Michael

You can think it’s funny all you like. Perhaps I wasn’t clear, but you misunderstood my grammar. I was detailing two distinct types of people, with different views. The latter (after the or) are more on the side of purity testing other Communists because they see what would unfold after many, many years of Communism as de-facto Communism and proof that others are not true Communists (hence the slash ideological purists part).

I currently choose to engage with emergent (and divergent) thought, not snapshots and echoes of the past - but I’m not trying to devalue it - I’m just very interested in modern Marxist-Leninist discourse and thought. I have previously engaged with the theory and understand the history that surrounded it and level of technology that we had in the 1900s.

What if the answer to all of our worldwide problems is finding a balance between decentralized and centralized structures, balancing technology and the environment, finding a balance between currency and a moneyless society, and achieving balance between authority and liberty (with the goal of individual and societal sovereignty), and so forth?

In this thread, I see Anarcho-Communists (or final stage Communists/ideological purists) taking bat at Marxist-Leninists (who espouse mostly outdated theory, but not always) and Liberals who fail to understand really any ideology that differs from their own because of how thick the propaganda is (and who espouse ideals like Democratic Socialism while failing to realize that their social support is still enabled by modern slavery - such as the exploitation of third world countries).

I think a direct democracy, with authoritative and libertarian elements (such as enforcing liberty/a universal bill of rights for individuals) would be ideal.

It could have an economic system with built-in social supports (each according to their need) that emulates cash and all the best parts of blockchain (that isn’t hoardable or worth hoarding, that also doesn’t enable slavery/other forms of parasitism, and is generally private at the transactional stage - yet is auditable at a larger-scale), with centralized control of natural resources that still respects decentralized development and balance with the environment. And also does not have debt or parasitism of any form, instead encouraging diplomacy - such as contracts/agreements taking the place of debt to better the planet and encourage societal responsibility and stewardship (e.g. contracts that result in the stabilization of the society incurring the would-be debt).

Instead of total anarchy or various forms of authoritative control/dictatorship, we could simply combine direct democracy and hierarchy by electing leaders based solely on merit in the areas that are most needed, with strong controls so we get the best out of leadership and hierarchy and the resultant clarity and direction, without letting leaders and other experts become drunk on power. While also preventing the corruption of the individuals in power and the various forms of stagnation that result from entrenched power not conceding to new developments or advances.

I know I’m an idealist, but I’d like everybody to turn the chapter and realize that we are in 2025, not the 1900s. Technology and science have advanced every area of our society. We are so beyond scarcity that we are producing well beyond our needs with conditions and methods that are not even close to ideal (with ideal and emergent solutions and methods ready to take the place of those unsustainable methods).

We also have a global communication network - we can understand foreign languages without any human intervention in some cases, we can bridge cultural gaps, we can seek understanding and truth with our fingertips, and also we can push past the propaganda we are served on a platter, etc.

We can achieve something better than anything that has ever been conceived of previously, and it starts by crumpling up all of the things that no longer serve us. Concepts like racism, nationalism, really all of the isms that promote superiority over others. Bridging gaps, joining hands, while also countering disinformation (not misunderstanding) and bad faith.

We truly are not facing the same limitations that we did in the 1900s, although we may be facing new challenges like the rise of AI and the misuse of it by those currently in power.

There really is no more room in society for mucking about and fighting others while everything is in such disrepair, with so much needless suffering happening.

💯

The world could indeed learn a whole lot from China’s efficiency, how they do business, and specifically from their advances in manufacturing.

I see their point, but I disapprove of contributing to the destruction of the environment (from lengthy transport or industry potentially not using best emergent practices) because it’s “cheaper” and that’s what I was trying to touch on.

I’m no fan of Trump or his policies, but I don’t think it’s a necessarily a bad thing that he’s encouraging American industry to develop (even if his reasons for doing so are vastly different from my own) - but as they pointed out - his policies are hilariously not to much effect, if any.

If products produced in China and sold here in the US are “bad”, it’s solely the fault of the American capitalists who don’t have a care in the world besides selling the lowest common denominator in mass quantities, with no quality control on their side, consumer support, or care for how it’s made or transported. And of course those who blindly consume are responsible as well.

If products are made in China and consumed in the states, there is usually no way to have things repaired or serviced as a consumer. We also have no idea what chemicals are being used and are exposing ourselves to and we can’t directly control or quantify emissions from Chinese factories besides voting with our wallets. A lot of waste is produced because nothing is built to last - not because it was made in China, but because it was all orchestrated by uncaring capitalists.

If the global supply chain was localized to geographic regions, we can greatly reduce emissions from transport. With regulation and our technological advances, we can also build new industry that is significantly less harmful to the environment and the people that work and live around it. I’m not claiming that China isn’t implementing new policies or practices or trying to make light of their efforts to reduce their emissions.

Their company is not just a software development company - they are presumably designing hardware, having it produced, and selling said hardware.

If you can’t answer basic questions about the product you want produced, as a company selling hardware, then clearly you need to hire somebody who can answer those basic questions and deal with the manufacturing side of the business.

There are just very few companies left still working in manufacturing in the US, and of course they are selective about the clients they take and the projects they work on. If you can’t form healthy business relationships and learn to do business without calling people that you deal with babies for having questions or requirements, then perhaps it’s possible that you strongly consider contracting with another company to manufacture the hardware for your software.

