![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
OK, please care even less so to not litter my inbox
OK, please care even less so to not litter my inbox
I was banned a few times for saying something like that if some politician of some country consciously does a thing which costs Armenian lives, or, say, “recognizes territorial integrity of Azerbaijan”, they are fair game for Armenians. That technically they make a choice they have right to make, or that their country has some interests, etc are reasons, but not excuses.
I mean, people are responsible for the actions they take. It’s not extremism.
I’ve had people clueless about tech tell me that:
using Linux and not buying Windows I rob MS’s developers,
not doing things the way big corporations want I deprive them of profits and thus rob their workers,
using your own device the way you want it is a crime if you have to bypass what the vendor does,
GPL and BSD licenses are not real sovereign citizen stuff, and if I’m not paying someone for software, I’m robbing the working class,
repairing things yourself in your house is robbing people working in those trades,
reading things in the Web is robbing university professors and book store workers and publishers,
having to learn a particular technology while doing my task at work means I’m a fraud and rob my employer or our clients, because apparently I have to keep all the today’s tech in my head before needing any of it,
if I don’t know some single thing another person knows, they are obviously better qualified than me (say, that other person can write Windows device drivers, while the job is about systems integration),
…
and I don’t remember more stupid shit from those people and I don’t want to, but generally being not a dumb ape in today’s world is considered suspicious apparently.
After that wonderful experience I might be silent about my views with people usually, but really I’ll never stop being anarchist (whatever kind of anarchism that is).
im sorry for being this rude, but Fuck of with that bullshit excuse.
No you’re not, and no I won’t.
I have Asbergers aswell, and have been arround a lot of other Autists.
Well, I hadn’t, except for my sister, so, especially back then, I was desperately trying to have social things other have by effort.
Going into offensive in that could look similar to what Musk posted.
and at worst it could be considered a thinly veiled rape theat.
At worst. I first took it as a very awkward attempt to seem magnanimous\friendly, plus Musk’s weird ideas about healthy relationships.
Anyway, can he fulfill that threat were it a threat? No? Then it’d be similar to what 4chan inhabitants write. Inappropriate is not the same as evil. Though I guess he and the Internet would both benefit from cutting ties.
As somebody with Aspergers i feel downright insulted that you attempted to blame this on ‘the sperg’.
Well, sorry, but since I wasn’t aiming for you, irrelevant.
hes in his 50s for gods sake.
The say older people are more like kids, ha-ha-ha
You are way too fucking serious and judgemental.
There are both much safer (than Chernobyl or Fukushima or whatever) reactor models and fast-neutron reactors that can reduce the amount of spent fuel to be stored.
About reasonable and cost-effective alternatives - with bigger storage expenses and grid losses.
IMHO a good grid has at the same time a few nuclear stations (no, not those which will be inevitably shut down, but those which are being prolonged or replaced as the time passes), a huge amount of renewable sources, storage to alleviate spikes\falls of said renewable sources and backup coal stations.
And German grid is connected to a few others, so that they themselves have gotten rid of nuclear energy doesn’t matter much, with unified grids.
And we are shutting down — not building — … nuclear plants.
Morons. Managed to almost descend to his level. No, that’s not sportsmanship.
Google says he has Asperger’s, which would make this, eh, kinda normal.
When I was 16, I wouldn’t be able to have a mutually consensual romantic conversation without saying something that cringed even myself out remembering it the next day.
Nothing worth feeling bad for will collapse.
People are not willing to get ads into every orifice, just nobody’s asking them. Ad blockers are reactive.
Bigger businesses will feel more pain, I can promise you that. Smaller businesses do not benefit from this ecosystem, quite the opposite - it heats up those who pay more for advertising, or those who are partners with those doing advertising.
As of payments again - when you are getting ads into your face with a message that you can pay to use something without them, you naturally feel against it.
I haven’t yet read the article, but it may well be a comparison for which Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris can be united under the Unix umbrella as systems with monolithic kernels and similar conventions. Of course FreeBSD is much cooler than Linux and Solaris is much cooler than FreeBSD, but we get what we get.
Also ndisgen under FreeBSD. MS could have been nice for a difference and not broken compatibility.
Hates - no. But giving off the impression of being weird is not that hard. I’m certain quite a few people would believe something like this about me purely due to being a sunlight-avoiding wimp bad with words (in verbal conversations).
So due process is a good thing. For each Andrew Tate there are a few dozens at least of people whom “the society” would eagerly accuse simply because of being asocial and weird. Like that folk psychology with red flags, manipulations and other shit. People practicing it can wound an autist. But I seriously doubt those would help them avoid a serial maniac.
