being said, we are not on Reddit, this is not my sub, and you are not me!
Appreciate that! I recently resigned as a mod on Reddit and I’m pretty focused on building up the truegaming community here but I am always happy to chat with you and help however I can!
That would imply that (liberal) reforms are a good way to solve our issues, but that is not the case. Of course posting memes is not praxis. But to say that reforms, especially liberal reforms who even fail to see capitalism as the root problem, are good because someone is at least doing something is just as wrong. This is not a new debate and none that needs to be had for the hundredth time. All this reform vs revolution talk has been plentifully discussed over a 100 years ago. Rosa Luxemburgs “Reform or revolution” makes the biggest points perfectly clear. Reforms can be a way to temporarily make things better (if done right, which is not the case with most liberal reforms), but we should not be kidding ourselfs by thinking that we can solve this systemic issue by making new laws. The powerful won’t just sit there and watch their power be handed over.
But to say that reforms, especially liberal reforms who even fail to see capitalism as the root problem, are good because someone is at least doing something is just as wrong.
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying do the work or put the effort into help sell people on and direct them to better action. Critique is easy, solutions are not, and this post doesn’t really propose solutions. It feels like red meat for people who want to go “liberal reforms are nonsense amirite?” - notice how most comments are functionally just nodding along or just giving this post the same dismissal in kind. Ridiculing well-intentioned people with a pikachu joke and then walking away is worse than inaction, frankly. If your goal is buy-in, I’m seeing quite the opposite, which is unfortunately a kind of post that is generally rewarded online. Yet I imagine we both want to see meaningful change!
Let me ask you this: why was this posted? What was the goal?
I do that with ppl who make right wing and/or troll “contributions”. A singular lapse of judgement or lashing out - between socialists - does not warrant more than a warning imo
Repeated toxic behaviour, however, will be handled differently
that is not what I said. If you want to constructively point out flaws in other peoples’ argumentation, feel free to do so. Friendly discourse in the comments is more than welcome!
It’s the insulting/ad hominem or using/painting caricatures that I cannot abide
The meme about liberals is also applying that same kind of logic, so I guess it’s all just petty insult flinging in the end. Proves hoodatninja right nicely.
–>since everyone is confused about this i’m gonna try to explain as best as i could and also clearing some misconceptions:
1# why this is such a big deal ?
if this gets implemented AND it gets widely adopted websites now can refuse to give you content if you are running a non complied browser, remember those website that say “oh you are using an ad blocker so disable it to access our site” they can detect this by various methods but ultimately all of them rely on running a JavaScript into your browser. which you guessed it, its easy to modify and tamper with manually or using extensions
now what WEI-API does is that it can verify the integrity of the web page ( JavaScript/HTML/CSS has not been modified ) and even tell the website what extensions - ad blocker detected no content for you - you are using and what browser you are using - firefox or brave detected no content for you - and do not be fooled into thinking that this can be spoofed. and website owners who think that they are running a business not a charity will implement this.
2#will using firefox save me?
if this gets widely adopted and you inevitably encounter a website that require this ( for your job ,school or your bank ) you have no choice but to use chrome just like when your banking apps refuse to work because your phone is rooted which means that SAFETY-NET is broken
3#why this is a threat to begin with?
this is only viable if the web adopt it so why bother?, well guess what google is famous for making its services very easy to integrate and well documented just look on how easy it is to integrate google analytics and google adsense* into websites and how many of them use it in the internet.
4#what can we do to prevent this?
this is my personal opinion but i think we simply can’t, this not like the reddit incident were very large portion of the user base was upset most people don’t know/care/give-a-fuck about web technologies and how they work.
#and Finally “but google said they don’t plan to use this to fingerprint you (Device ID) or track your browser history or interfere with the work of extensions”
do you really believe that a company like google whose bread and butter is advertising would not make it easier for themselves, a company who has been exposed time and time again for lying and having ulterior motives ( you don’t need to look far just look into what manifest-v3 did )
remember those website that say “oh you are using an ad blocker so disable it to access our site”
I can easily imagine this not being a necessary, anymore. Just let the website using this WEI API automatically disable all browser extensions on a WEI-enabled site. Why not, after all? Why should you dictate the traffic you receive on your computer? Why should you own anything?
I believe that part of the problem - at least in my case - is that typical person immediately sees 3-4 possible generic answers to such questions.
For me… It’s like opening Pandora Box and have the brain flooded with not just answers but long chains of interactions, where none leads to anything positive. A “simple” question is like like an abyss that’s gonna suck you down and exhaust you while you’re trying to escape it so much, that you feel like lying down and trying to remember that air is meant to be inhaled again after it’s exhaled…
There was this scene in the original Terminator movie, where the robot sees the spinning list of possible answers to “cat question”. For me, this list doesn’t stop. Even when the conversation is already finished, the list continues to spin.
Since I think no one will see my comment at the bottom of the OP im going to reply it here as I think it’s relevant to your content.
For me, in addition to this, more specifically it’s the energy to pull up that info and analyze how I am. Like I don’t know the answer to that question and that’s why it’s so annoying. Now I need to analyze my day, decide what parts mean what to me and weigh the average basically, and then decide if that’s appropriate to share/if the person really wants to hear the truth of that, then pull up my files of pre-prepared phrases for the question that fits most closely with the truth since not answering truthfully is close to impossible for me.
I’ll be honest, it really feels like you’re overanalyzing it. You really can just say you’re fine and go about your day. You don’t need to analyze your day or even know how you’re feeling at the moment.
There’s a couple different issues at hand here. There’s the social protocol being stupid and annoying part which is what I think you’re referring to. I don’t analyze my day like that with a stranger like a retail worker, or anyone at work. I know the social protocol. I just think it’s a dumb game and I don’t want to play.
Then there’s another aspect which I was thinking about when I wrote the above comment. I was thinking about how even with dear friends, even with my partner who truly want to know how I am, I personally get tired of the question. And maybe that’s unreasonable of me, and I know they mean it out of kindness and love. But it can feel formulaic, like ok are you just initiating a conversation and therefore don’t need the full answer or are you really truly asking? Because when I know someone cares about me and wants to know that’s when I feel like I need to run the above algorithm.
But chances are when people ask me how I am, honestly I’m probably dissociating right now in order to not be overcome by how exhausted and burnt out I am just trying to survive. So a. I don’t really know how I am most of the time unless im in the middle of an emotional experience. And b. I don’t really want to go and pull all those emotions up and relive them in order to analyze the words to summarize and describe them. That honestly makes me feel worse.
