Why would you care to read and respond in an ask-random-lemmy-users-for-opinions@major-instance if you wouldn’t be interested in random lemmy users’ opinions?
Caller in the desert.
My alternative account @[email protected] moderates https://sh.itjust.works/c/neurodivergent.
Why would you care to read and respond in an ask-random-lemmy-users-for-opinions@major-instance if you wouldn’t be interested in random lemmy users’ opinions?
You seem to show some of your self-image here (a concept that replaces the misleading “ego”). The short description you give seems to tell that this is attached to “the quantity of your doing”. Hence the idea of “living = doing more = becoming more” vs. “dying = doing less = becoming less”.
While there is nothing wrong with that in principle (heaps of books exist on the different philosophical approaches on this wider topic and yours is quite popular among certain cultures), we could without changing much arrive at a different but perhaps more satisfying conclusion.
The change is from equating “living” to the experience of exercising our body and mind, to “living” being the experience of purely inhabiting and owning that body and mind. – That would probably be what people mean when they seemingly tell you to paradoxically “live a little” (implying to mean “live a little more”) by “doing less”. Which, when we really concentrate on enjoying the pure experience will not actually mean that we are just idling but it would mean we would be less occupied with exercising and more occupied with observing the living (or observing the feeling of it). Whether we actually do physical/mental exercising or not does not really matter. It’s just more easy for many people to do the observing while they are “idling” or “meditating” in a still way, but any way that fits a specific person is good. We might be surprised by how active we are when doing that.
That way we could arrive at the insight that “doing less” does not equal “becoming less” (perhaps even the contrary), neither that “dying” equals “becoming less”. :-)
edit … If we were to see “living” and “dying” purely as functions of an organism regardless of the existence of a self-image, then “living” would mean a sustained state of dynamic equilibrium whereas “dying” would be a transitory state toward non-equilibrium (that is decaying). Interestingly, decaying should then be a transitory state from being one dead organism into sustaining the equilibrium of living in other organisms (i.e. becoming the other); while there would be no transitory state toward becoming living (there’s just a transition from being a single cell to being an organism).
Do you, by some chance, mean c/ukraine on sopuli and people cheering to the real-life gore that keeps being posted there, and users getting banned for their ethical concerns about it?
e: It can be pointed out that it’s even worse here than on platforms run by single companies. With those, the admins themselves will mostly not have a stake in the company but they themselves will be employees, which in theory would enable the company to hire ehtically vetted/trained personnel. Whereas here, the admins are likely be tech people who know how to run a server but might otherwise be overwhelmed with ethical conducting, or put their own political teint onto their platform, respectively. Lemmy has been deliberately set up in such a way.
Add to that the lack of good moderation tools. Many of the issues people are complaining about are prely technical, though; what is displayed in UI and database functionality. Such things could be solved though, by actually hiring some capable software developers (takes substantial funding), or by having it done bit by bit. Would there be enough people with enough faith in Lemmy to substantially contribute
Societies would probably degenerate to absolute chaos. Relevant book exists: The Children of Men
film: Children of Men, 2006 (trigger alert: realistic brutality!)
Exactly, thanks.
I could also have said something about misguided patriarchic structures but if they react like that just on female promiscuity, such an effort would be wasted.
(Yes i mean to say that monogamy is an invention of male dominance cultures.)
To the contrary, it could fuck up several people’s lives if someone were to interfere with their peace. It’s just part of human nature that males can not be that certain about their offspring.
Via is indeed a wrapper for WebView, and i used it on an old device for its small memory footprint. Then kept using it for some features which the non-Chromium alternatives (Firefox but also Mull) have dumbed away.
That’s mainly navigation buttons in the address bar, drop-down tab switcher, the ability to export settings and bookmarks (never liked to have yet another “cloud” account that tracks my usage…), and saving webpages for offline use. Among other features such as code and resource-file viewer, network log. – It’s just a a lean and convenient UI.
Lately, i started to run it together with DuckDuckGo-browser’s tracking protection. That does take care of Via’s own built-in trackers.
