Our biggest enemy is actually the bootlicker
I got a small dose of this at work. My coworker has a safety incident, almost fucked up her hand. She got made the safety champion the next day, and was concerned about the optics.
My lead told her “don’t worry what they think of you” but brother you are a leader. Public perception is your strongest tool. You absolutely should be worried what we think of you
Forcing the Fediverse into your experiment isn’t going to get you into the position you think it will be the way
Like the other person said, beta software is expected to go through pretty large design changes. It’s not a matter of “forcing it on the user” it’s a matter of “my software isn’t ready yet, I’m not certain what my vision is, and if you’re not willing to put up with me figuring out what I want out of this software then wait for it to release and I’ll keep it stable from there”
I don’t see Linux phones being viable for the average person for a long time
Which is really so sad isn’t it? The whole thing is so modular it would really just take one dev team a few months to at least get the ball rolling if they had the investment but… It’s just not instantly profitable enough for anyone to bother putting the initial money in
I didn’t assert it. In fact, I very intentionally used passive language to avoid asserting it as a truth. I said “I think there are… That claim to be”
I didn’t say “Russia claims to be communist” or the likes.
I specifically phrased it that way to communicate that that was my understanding and not necessarily the truth. Then, someone told me my understanding was wrong and I corrected it. Then you came along, doing whatever this is.
I was humble about it. I publicly admitted that I was a victim of propaganda and adjusted the way I acted going forward.
You’re right that I probably could have put a other moment of thought into it before hitting post and I probably would have googled it and then changed it. Which is exactly what someone else has already pointed out to me and I’ve already done. So you’re repeating them, and bringing no value to the conversation.
Okay, let’s break down a few things here. I said
A few countries claim to be communist… Russia
[In 2018 I read propaganda that Russia still claimed to be communist] (paraphrased)
I then recognized that I was affected by propaganda and changed my tune. Then, several hours after I had already realized my mistake and changed my behavior, you came and started verbally abusing me for having misspoken in the first place due to my lack of knowledge. Again, I’ve already been educated and changed my behavior.
What value do you believe that your comments brought by being abusive after someone had already recognized their biases and changed them? Do you believe you are helping to further change my beliefs or do you feel like you might just be pushing a wedge between two people who actually agree for no reason?
Imagine replying to the same person 3 times to say the same thing, and all 3 of them were idiotic because you misread their first comment.
I said “claims to be” not “are” and then further clarified that I was saying that the most recent time I had looked into it I found multiple sources saying they stilled claimed to be communist. I knew they weren’t actually communist, I always did. Because of course I knew about the fall of the Soviet Union. I just didn’t bother to pay attention to the actual internal structure of Russia because it didn’t apply to my life in any way
I don’t believe that you can speak about propaganda without context, and I didn’t claim that either. The “efficient phrases” thing is part of a puzzle, not the whole puzzle. What I do believe is that terms like “tankie” fill the same role “Jew” or “Gay” fill for the right. It’s a term used to change the perception of the speaker from “person/human being” to “undesirable with a bad opinion”
Since there is no realistic way to accurately and objectively determine what is or is not propaganda
Can you realistically accurately and objectively determine that the source of the claim was a tankie?
So it makes more sense to make wild claims about the person behind the message than it does to classify a piece of information based off of its linguistic characteristics?
Choose the most efficient phrase from these options:
Notice how the message still gets across with that third one? It still tells you “these are lies or exaggerations that have misled you” without needlessly classing the source with a catch-all term that obfuscates their position as human beings with the right to live?
“Tankie” is a generalist term, the same as “leftist” and whatnot. The goal of terms like these is to put people into camps that are divided and label them as anything other than “human” because it’s a lot easier to say “100 dead tankies” than it is to say “100 dead humans”
My point is that terms like this detract from communication because they obfuscate the meaning behind what is being said. Using these terms, even if it is to fight against propaganda, makes it easier to continue using other terms that are similar in nature. This encourages people to use less people-centric language, which dehumanizes those around them and makes them easier targets. Best to just avoid using them at all IMO
I remember googling “which countries are still communist” back around 2018ish and Russia being at the top of many lists. It’s just another ripple effect from propaganda that hasn’t died out yet.
That being said, fighting propaganda is much easier with gentler words instead of name-calling in my experience
Oh man I made the mistake of saying the word Russia and now I must be evil. You’re right, they’re not technically communist and after double checking yeah they don’t claim it anymore either. Last time I really cared about Russia’s internals was quite a while ago, and despite few changes to their economic system they definitely used to at least claim to be communist. Or that was my understanding at the time.
The point still stands, a handful of countries claim to be communist. A handful of countries are communist. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is up to you to decide
I think there’s like 12 countries that still claim to be communist. Cuba, China and Russia off the top of my head and there’s a handful of island nations that are doing quite well with it
I can barely be trusted with shoe laces these days tbh
(Don’t ask how)
I imagine you just couldn’t find the words at the time but I would have, with relative accuracy, summed this up as:
“Each server on that web can communicate with every other server on that web by using ‘secret’ information to determine a path to get there”
Each federated service is on its own web
I know you said simplification to the point of inaccuracy, but while I’m being pedantic:
“Each federated service is on its own web, but imagine they overlap with each other in such a way to bleed into a single web”
This joke would have worked even better (it already works well) if you put the lines in the other order
Edit: I know markdown, I should not struggle with formatting this much lmao
New phone, who dis?
To agree with you in different words, I would you argue that you can compare it to a calculator. Without the reasoning, a calculator is basically useless. I can tell you that
1.1(22 * 12 * 3) = 871.2but it’s impossible to know what that number means or why it’s important from the information there. An LLM works the same way, I give it an equation (“prompt”) and it does some math to give me a response which is useless without context. It doesn’t actually answer the words in the prompt, it does (at best) guess-work based off the “value” of the text