So what I wish I could figure out how to communicate to my loved ones is that I will tell you what I want you to know when it occurs to me to say it. And if you want to connect with me and talk to me, why don’t you just tell me what’s on your mind? What are you feeling if you have any feelings, or what are you doing? Or what’s your current interest? Literally anything. I always want to hear from you and listen to what you’ve got to say and let the conversation grow from that. Because that’s how I approach conversation. I just start talking to you about whatever it is I’m thinking about. If I just feel the urge to connect with someone I haven’t spoken to in awhile, I’ll usually say something like “thinking of you, hope you’re well” because that’s literally what’s happening to me right now.
For me when I’m asked how are you? It feels as much pressure as a phone call. Like, please don’t call me! It’s such an imposition demanding attention immediately. I much prefer text so I can think about, draft and edit my response, and respond when I’m ready on my own time. So same with how are you? Like maybe I don’t want to think about that right now. Maybe it’s painful to think about how I am. Maybe I’m not ok but I’m just a saran wrap covering of keeping it together. So talking about it directly is too risky. But I want to talk to you.
Anyway, I can go on and on so I’m going to stop treating this like betterhelp. Hope some of that helped explain why I said what I said although I’m betting probably not. I think something you might have missed was that the post was intended for discussion among those who feel similarly, and really not asking for help. Because there is no help. It’s just the way it is. We understand the social protocol, we just would prefer it to be different and find the whole charade to be one of the hundreds of daily ways we feel othered by society, showing us we don’t fit in, which is often very unnerving and/or frustrating. And when you are feeling those things every day in every interaction with people, it’s a cumulative effect. Ok I’m stopping for real
The “typical” person doesn’t see 3 or 4 answers, they have prepared a few generic answers to those small questions, and anyone can do that. Unless you’re really feeling different, and have enough intimacy with the asker to be honest, it’s just a game of tic-tac-toe that anyone can learn.
Imagine that somebody places before you a dozen baskets all filled with white balls the size roughly of a ping-pong ball.
They are all identical. There’s no way to discern one from another.
Then he says: pick the right ball, but be warned, picking some among them will result in a member of your family dying a horrible, gruesome death. Now choose, you have 20 seconds.
That’s not how it is, you’re comparing a Saw movie with small talk, talk about hyperbole.
You can always say “I don’t feel comfortable with small talk” if you don’t want to make the effort of making your own quick-answer list, and no loved one of yours will die because of that.
It’s hyperbole yes, but there’s a kernal of truth to it.
Consider that this conversation is one example of the hundreds of examples ND people experience every single day for how they are asked to mask their initial reactions/responses/preferences for seemingly arbitrary meaningless reasons “just because” that’s how it’s been done and no one wants to care about how it impacts us day in and day out.
Consider how it is a cumulative effect that builds up. Frustration, embarrassment, confusion, annoyance, sadness, hurt, yes even rage at the stupidity and injustice of it all.
These are the emotions ND people in your life are experiencing every day all day as they go about trying to survive and fit in in a world that is constantly telling them that they are wrong for the way they instinctively react to things and their preferred ways of being and interacting are not only weird and wrong but somehow disturbing and put a target on their back for disrespect or worse, bullying, being ostracized, fired, or targeted for harassment.
Try to think about that before responding. Really think about what that would be like for someone to live with every single day in every interaction with other people.
Oh, they can pretend. They can pretend so freaking well that loads of people have ZERO idea they are experiencing any of this. They just see them as a little shy and a little weird. A loner. Creepy maybe. Or maybe they are so good at masking you don’t even see that. You see a happy friendly person. Meanwhile inside they are so fucking tired.
All of these stupid little dances we have to play in order to be accepted. When being ourselves, why would that be so bad? It doesn’t make any sense. But whenever we try to unmask, society very quickly shows us that is not acceptable.
If you are asking this question you haven’t read enough of the responses to this post. Consider refraining from commenting until you have read more and listened and reflected on the experiences of others different from yourself.
No, I will not consider refraining from replying just because you don’t agree with my comments. I’ve replied to plenty of comments to explain my point of view, to show it’s not a superficial opinion. Don’t pretend to discuss by trying to silence your interlocutor.
You can always block or report me if you must, just don’t try to pass that attitude as dialogue.
Yeah I understand how my phrasing would make anyone feel defensive. Maybe you might attempt to understand why the phrasing you used in the comment I was replying to might trigger someone to want to tell you that.
For some people it is hard to do. I have ADHD and it is tiring because I have to actively focus on not jusy being honest, but apparently not as much as someone who is autistic.
Saying 'why do some people find my effortless things take a lot of effort' over and over is the same thing as telling them they are wrong for telling you it takes them effort.
I used to struggle a lot with small talk too, and dialogue in general (used to be too literal), that’s why I can relate to some of the answers here. I speak not from prejudice, but from my own experience.
That same experience has taught me that not thinking like the rest is not necessarily the same as being neurodivergent, but having developed different skills as you grew up. If willing, everyone can learn a skill they find lacking at least to a beginner level.
Believe it or not, that is plain emotional intelligence. Over analyzing can become a vicious circle, but most therapists will teach you ways to escape the dreadful scenarios in out heads, and ground yourself in the real world.
The liberating part is that most people don’t care about you much at all, they won’t obsess because you said “you too” to your waiter, they’ll forget your faux passes quickly if they’re small.
I agree. That's exactly what I do. Memorize two or three different socially acceptable answers to each of the half-dozen or so most common "human vibe check" questions.
Because that's exactly what they are. They're human vibe checks. It's not about finding out how you're really feeling, or what you honestly think of the weather. It's about being a quick way to sort out who is capable of of functioning in a social capacity and who isn't, without putting in a lot of time and effort doing an in-depth screening.
"Small talk" is culturally designed to weed out 70-80% of those people who are likely to be dangerous, unstable, or unreliable, allowing us to know who we need to pay close attention to in our environment and who we probably don't. It's not a question of "lying" or "telling the truth", it's a question of "can you perform your socially expected role in this cultural ritual?".