Are any of his clients now in jail?
Just have to try
EDIT: Who downvoted a perfectly valid movie quote?
Ban any advertising unasked for, even better.
Things were better because people would “go to a different brand” and sue morons more often. They’d also be more confident of their own knowledge in various technical things.
Things becoming more complex was used to gaslight a lot of people into questioning their own knowledge about what they need. Such gaslighting first and foremost works via people being ashamed to be stupid and pretending they know it all.
Most (even technical) people are like this - they feel that they don’t understand the world around them, it’s stressing, spying, rigged, chaotic in the wrong places and ordered in the wrong places, - but they are ashamed and pretend. And what they pretend to think specifically and what they try to follow is communicated to them via ads, via movies, via corporate bullshit. Because they have nothing else to turn to.
It’s a bit similar to the way some autistic people do imitation - they too imitate ads and movies more than people around them (well, maybe also imitate people they are romantically attracted to, or those they consider cool).
Or to the way state propaganda works in atomized societies - people don’t have good horizontal ties, but pretend to have them, while taking the material from what they hear on TV.
20 years ago would you use something like an Android phone with no buttons or would you crush it with a hammer? Would you use something like Windows 10 or would you ignore that crap? Would you buy a car that spies after you?
You’d open one only when you wanted it.
A database with various characteristics being the main component and the advertising text not being that is better, yes.
No, advertising is not necessary when a user can search a catalogue with multiple optional constraints, as we did in the olden days of printed catalogues.
Advertising is harmful - it’s somebody trying to persuade you that you need to buy a thing. First, you’ll usually know when you need something. Second, the salesman is not someone you’d believe normally.
It’s an interaction which normally should be initiated by you, not by sellers. Which makes advertising utterly useless immediately.
In the days of Apple II and similar machines a person who operated a computer knew it, because computers were simpler and because there was no other way and because you’d generally buy a cheaper toy if you didn’t want to learn it.
Also techno-optimism of the 70s viewed the future as something where computers make the average person more powerful in general - through knowing how to use a computer in general, that is, knowing how to write programs (or at least “create” something, like in HyperCard).
That was the narrative consistent with the rest of technology and society of that time, where any complex device would come with schematics and maintenance instructions.
Then something happened - most humans couldn’t keep up with the growing complexity. Something like that happened with me when I went to uni with undiagnosed AuDHD. There was a general path in the future before me - going there and learning there - but I didn’t know how I’m going to do that, and I just tried to persuade myself that I must, it should happen somehow if I do same things others do with more effort. Despite pretense and self-persuasion, I failed then.
It’s similar to our reality. The majority stopped understanding what happens around them, but kept pretending and persuading itself that it’s just them, that the new generation is fine with it all, that they don’t need those things they fail to understand, etc. Like when in class you don’t understand something, but pretend to. All the older generation does that. The younger generation does another thing - they try to ignore parts of the world they don’t understand, like hiding their heads in the sand. Or like a bullied kid just tries not to think about bullies. Or like a person living in a traditionally oppressive state just avoids talking about politics and society.
That narrative has outlived its reality not only with computers.
People are eager to believe in magic. Do you need to know how to cook if you have dinner and breakfast trees (thank you, LF Baum)? So they think we have such trees. It’s an illusion, of course. Very convenient, isn’t it, to make so many industries inaccessible to amateurs.
It’s very simple. There’s such a thing as “too complex”. The tower of Babel is one fitting metaphor.
You don’t need this complexity in an AK rifle. Just like that, you don’t need it in an analog TV. And in a digital TV you need much less complexity too. We don’t have it in our boots - generally. We don’t have it in our shirts. Why would we have it in things with main functionality closer to them in complexity than to SW combat droids?
I think Stanislaw Lem called this a “combinatoric explosion” when predicting it in one of his essays.
Oh, I remember my childhood and how everybody (and sadly myself) considered us so knowledgeable because we sit chatting via ICQ, writing stupid shit in forum text RPGs, playing WarCraft III, Perfect World, IL2, KotOR and X-Wing Alliance all day.
Not in Retroshare or Freenet or I2P. They do have such people, of course.
My free speech absolutism would be in separating community moderation from actual physical instances.
Say, a P2P system where you subscribe to a community (somehow identified) and the “deleted” comments and “banned” users are that because of there being a “delete” record signed by that community.
With distributed storage, but storage a user contributes being used only by communities they subscribe to, so not like Freenet with every user probably storing one or two blocks of CP files.
EDIT: That would allow everyone to verify moderators’ honesty and fairness, which would be beneficial to moderators themselves, but at the same time in practice you’d have easy moderation.