I didn’t. My answer is as much guessing as the other funny ones. It’s just the lamest one as in: if no other information is given then the question must be about the (true) semantic relation of the words themselves … which there isn’t because the accusation of treason is arbitrary. 😅
Nothing much, really. Usually, those who have been accused of being traitors have in fact been loyal … just to something that was not in favour at the time.
Privacy means that you can talk/act safely in your own closed-off space while no-one knows what you do. The opposite of private is public.
Anonymity means that you can safely talk/act in public space while no-one knows who does it. The opposite of anonymous is … identified.
If you want your talk be private while doing it in public or via an untrusted service, you can use obfuscation/encryption of the content/payload data of your talk (still anyone could receive it and know it’s from you and if they have the key they can decipher it).
If you want to be anonymous in public space, you have to obfuscate the metadata of your talk (so that no-one knows who said it but anyone can still receive it).
*And here is a bit of an overlap depending on where we want to draw the boundary of our privacy realm. In some cases, the knowledge about metadata like location and time of a message can be breach privacy while in other cases this is irrelevant.
You could also do both, meaning you’d have an anonymous appearance in a public/untrusted space, having a conversation with only those people who have the key to your messages. That’s a stunt which is not easily accomplished, as obviously you’ll need a way to let others know how to reach you, and exchange keys (in other words, you’ll have to first make an appointment in private and in a trusted space).
[wanted to write two sentences, no so much text :-D]
You forget to mention, a constitution that is written (and properly commented) in such a way that it doesn’t require any interpretation; and that will receive periodic review and updating according to cultural and historical development; and that holds actual punishment for lawmakers who violate the constitution. Not saying that i know of any such thing.
All the power that an advertisement network can buy. Especially youtube since it’s owned by google. And advertisers will be happy to have a way of forcing site visitors to run ads/malware or else they will not get served the content.
It’s similar to certain bank apps refusing to function on Android devices with an unlocked bootloader: you want the convenience of an e-banking application (/ad-driven corporate website)? – Your device (/web browser) “security” must be verified by the “authority” who actually owns your operating system, else you won’t. Everyone* will “be loving” their secure devices, because they “just work”.
*who is a potential customer buyer and therefore relevant
Google is trying to use their dominance to actually own the www. The comment/issue section of the github site of the proposal is quite enlightening, if you have the time … especially their reactions on the general dismissal and condemnation of the proposal as unethical.
Relevant link: https://interpeer.io/blog/2023/07/google-vs-the-open-web/
Bottom line: Google want to introduce a live certification process for web clients so that webservers can potentially discriminate against specific configurations.
It’s called hypodipsia or adipsia. The bad thing for me is that dehydration causes the brain to get forgetful of things. So i notice that i’m dehydrated and i remind myself that i should drink … only to have forgotten about it after 10 seconds.
What helps me is to always have a water bottle at hand, and preferably have it so that i’m often reminded of its presence. Frequently have it in the field of vision, or strap it to the belt. Then train the habit that whenever i get aware of the bottle i immediately take some.
If you dislike the taste of pure water then try adding some flavour to it. Mineral supplement fizzle tabs, lemon, mint leaves … are you also “hungry for salt”? As someone mentioned, you might be low on essential ions as well.
When you drink beer, eat something salty to it (beer may cause sodium to get exchanged by potassium), and drink at least the same amount of water as you had beer. (hint for anyone for minimising hangovers)
Eyesight. Because the glory.
https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/issues/1048
In a nutshell, many people are bringing in more or less useful comments although it has already been suggested how this could work; the changes required would touch some core functionality in the way federation is done/ links are handled, thus none of the new devs take the initiative; the two main devs are occupied with other serious stuff.
WP as it is is of course not useless. But don’t confuse it with a real library. Then, imagine in the apocalyptical worst case, having archived only that summary of humankind’s knowledge. There’s a vast amount of detail that WP is just not the right place for.
The problem with such approaches will be human curiosity. Imagine today’s scientists find such a site from the late paleolithic which has messages like “This site is cursed; we buried here what causes death and pestilence to us; go no further or it will do the same to you!” – You bet they will want to see what is inside the “buried temple of death”.
Wikipedia is basically useless without the sources, though. It’s just a TL;DR summary of things.
Was this some glitch in the matrix, then? (For reference: attack happened on 2024-04-14)