Saying "I'm fine, how are you?" is no more "lying" than doing a safety check on an airplane you're about to fly is (because you don't actually need to engage the flaps right now, being on the ground and all). It's just about checking to make sure the right lights come on and the right motors engage. If a person can't even answer a question they've had decades to prepare for, and can't engage, even to a minimum acceptable degree, in a small social ceremony they've watched thousands of times and had hundreds of opportunities to practice themselves, that's a bad sign. That's like trying to engage the flaps and hearing some weird grinding noise and getting a red blinking light on the console.
It's important to note here that I have a bit of an advantage in this arena over a lot of the rest of the community. One of my deepest autistic hyperfocus areas has been observing, experimenting, and collecting data on human interpersonal communications, specifically linguistic communication. It's all very ritualistic, at its base, and it's easy for me to create, memorize, and practice the scripts for performing those rituals in different contexts. And when I fuck one up, I can go back through and memorize another script so if that same conversation every comes up in the future (and it will, because there are only so many rituals!), I won't fuck it up again (to the same degree).
"Small talk" is culturally designed to weed out 70-80% of those people who are likely to be dangerous, unstable, or unreliable, allowing us to know who we need to pay close attention to in our environment and who we probably don't. It's not a question of "lying" or "telling the truth", it's a question of "can you perform your socially expected role in this cultural ritual?".
I find that the best and worst people are really good at small tall. The best people use small talk to establish relationships and ease into more personal topics that they honestly care about. The worst people use small talk to establish a connection that they can abuse later on.
That's like saying a pre-flight check doesn't throw up errors on anything anything but honest machines. But, more to the point, you're right, in the sense that the people on either tail end of the "good/bad people" bell curve aren't going to be precisely detected by a simple test of inclusion/exclusion criteria. The ~60% of people in the middle will be. That's why it's a screening tool, not an in-depth socio-psychological exam.
As long as your honesty comes closer to filling the socially expected role than, say, a man who's high on meth or a Qanon conspiracist who thinks "how are you?" is a sex-trafficker code, you're probably ok.
The ability to follow social rituals like small talk, handshakes, bowing, making small offerings, etc. doesn't screen anything for the people in the middle of the bell curve other than the knowledge of and conformity to social rituals.
What is the benefit of screening people through social rituals?
other than the knowledge of and conformity to social rituals.
That's exactly the point.
What is the benefit of screening people through social rituals?
You know instantly who's part of your culture. Whether or not they are a part of your sub-group within that culture. Whether or not they are capable of interacting with strangers in a way that isn't frightening or disturbing (try asking a guy on meth "So, how about this weather?").
If you respond to a social ritual with hostility, that tells the other person exactly what they want to know about you. They know to avoid you, that you are not "friendly", meaning that you are not a person who can be trusted with other, more important/complex social rituals.
You're seriously asking "What's the point of testing the flaps when the plane is on the ground? It's not flying. What do I need to know about the flaps when we're not flying? It's just me and the plane lying to each other?"
So if someone is not familiar with your social rituals then they are not to be trusted?
That is what you are saying, just making sure you mean that someone who doesn't already know your local customs is not to be trusted. Because someone who doesn't want to shake hands because it is taboo in their culture is the same thing as someone refusing to check the flaps before takeoff.
So if someone is not familiar with your social rituals then they are not to be trusted?
Yes. This is the basis of pretty much all Western human interaction, from the observations and data I have collected over the last 30+ years. It is the root of all inter-group conflicts in the country, from the lofty halls of politics to the "that group's not really a metal band!" subreddit pettiness.
Humans are ritualistic and their interactions are so rigid as to be almost mechanistic, when you get down to the base of them. Every person isn't so much a unique individual as they are a unique combination of common parts, and their communication ceremonies reflect that.
Because someone who doesn't want to shake hands because it is taboo in their culture is the same thing as someone refusing to check the flaps before takeoff.
Yes. That is exactly correct. If you don't do the ritual right (or right enough, within a margin of specification), you will not be trusted.
Does it make rational sense from the perspective of a sapient being capable of examining their own actions? Fuck no. But that's the world we live in. We refuse to learn it and adapt to it at our peril.
“We refuse to learn it and adapt to it at our peril”
See that’s the entire whole encompassing point of this post. We are literally “in peril” either way. We are all sick, literally burnt out exhausted from all the adapting and masking we are doing every gad dang freaking day to these arbitrary stupid social protocols that serve no purpose. I’m ready to stop. I’m ready to call it out and ask society to change itself for once. ND are literally killing ourselves to fit in and it barely ever works anyway! Accommodations are for everyone, meaning everyone benefits. Just accepting that this is how it is is fucking bullshit. How about NT have some personal fucking growth and acknowledge that they have not given half a shit about how much ND people have contributed to society while being shat on CONSTANTLY for being socially different.
Our brains work differently. It’s equivalent to being from a different culture and speaking a different language. Many NT can learn to accept this and adapt their own behavior out of respect for this other person. It’s far past time we stop looking at Neurodivergence as a disorder to be suppressed, and instead as a different way of being that is just as valid and that society needs to accept, truly, and adapt to accommodate our needs.
How about NT have some personal fucking growth and acknowledge that they have not given half a shit about how much ND people have contributed to society while being shat on CONSTANTLY for being socially different.
Great idea. Will never happen. Not in a million giggity years. It's like saying the best way to stop mountain lion attacks is to teach mountain lions to not attack.
Treating NTs and the society they built like they are all rational actors who give a fuck is the most dangerous, naive, and stupid thing I ever did in my life. We must treat them like impersonal, implacable forces of nature that cannot be educated or reasoned with, only prepared for so that we can mitigate their inevitable destructive effects on our lives.
I spent most of my life trying to "inform" the NT-society hurricane about how much it hurts me. It's pointless. Give up, spend your energy and your focus on figuring out how to protect yourself from them. The results on your everyday life will be far better.
I disagree that it will never happen. I think it’s already starting to happen. Part of it is ND tiktok and Instagram and Reddit/Lemmy and YouTube educating people about it and helping people get diagnosed, part of it is research is ongoing allowing therapists/doctors to get better educated about these conditions, and yes part of it is ND people just deciding fuck it I’m done masking in this specific way in this specific environment and learning how to advocate for our needs and ask for accommodations so that it becomes better understood by NT and more commonly seen.
But I agree with you that for now my energy is best spent providing myself my own accommodations and protecting my energy. I love love love talking about this stuff online in the autism communities.
This post went bigger than any of the others I’ve made so more NTs came in asking to be educated and riling me up, so I have spent more energy talking to them about this than I would ever normally try to do. So far none of those comments seemed to sink in at all lolsob, in accordance with the prophecy. They tend to just ignore what you say and then repeat what they said before and add an “it’s that easy” to the end. And then you slap yourself in the face and do some breathing exercises and walk away for awhile.
