Opposite mechanisms - are they rich because they are entitled or are they entitled because they are rich.

My first reaction was to think the same, but this kinda assumes class mobility. Which is rare.

I think it’s more likely that upper class kids are more likely to be entitled and grow up to become entitled adults.

Yes, it intentionally breaks with human history, which has been largely built around and fought over borders for a really long time. What people argue is that it’s not human nature but learned. We organize ourselves locally and in communities, there’s nothing natural about patriotism and nation states.

I personally think they are correct in fundamental parts of their criciticism, but that doesn’t make it a realistic goal work towards any time soon. What we can do is to question the premises we are trained to accept and to think critically about how we should structure our societies going forwards.

Arguing we can’t abolish borders because of Russia and America is a bit like arguing nukes can’t be abolished because of the need for nuclear deterrence. It might make some degree of sense as a practical argument, but not as a normative stance.

The no borders crowd doesn’t want America to be anything more than a geographical term. There wouldn’t be borders and there wouldn’t be states. Possibly some sort of global federation would be acceptable depending on who you ask.

They’re right in principle. Borders are man made and lead to a bunch of conflict. The nation state is an arbitrary unit that has gained an absurd amount of power.

In practice of course few people would say we can just abolish borders over night and hope for the best. But criticizing it by saying that Putin would do this or that doesn’t work because Russia wouldn’t exist in this scenario and Putin would just be some powerless random guy with rapidly declining mental abilities.

The entire Russian war of aggression is about moving lines on a map in the first place. It’s a text book example of the stupid shit people start doing precisely because of our obsession with borders.

It’s funny to do a Ctrl+F for Lemmy in the thread linked by OP. They all collectively seem to agree that the threadiverse is a bunch of weirdos and that it’s only good for memes and brainrot.

I’m not saying they’re wrong, but it’s true that they do seem to have a culture for lengthyness.

Yeah. I don’t have the energy to read up on him too much but what I see reminds me more of socially awkward teenagers trying to be edgy than actual fascists. It seems to me it’s a person who needs guidance more than boycot and a cold shoulder. But then again I can’t be bothered to do my research and I’m sure a lot of people would be eager to tell me how wrong I am.

They sponsor a window manager called Hyprland, which is developed by some aggressively unwoke guy. When dealing with it Framework has blundered, babbling about a big tent instead of publicly asking the guy to stop being an idiot if he wants to keep receiving money.

I suspect people asking to boycot Framework tend to forget that people occasionally need to buy new laptops, and when doing so they have the choice between 1) a repairable laptop developed by a company supporting open source, and 2) a non-repairable laptop lining the pockets of people who are guaranteed to do more evil in the world than whoever develops some fucking Wayland window manager. But this is probably a dangerous take in these parts.

Edit: It seems the Framework also tweeted about Omarchy and some stuff. Not a great look, not sure if it’s boycot worthy either.

The google apps themselves are largely replaceable, but stuff like banking and communication (WhatsApp, Outlook) is where things tend to get problematic. You can run Android apps in Linux, but it might not be the most convenient thing to keep running at all times, and many banking apps will fail as they recognize the device as “insecure”.

Precisely how much of this would you want to eat?

I have seen sources claim it’s a form of meat.

I’ve seen some blogs using threadiverse posts as their basis, and honestly I don’t se many downsides. The content can be spread around the fediverse if people find it interesting, markdown allows for all kinds of text, it’s long form by nature, and the comment section is integrated into the whole thing.

Pixelfed is for pictures, not blogs. Write.as would be a more natural (but probably less social) alternative.

I never had problems with Comaps or Organic Maps, and in my experience they are particularly good outside of cities.

I don’t use voice guide though, but my advice would be to give comaps a shot and see if they fixed whatever bug you were having.

I really don’t like the user experience of OsmAnd to the point where I find it unusable. I use Comaps all the time and love it. Each to their own I guess.

If a bolt is loose you might lose it.

Obviously Whitney Houston’s version is amazing and her voice is incredible, but for me Dolly’s version feels more real and somehow hits me harder. And obviously she sounds incredible as well. I probably heard Dolly’s version first so that might play into it.

https://bird.makeup/ should allow you to follow twitter accounts from the fediverse. Obviously interactions don’t make it back to twitter, but could be useful nevertheless. See for example @franceskalbs@bird.makeup. Unfortunately twitter is full of trolls, so many instances block bird.makeup to avid spam from seeping through.

It’s not an alternative to xcancel as it doesn’t allow you to read feeds you don’t follow, but it’s good if you want to keep up to date with what users post.

There’s something about the way the lines around the couple and abstract facial features in Kooning’s piece that makes it look to me as if it’s an earlier stage of the fusion somehow. But indeed, it’s not like it’s the same motive.

In earlier renditions of Munch’s the Kiss the lovers had not yet merged. This one gives a very different vibe, especially with the use of colour:

I don’t read him as worrying primarily about the immorality. As far as I remember his problem is more that atheism is amoral, if anything. The main concern is the lack of meaning. Humans crave rituals and spirituality. Now that we killed God we have nothing to turn to; how do we bury our dead now that God himself has died.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

It’s hardly one-sided when you consider what Nietzsche had to say about religion. Take Christianity:

Christianity was from the beginning, essentially and fundamentally, life’s nausea and disgust with life, merely concealed behind, masked by, dressed up as, faith in “another” or “better” life.

Or more generally:

As soon as a religion comes to dominate it has as its opponents all those who would have been its first disciples.

His father was a pastor whereas he had a profound distaste for the church. Presenting him as a defender of religion is not accurate at all. I guess it’s easy to misrepresent him because there are a lot of nuances going on, and his writings also don’t always align perfectly.

For anyone unfamiliar, his sister was a Nazi, and after he died she managed his legacy in the worst possible way.

Nietzche had an interesting relationship to Jews and Judaism, informed over time by his own personal relationships in ways that probably didn’t influence his philosophy for the better. Parts of his work is about what he considers to be strong cultures, at which point he praised Judaism for being a particularly strong culture. Later in life he was less positive.

This of course comes on top of his thinking about religion, which is less one-sided than often portrayed: God is dead, we killed him, but importantly that was in all likelihood a huge mistake.

So the Nazi connotations are partly a result of his sister’s management of his legacy and unfinished/unpublished works after his death, part how Nazis ended up using his works long after his death.

He ended his life living with his sister in a rather fragile state, with his great writings behind him. Judging him by his death bed would be doing him and his work a great injustice. But even then there’s no evidence to indicate he was some sort of proto-Nazi.

Also as illustrated again and again, from ICE hunting down good people to cops stalking women because they are pigs, surveillance is not safety. It’s rather the opposite. I want privacy so that I can remain safe.

I don’t think anyone who ever lived in a totalitarian regime would describe it post fact as having made them safer.