But the value I get in engaging with ND folks here is life changing. Just sharing our experiences with each other, commiserating. Makes me feel less alone and gives me spoons somehow. Gives me perspective, and sometimes tips, and resolve to prioritize my needs, and forgiveness for when I can’t do the things that I feel I’m expected to do.
Anyway I’m rambling again. I just wanted to say I understand your sense that it’s hopeless, and I’m sorry that you burned yourself out in that way and I hope you’re taking care of yourself and that you have some people who support you.
All of my bitterness and cynicism in my previous post is actually, now that I sit down and think about it, motivated by concern. For you, for our community, for all of us. I've gotten to a point where I have nothing left to fight with; I can only use the privilege that comes with my specific level of social function and direction of hyperfocus to hide (as much as possible) and pass as a slightly-weird member of NT culture.
As worried as I am that you and others will come to the same fate, I'm also glad that there are still people with some fight in them, who love talking about the community and trying to spread their knowledge with those outside of it. You're doing a good thing. I just worry about you while you're doing it, and I'm not hopeful that it will help in the long run.
But I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong.
I resonate so much with that. I think this is the nature of social change. We fight however we are able until we cannot anymore and then others take up the torch. I struggle with bitterness about other fights I fought before that I burned out from. Maybe I’ll learn from those lessons and definitely have learned more about myself so I’m working on recognizing burn out before it ruins me. If not, well I’ll learn from that too. It’s all we can do. I’m proud of you for recognizing your needs and prioritizing that for now, for however long you it takes.
I agree with this. Observe carefully someone who you deem a master of small talk, and you’ll notice it’s not intellect or genius, but patterns of small non-answers they’ve learned to use as conversational support.
Most of us neurodivergent people consider ourselves smart and observant. Observe those who you consider small talk comes naturally, and see how they fall into patterns. They’re more elaborate that a non-answer catalogue, but they’re still crutches to make ease the friction.
An acquaintance of mine, for example, tells jokes. Some times they bomb, but he doesn’t sweat it, they’re still ice breakers. Another acquaintance immediately gets the attention of nearby females by retelling one more how he went randomly backpacking across Europe as a poor, young musician. If that doesn’t work, he has other, equally entertaining tales, which we have few ways of fact checking, ha ha.
But for us small-talk-stunted people, clever non-answers are a perfect crutch to fend off the awkwardness until we acquire this skill, and we can always refuse small talk if we’re not in the mood.
Nobody is saying that neurodivergent people can’t do small talk, it’s that it is oftentimes a dreadful experience for them. You do understand the difference, yes?
It’s a bit like telling someone genetically predisposed to disliking cilantro because it tastes like soap to “just eat cliantro… everyone can do it!”
Fine, but beware of getting on the “I was born this way and I can’t change even if I wanted to” train. That’s extremely harmful to your personal growth, because even if you were truly different genetically, it can be used as an excuse to not learn or change, even if you were capable of it.
This comment gets under my skin because in this community for autistic folks we have heard this kind of thinking our e-n-t-i-r-e lives and NT never ever ever ever understand just how much effort it takes for us to mask in order to fit in with their arbitrary ass rules that we consider hella dumb. I long for the day when a NT person comes into communities of autistic people and says, “wow, you know what, all this you’re saying makes a lot of sense and this social protocol IS hella dumb and doesn’t actually serve any valid purpose and I’m with you! I’m going to help out and join the movement to making society more accommodating to different brains preferred way to be, instead of assuming like everyone always does that the way society is is by definition the right and only way it should and could be.” How about calls for personal growth that aren’t ableist and full of unexplored privilege and ignorance about what masking actually does to us. Because I’ll tell you right now that it is 100,000% devastating and the fact that many of us are keeping it together enough to survive is FUCKING MIRACULOUS and we honestly deserve monetary awards and rest and a fucking break.
Did it occur to you that I could be a neurodivergent person too? Did you label me an enemy because I’m not getting on the “I can’t help it, I have no choice” train?
I couldn’t tell you I’m actually autistic to some degree because I’ve never been tested for that. I’m introverted, struggled with shyness most of my youth, and was very inept socially to add insult to injury. It has cost me a great deal to learn to improve those aspects of life, and I owe a great deal of it to my wonderful wife, who somehow reciprocated my affection when I was still emotionally stunted.
That’s why I can speak from my own experience, and not trying to tell people here to “just walk it off”. That being said, most of us are capable of growth and change, we can adapt. Yes, there are severely autistic/disadvantaged persons that can’t, but I’ve seen too many others using the pretext of being different to assume they’re autistic too (without a medical diagnosis) and are too hardcoded to change. What most functional people perceive as innate disadvantages is, at least in part, emotional immaturity. We focus on improving some aspect, study or expertise for example, but neglect others, like socializing, empathizing, or management of emotions. We grow unbalanced, and it’s wrong to pretend we can’t change without at least doing an honest try to change.
I don’t know why I’m being so insistent here, probably because I’ve seen this attitude more in the younger generations, IRL, and it’s not like something is making more people autistic, but making them less eager to examine and improve themselves. I’ve met autistic and mentally challenged people in my life, and they’re truly limited in their capabilities, but highly functioning people claiming they’re the same as them is bordering entitlement.
I think there’s a lot in your comment to talk about and I certainly don’t think you’re wrong about a lot of things. I think if we were in person we could have an engaging evening of discussion that will be harder to do in this way online but I will try to expand just a little more.
Your comment made me think about something that’s been brewing in my mind a lot recently but I’m not sure it’s entirely fermented enough to put down into words yet.
It has to do with my reflection on interpersonal relationships with people who I suspect might be ND but are either closeted about it or perhaps don’t even know themselves, people who have put a lot of work into analyzing social norms and applying those lessons in themselves so that they can pass as normal. I suspect these folks I’m thinking about are autistic in large part because of their rigid sense of social norms rules, and their clear anxiety when they see people eschewing those rules.
I was afforded a lot of freedom to be weird as a kid. I learned social rules for in the classroom quickly, but outside that I was very lucky with the kids that were around me. And since I loved school and learning so was missed for my ND I just grew up understanding myself as someone who was a weirdo but was accepted for that.
What this means in this context is that I find myself often triggering the above group of suspected ND folks who I think were probably not as lucky as me and who learned to be very rigid in applying social norms in order to be accepted. It smells of trauma, right? And how could it not be trauma. Being rejected as a kid is probably the most primitive danger we face outside of actually dying.
The point I’m getting at here is that I don’t think you’re wrong in a lot of ways but I think there has got to be a middle ground where yes we are learning the social norms and applying those lessons in order to provide the social lubrication to get along and succeed, but ALSO educating the world at large that Neurodivergence exists, is valid, and should be accommodated. I just really believe that the vast majority of the reason ND is not accommodated is because of unintentional ignorance.
So you clearly have had a lot of experiences with people who you felt were not trying hard enough to learn and apply the social rules. So that has shaped your perspective in this discussion.
I have had so many more experiences of the opposite where I have seen people living with intense anxiety constantly about their ability to fit in, and failure despite all their efforts. People who are killing themselves with stress, leading to burnout, depression, substance abuse, abusive relationships. All of this i see as a direct product of them never being given permission to be themselves, be different, advocate for their needs.
So I don’t think we are actually at odds in this discussion and I think if we were able to talk in person we would find that out.
Thank you for your sensible response. I also think online forums make it harder to carry a complex conversation, because we’re filling in missing context that comes with personal interaction. I don’t doubt we could discuss our personal experiences in a constructive way, and learn from both sides, given a better medium.
Thank you for saying what I was trying to express and just couldn’t. It hurts so much to be told “just act like ‘normal’ people so you don’t seem to be ‘disabled’”. We’re not disabled, just different!
❤️I swear we’re gonna get this all sorted out. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but we’re gonna help it get there. Just by having these conversations we’re gonna make it happen
I’m disabled. I can barely deal with normal amounts of noise. Banning cars and ads would go a long way to making me less disabled, but unfortunately I just have a lower tolerance for attention violence, and we live in a society of frequent attention violence.
I understand what you mean. I’m also extremely noise sensitive and have to wear ear plugs pretty much all the time. Being outside is so exhausting.
That’s part of what I was trying to say though. This world isn’t made for us and barely anyone cares to make it easier. In a different world we wouldn’t be disabled. We have different needs than NT people and it’s the world that disables us, not our being different.
The thing is I can do small talk, it just costs a lot of energy that I’d rather use for something more important. And I honestly don’t see a reason to mask all the time and pretend I’m not who I am.
While I might mask in short interactions with strangers I refuse to do it with people I know. They’ll have to accept me the way I am. And that, in fact, is personal growth as well. To accept yourself the way you are and stop pretending to be something you’re not.
Does Discord now offer the ability to save/fav comments to find them again? When I used it the last time, i was amazed how everything just scrolls by without a possibility to hold on to something.
How is that the same than a favorite? I can also use a searchengine to find a website, but a bookmark is sometimes better. I can also search through all tweets on twitter, but having some marked as favorites come in handy sometimes. I use favorites and save lists in youtube quite a lot. Even though I could use the yt search bar each time.
Since being forced to use this terrible communication method in my teams and groups, I’ve been copy-and-pasting good Q&A threads into text files that I push to an enterprise GitHub repo for perma-store. At least that way other engineers and myself can either use GitHub’s search or clone the repo locally, grep it, and even contribute back with PRs. Sometimes from there, turn into a wiki, but that’s pretty rare. My approach is horribly inefficient and so much stuff is still lost, but it’s better than Discord’s search or dealing with Confluence.
At my job we bought an entire different product (glean) and are paying them a ton of money every month just because they can search our confluence wiki effectively lol
The two largest central banks in the world, the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank, have explicit mandates for keeping inflation under control.
The Federal Reserve has the “Dual Mandate” of price stability and achieving the maximum sustainable employment.
Price stability is about controlling inflation. It’s complicated, but high inflation both affects the direct price of goods and services and expectations of their future prices. So, in a high inflation environment, what costs $10 now may costs $12-$14 in the future.
We saw this after COVID, when supply chain issues became a huge problem and it was difficult to say how much goods and services would cost. Multinational corporations bragged about their ability to “price-take”, or raise prices in response to supply chain delays and have consumers continue to pay it.
This demonstrates, at least in part, why our buying decreases far more often than it increases: large companies can “pass through” inflationary costs to consumers. You need soap to clean yourself and food to eat? Well, Proctor and Gamble and Tyson Foods bet they can raise prices on soap and chicken and that you’ll pay it. And you do. Because what choice do you have?
In the U.S. specifically, there is the flip side of inflation: the maximum sustainable employment rate. If too many people are employed, the labor markets get hot. You know what that means? Mo’ money for you! Mo’ money for me! Mo’ everybody!
You know what that also means? Demand for goods and services is going up. Supply is going to lag behind. It’s like a bunch of isolated people with jobs wanting a lot of stuff during and after a pandemic that decreased the supply of goods and services. This causes…inflation. All those people are going to be willing to pay more than the next person (up to a point) for the same Nordictrack Treadmill.
This also demonstrates another reason companies can pass through inflationary costs: under a hot labor market, consumers are willing to pay higher prices.
So, there are at least two reasons why consumer buying power decreases more often than it increases. Conditions are such that either
Consumers must pay more because what choice do they have?
Consumer want to pay more because the value a good or service higher than the next person up to a point.
In either case the response of the Federal Reserve will be to raise the price of money, making both capital and labor more expensive. The Fed’s recent increases to inflation make you, as an employee, and the things you want as a consumer, more expensive.
In contrast, the primary way consumer buying power increases is if they make more money. (That happens in a hot labor market…but then the consumer gives the surplus away if they’re not careful). However, that raise must be greater than the rate of inflation. If you get a 1% raise and inflation is 2%, well, your buying power decreased, even though you’ll still see a higher number on your paycheck. If you get a 3% raise and inflation is 2%, your buying power increased.
The challenge for businesses is handling inflationary increases in capital and labor. It’s easy for capital: you need stuff to produce stuff. And it’s likely you can pass through those costs to consumers.
In contrast, labor has all sort of demands like…water/bathroom breaks, mandated over time, safety regulations, etc. And workers don’t see a decrease in their chances of being maimed at work as an increase in value from their employer. If a company is going to invest in its employees, given a certain dollar amount, workers would generally prefer to see that money go into their pockets rather than be invested in stricter adherence to safety regulations or more breaks while at work. But companies can’t often make that choice, the law changed and they must adhere to safety regulations. So, no raise for you!
Now, it’s certainly more complicated than that. Businesses have a lot of financial demands, of which employee compensation is a small, though often significant, piece of the pie. It’s harder to give raises than it might seem. Unless your CEO makes one hundred thousand dollars a second, as some do, then wage increases may be difficult to do.
You should consider posting that screenshot around the bigger subs that are still resisting. Ask them to repost it as well. Don't go quietly, let the whole site see what lengths the admins are going to for the illusion that everything is fine.
No offense, this is a great site, but the word isn't going to get out from here.
Joe Biden is “only” Genocide abroad, and probably less of it.
Therefore, a vote for Joe Biden is a Vote against genocide.
No, it doesn’t matter that he’s an active participant in the apparatus that’s creating the genocide, because if he’s in office there’s less genocide. Which is the important part, and pretending otherwise is sophistry. If you abstain from voting, you are increasing the likelihood of more genocide and if you discourage others from voting, you are an active participant in the overall social apparatus that is probabilistically increasing the amount of genocide.
The utility calculation is dead simple: more votes for Biden in key states makes more genocide less likely, and discouraging people from voting for Biden makes more genocide more likely. Therefore, discouraging people from voting for Biden is a pro-genocide strategy and voting for Biden in battleground states is an anti-genocide strategy. You should vote for Biden unless you live in a solid blue state, and even then it’s not a bad idea.
TLDR: if you encourage people to not vote for Biden, that’s supporting genocide. Accelerationism never works for us.
There are two options: ‘some genocide’, and ‘a lot more genocide’. The race is close, so if not enough people vote for ‘some genocide’, ‘a lot more genocide’ will win. ‘No genocide’ is not one of the options. Do you vote for ‘some genocide’, or do you assent to letting ‘a lot more genocide’ win?
As I said, ‘No genocide’ is not one of the two options that’s going to win. The race is close, not voting for ‘less genocide’ only helps ‘lots of genocide’. So you’re helping ‘lots of genocide’ beat ‘less genocide’, congrats.
Voting against genocide doesn’t reduce genocide. In American elections, the only votes that have an effect are those for one of the two front-runners. Any other vote is an admission of equivocation of the two front-runners. The two front-runners are ‘some genocide’ and ‘lots of genocide’. Equivocating the two means you think ‘some genocide’ and ‘lots of genocide’ are equally acceptable. Q.E.D. you accept lots of genocide.
Unfortunately the American electoral system is not ranked choice, so “bar of acceptability” isn’t a functionally meaningful concept. In American elections, the situation is as I’ve described above. Refusing to choose one of the two primary options functionally means you find both primary options equally acceptable.
That’s not what a tautology is, Duverger’s Law is a mathematical derivative of First Past the Post election systems. Yes, under FPTP systems, voting third party is equivocating support for both primary parties. Performative ethics without pragmatics is moral masturbation.
Splitting your responses is rhetorically ridiculous.
You do not know what a tautology is. You do not know what a false dichotomy is. Your attempt to Gish Gallop is transparent and I won’t be wasting any more time with your childishness.
your accusation of gish galloping is baseless. each of my replies has been a succinct response to one of your claims. the fact that you are able to pack so many fallacious claims into one comment suggests that there is a gish gallop happening, though.
you’re characterization of my actions and motive have no bearing on whether anything I’ve said is correct, and they do not support any of your claims. this is just posturing and rhetoric.
Yes, bc they do this all the time. Its to exhaust u, drag the comment train into the ditches where they may convince at least some young person that you are actually wrong if u ever once misstep or misspeak.
Ive em tagged as “russian shill.” Theyre not the only ones, but take careful note of their rhetorical style, the way they twist words and come off sounding confident and “intelligent” if u dont think about what they’re saying for more than 3 seconds.
Theres more of em, hence why i say again, take note of the “flavor,” shall we say, of debate here. Its easier to catch the others then; they all sound the same. Often they back each other up.
Performative ethics without pragmatics is moral masturbation.
deontological ethics are preferred by professional philosophers and are the basis of most ethical systems. most people grew up with an understanding that “the ends justify the means” can be used to justify some pretty horrific shit.
Tautologies are statements that are necessarily true by virtue of their construction. In order to show that something is tautological, you must reduce it to an open statement and be able to show that it’s true independent of the variables. Tautologies include “Not Q or Q” and the equivalent “If Q then Q”. Furthermore, stating that something is a tautology implies that you believe it’s true. The last time I encountered someone claiming that something didn’t have predictive value “because it’s a tautology” was a creationist saying the same of evolution, and I realized they had essentially granted their opponent’s conclusion.
The last time I encountered someone claiming that something didn’t have predictive value “because it’s a tautology” was a creationist saying the same of evolution
i don’t know the exact context you’re referencing, but i do know that trying to pigeonhole me with creationists is underhanded.
stating that something is a tautology implies that you believe it’s true.
i believe anyone may claim that the price of a good can be described as the point at which temporal demand met temporal supply, but that doesn’t make it a useful observation. it’s not even disprovable, as there is no way to test it. so there is no reason to believe it’s actually true.
I’m not getting in another argument with you; you’re dishonest and annoying. I replied to educate, because despite your claims otherwise you’re clearly ignorant.
in a show of good faith, i’m about to break from my usual rhetorical style. i hope you find this explanation helpful
Duverger’s Law is a tautology because, from a critical rationalist perspective, a tautological statement is one that cannot be empirically tested or falsified—it’s true by definition. Duverger’s Law states that a plurality-rule election system tends to favor a two-party system. However, if this law is framed in such a way that any outcome can be rationalized within its parameters, then it becomes unfalsifiable.
For example, if a country with a plurality-rule system has more than two parties, one might argue that the system still “tends to” favor two parties, and the current state is an exception or transition phase. This kind of reasoning makes the law immune to counterexamples, and thus, it operates more as a tautological statement than an empirical hypothesis. The critical rationalist critique of marginalist economics, which relies on ceteris paribus (all else being equal) conditions, suggests any similarly structured law should be viewed with skepticism. For Duverger’s Law to be more than a tautology, it would need to be stated in a way that allows for clear empirical testing and potential falsification, without the possibility of explaining away any contradictory evidence. This would make it a substantive theory that can contribute to our understanding of political systems rather than a mere tautology.
Nah we can take it up with you, because the choice is Biden or Trump, not Biden, Trump, or time travel. Pull your head out of your ass - your little protest vote doesn’t matter now, but your ACTUAL vote does.
Is your protest vote saving Palestinians? At least my vote conceivably could have an impact
With one term, Trump stacked the federal judiciary for a generation and eroded the administrative state. If he gets another terms he’ll use his stacked bench to pass his agenda and uphold it when it’s inevitably challenged. How do you think progressive causes will fare then? At least you’ll have your protest vote to soothe your conscience as Trump enacts a little genocide on immigrants, trans people, and anyone else he decides isn’t pure enough.
In 2016 people like you were smugly announcing that nothing bad would happen, like Roe being repealed, and everyone was being dramatic, because Clinton was “just as bad” as Trump. So fascinated to hear what your excuses will be this time around.
I can’t bring myself to vote for someone like Joe Biden. Without getting too in depth on my life story, I’ve been falsely arrested before. Hell, I’ve basically paid the price for a crime I didn’t commit. So when someone like Joe Biden promises police reform and then turns around and immediately pours $34 billion dollars into 100,000 more cops and more surveillance, I just genuinely cannot bring myself to vote for him any more than you could bring yourself to vote for your abuser.
At the same time, I have great sympathy for Palestinians. Here in the US and abroad. And I also cannot expect them to vote for someone assisting in the genocide of their friends and family, even if some political arithmetic says they should.
I don’t bemoan you for voting for Joe Biden. But I’m voting third party this time around. Maybe it’ll send a message to the DNC, maybe it won’t. It’s the only voice I got as a singular voter to cast my vote in a democratic process towards what I believe in the most.
We did. They lost the primary in 2020 and now we have Biden. Any other fundamental misunderstandings of American politics or are you done being stupid?
Your solution to losing is to now bandwagon with “the lesser of two evils”? Why wouldn’t you abandon that party entirely? There’s more than two choices.
They’ll kill and take away the rights of people who aren’t you though…yay…
To top it off, you go on to bash those who think that’s not a good choice
There’s two choices. Protests votes in the general election in the system we have today are at best no votes, but are often just votes for the other candidate. Your moral high ground is nothing and smugly voting third party doesn’t actually DO anything right now.
If you think that “protest votes” have any chance of removing the two parties from power, you’re naive. If it were that easy, it would have already happened as people have been voting and advocating for third party votes for generations. The way to actually affect change is to engage vociferously in primaries and lower level offices to get outside voices in at a level to actually change things - specifically abandoning FPTP voting and getting third party candidates in local offices (and eventually ditch the electoral college). Even if you somehow magically convinced everyone that “would like to vote for someone other than D’s and R’s” to actually do so in a national election, having a candidate that adequately represented enough people’s beliefs to win is a statistical impossibility.
The fascists/Christian Nationalists have been methodically working towards their goals for decades; to think that you have any chance of overthrowing the Democratic or Republican party in this election is beyond laughable.
Easy. By eliminating the worse party and transforming the existing one. Parties have already vanished in our system in the past; see the Whigs.If you’re older than 22-years-old you recognize just how much progress Dems have made in the past 15 or so years. So continue promoting progressive candidates in Dems while ensuring GOP go the way of the Whigs. Start advocating for campaign finance / election reform as your primary voting concern and that you’ll donate to anyone who pushes this.
Things take time but a protest vote inevitably leads to the worst evil prevailing.
There’s more than two choices the same way there’s more than two choices for calling a coin. You can call a side. You can call for the edges. You can call that it balances diagonally. You can even call for a unicorn to magically appear over one of the sides. The chances are so slim that you might as well have chosen no side at all, but it could happen, and it is a choice.
Personally, anyone that says there are more than two parties has no idea how statistics and/or voting works, or they don’t really care about the outcome.
Your conscience can be a good indicator that something immoral is happening, but it’s certainly not infallible. While I think abstaining is a worse choice, the most egregious course of action being discussed is actively arguing against voting, which is actively harmful and supports multiple genocides including the one ostensibly being denounced by the people who act as such.
I voted third party too once. I couldn’t in good conscience vote for either major party. I was living in Florida, and voted for Nader in 2000.
I’ve not been so naive since.
Did I not vote for the killing of children in Iraq and Afghanistan? Did I not vote for the curtailing of medical research? Did I not vote for the hundreds of millions that will die due to climate change?
Learn from my mistake. Because the lessons you learn from yours may not be applicable given what will be lost by the time you realize what you’ve done.
I hear you. And I appreciate your candor and politeness, which can be hard to ask for sometimes.
I’m still planning on voting third party. I’ve voted dem every time since I could vote, I feel like I gotta draw a line in the sand somewhere. But! By golly, if he says he’s going to cut some of the money out of the police, and maybe tighten some things up in the Middle East, he’ll have me again. And he’s got months to do that! And I’m hoping. But if that effort isn’t made and he focuses on the center-right… I just can’t do it.
You want very reasonable things in a unreasonable system.
Youll either get the status quo as it stands, or you’ll get Dr. Fascismo doing away with free elections on top of an Eastern European genocide courtesy of trumps master, minorities being actively persecuted for just existing, and saying the things youre saying being documented and held against you as thoughtcrimes.
The US is on the cusp of moving past the stain that is rhe baby boomer voting block that insists on unfettered neoliberalism and conservative social policy by and large. Thisd be the time to ensure we dont double down on it.
I just blocked the whole instance when they removed my comment pointing out that Al Jazeera might not be unbiased in the matters of Hamas vs Israel, because they are funded by Qatar who also shelter Hamas leaders.
And even Al Jazeera think Trump would be an even bigger fucking disaster for Palestine.
I use voyager. I will be looking more into this function. My original thinking was that I would have to switch over to an instance already blocking .ml or start my own.
I am just tired of people getting away with being explicitly pro-terrorism just because they tell other users they are trans, as if that made sociopathy and psychopathy OK.
Idk how much i want to do this… ive been followed around by trolls for being vocal, but i wonder if it’s not a good idea to know what their talking points are. Not to mention the possibility of good daith youngins being attracted to their stink needing to hear something not advantageous to hostile foreign powers.
Also i like linux memes. Lots of linux shit is on .ml bc of it supposedly being sooper extra privacy oriented.
Haha u speak truth! I was blocked from world news.ml right quick. First day or two on lemmy. I was calling out shills for spreading russian/chinese talking points. Shame on me, i suppose!
To think i jumped ship from reddit to escape the bans from the same following the api changes and thought id find refuge here.
They go after leftist spaces in particular with the shit u have seen. They know what theyre doing. That’s why i think the pushback is so necessary. SY what they will, truth is truth, even in the post-truth era. It must be echoed, bans and whines from shills and tankies be damned.
Basically just the trolley problem, but the tracks are already aligned to killing fewer people. There is a vote on whether to divert the trolley to the track which would kill more people or stay the course. Is there blood on your hands if you abstained and convinced others to abstain which resulted in a win for changing tracks?
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.
When granted the option between 2 fascist regimes, a man has no choice but to pledge fealty to the fascist regime that targets the population that he like less.
The neolibs are the ones driving the murdering of the Palestinians. Today. Right now.
How do these dumdums not die from trying to eat through their ears?
"Save the Palestinians! Vote for the man who railroaded the UN as hard as he could to stop intervention to save Palestinians, who defunded humanitarian aid for Palestinians, and who is bypassing congress to supply all of the weapons that are being used to kill Palestinians."
It is such a complete nonsensical argument. It is just beyond me.
The simple, and unfortunate, truth that everyone here understands is that as bad as Biden is on this subject, Trump will be so much worse.
Biden is going against the wishes of his base to enable the ethnic cleansing. Trump's base wants the ethnic cleansing to speed up so that Jesus can come back and send all the Jews to hell.
Except that you cannot. Not under our current voting system.
Durvurger's law and Arrow's Theorem both talk about why voting for a third party under Ordinal voting systems, result in a literally wasted vote. But worse, when a third party candidate becomes popular, they actively harm their supporters.
There's zero chance of changing the voting system to something better before the election, so for now, Biden is the least evil option.
Make no mistake, Biden is still an evil, but Trump is so much worse.
Duverger's law holds that in political systems with only one winner (as in the U.S.), two main parties tend to emerge with minor parties typically splitting votes away from the most similar major party.
In short, a vote for a third party is exactly like throwing that vote away, and raising support for a third party is exactly like telling people not to vote at all.
Who the fuck do you think is bankrolling all these Third Party jackasses? The conservative think tanks out there love third parties, because that's the fastest and easiest way to split the left and drag the Overton window further to the right.
Sometimes the third party candidate is a willing participant in this bullshit, knowing that they're actively harming their supporters, but not caring because they get money and attention.
You sweet summer child. If you think the democrats are fascist, then you're in for a rude fucking awakening if Trump steps back into office. Trump has promised to weaponize the DOJ against everyone to the political left of Marjorie Taylor Green.
He will fire anyone who does not comply.
And if you think you're safe because you're a nobody. Well, the local police are sort of held in check by federal oversight. What I'm saying is, the police currently have to at least pretend to not be abusive assholes.
If Trump wins, then the masks come off.
But worse will be the random Trump supporters who now know that the police and DOJ will not protect certain people, that they will not prosecute crimes against certain people by Trump supporters.
If you love your Christian nationalism, that too is in the plan. Seriously, he's laid the plan out in the open. He's honestly telling us that he's going to end American Democracy and install himself as king.
And his plans to the Middle East are whatever the Christian nationalists want. Which is an even harsher genocide so that Jesus can come back and send the Jews to hell.
Then there's you. A person of questionable education who thinks that Biden and Trump are basically the same.
If Biden wins, the die hard Trump supporters will likely stage an attack of some sort. Maybe a series of attacks, And Biden's DOJ will reluctantly prosecute them. Otherwise, it will be business as usual for everyone else.
Biden is also slowly waking up and seeing the fucking obvious about Gaza. Too fucking late, but better late than never.
And make sure to be a white male. Because you're advocating for literal fascism with your both sides, third party bullshit.
You want an actual, viable third party? It cannot happen until we change the voting system to support it.
The math is clear. First Past the Post cannot support anything other than two party dominance, and any third party candidate will always hurt their own supporters via the spoiler effect.
It's far too late to change the voting system for this election, and thanks to the actual fascism of one candidate, if you want future elections at all, you will vote against Trump.
Unless you're fine with a totalitarian dictatorship. In which case, kindly fuck off.
He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.
They know who they’re hiring. I’m just surprised they said the quiet part out loud: "It’s okay if you’re dangerously violent, everyone here is, so long as you only do it in private. "
Just as I said with my other comment. Some of the consumers came here, and they want to be fed, so the bot-makers send bots to take content from Reddit.
It was nothing to do with Windows, it’s a sorta joke where the person telling the joke is trying to use logic to compare 2 different things, with humorous results.
A better example is an old Norm Mcdonald (I think) joke, I’ll post it below.
A guy sees his new neighbor out in his backyard, so he decides to get acquainted. After introductions, he asks the new neighbor what he does for a living.
The new neighbor says, “I’m a professor.” The first neighbor then asks, “Oh yeah, what do you teach?”
“Logic,” the professor reponds.
“What is that?” the neighbor inquires.
“Well, let me see if I can give you an example…you have a dog, right?”
“Yeah, that’s right,” neighbor #1 responds.
“And you have children too, right?” says the professor.
“Wow, right again!” exclaims the neighbor.
"So, then you must be married and that would make you a heterosexual, right?‘’ proclaims the professor.
“Unbelievable, you’re absolutely correct. How do you know all this about me?”
“Well,” the professor says, “I observed there was a dog house in your backyard, so you must have a dog. I also saw bicycles next to your garage, so you must have children. And if you have children, you are probably married and if your married, you are most likely heterosexual… it was all logical!”
The next afternoon, the neighbor runs into his old friend. His friend asks if he has met the new neighbor. The man says that he met him yesterday.
“What’s he like?”
“Well,” the man says, “he’s nice and he is a professor of logic.”
“Oh,” says the friend, “what’s logic?”
“Maybe I can give you an example. Do you have a dog house?”
“Why, no, I do not,” responds the friend.
“Well, then,” proclaims the man, “that means you’re gay!”
Temperature is average kinetic energy. It is very easy to put kinetic energy into an object and much harder to take it out. Microwaves do it by shining a “light” tuned to microwave frequencies on objects. So you can imagine the problem is about as hard as shining a lamp on something and having it get colder. Laser-based cooling methods do exist but they’re quite expensive and mostly operate on the atomic scale. For now, the best way we know of to cool large items in bulk is to put them next to something that’s even colder—in short, a refrigerator.
lemmy.dbzer0.com
Hot