It’s highly inefficient and harmful to the environment to ship steel across the world. We need to stop unsustainable practices, produce products locally, and develop economies of scale that make sense instead of simply “offsetting” emissions or relying on carbon capture that is not directly integrated into our industry.

That all being said, the world could learn a whole lot from Chinese manufacturing processes.

deleted by creator

Yes, from my understanding as an outsider and layman, of course. From my perspective, the observation and insights developed from the R4L project will make Linux much stronger project overall moving forwards.

Social media is virtual town hall and a place for many to vent and deal with their emotions - not everybody is perfect and uses the internet the way you approve of. It’s truly no different in essence than the LKML or other public-facing communication platforms - it just has more voices and more free engagement. We can be big people who express ourselves any way we’d like as long as we respect others the way we’d like to be respected.

I don’t advocate for shaming because I wouldn’t want it done to me, but I don’t see Hector acting in bad faith, and their actions are questionably hostile because Hector clearly wavered in their approach. They are under a lot of stress and are obviously motivated by the feelings of the other R4L maintainers and their issues - Hector’s good faith and empathy is plain to see. They are very upset that others are being disrespected, that their work is being unnecessarily questioned, and that their efforts overall are likened to a “cancer” while people openly stand in their way.

Did Hector disrespect the maintainer in question? Did Hector call people to action in order to shame the maintainer in question? Their initial intention did matter, of course, and I was not able to read the drama in question on social media because it appears to be removed. Hector certainly wanted the maintainer removed, which I don’t personally agree is ideal or fair, but it’s not their decision and it’s not social media’s decision.

On the flip-side in this instance, I similarly see somebody who brings up valid issues with splitting the codebase accompanied by a lot of emotions spilling out (like seeing Rust as a cancer, and vowing to stop it from spreading in the codebase further), but I personally fail to see how that is their problem if the code isn’t going to involve them. It’s up to Linus and the larger LKML community to discuss the form in which Rust will take in the Linux kernel.

Clearly a discussion that could be had with Hector included, but there is a lot of hostility towards larger public focus coming from Linus, and he effectively shut the discussion down and accused Hector of being the problem. There certainly are problems all around, from my perspective, but all of that could’ve been resolved, and still can.

Rust seems to be imperative for security. I hope people in the Linux kernel community put aside their differences and find common ground for the benefit of everyone.

From my perspective as an outsider, there is a lot of apparent hostility and seemingly bad faith engagements going on in this space. Hopefully the reasons are innocuous like them just not wanting to learn a new language, to avoid increasing their workload, or to simply avoid working with the Rust team for whatever reasons they might have.

I would argue that anybody standing in the way of progress and increased security should be moved out of the way. No need for shaming or deep dives, just move the ship forward.

I don’t think there is any need to reserve or control your feelings - love freely however you’d like to be loved to everyone you encounter. If somebody doesn’t hold love or respect for you in some form, I’d say that they probably aren’t suited to being in a relationship with you, platonic or otherwise.

See loving somebody as not possessing/owning them or controlling them. If you are the best fit with somebody, you’ll both know it and it’ll click at some point. You’ll both come to the understanding that you’d rather not be with anybody else on the journey you both share and mutually chose to be on.

Loosen up and be patient, honest, and direct. Give space to your potential love interests. If you think it would help, I’d also suggest seeing people you are very passionate about as friends you have feelings for, instead of love interests - just don’t overextend yourself or give what you don’t have to give.

Trust yourself, and trust that when everything feels right, you’ll both open up at the best moment and define a proper relationship and healthy boundaries. If you truly have built trust and rapport with somebody, whatever you create with them will be a beautiful and fulfilling thing and there will be no room for jealousy or doubt because it’s simply not necessary.

I’m asking out of genuine curiosity, what are they doing besides shaming others? What’s done is done - we are here now.

If they had constructive or productive intentions it could apply to the current moment even with Trump in office.

Just curious, if Kamala did the same arms transfer shortly after getting elected; how would you respond or what would you do?

Would you assure others that she is working tirelessly on a ceasefire despite her vow to always give them the ability to defend themselves?

Yes, surely with programs like PRISM and the NSA, and corporations collecting information about literally every aspect of our lives with every device we purchase…they are just trying to sell us ads.

Our ruling power structure is paranoid, our government is rogue and largely does not serve US citizens (only the ruling elite), they maintain control by invoking fear, division, outrage, and stress in the population and they count on our learned helplessness and slave mentality. They want us to be depressed, they want us to be chronically ill and tired, they want us to be poor and struggling, and most importantly they want us to think we’re the “good guys” fighting the “bad guys”.

I’d prefer to see people screenshot/crop and also link to an archived version or a frontend. These services (X, Instagram, Meta, etc.) often require you to login for a lot of things (including seeing posts) and also block VPNs.

It definitely is harmful to Lemmy’s userbase to click on these links, but I also don’t think we should create a walled garden. Users can always choose to use solutions like LibRedirect.

Shh, you must be wracked with guilt because of all of your sins. Think about all the privilege one enjoys in first-world countries because corporations have single-handedly solved all of the world’s problems. /s

I do like that you signal-boosted Mullvad Browser. I think it’s a great option. And I hope somebody sees this post and gives the team a hand.

Projects like LibreWolf and Mullvad Browser are important because user settings being roughly the same across a userbase helps you to blend in. Even extensions you install can be used to fingerprint you.

There’s also no credit-score check in the US for job applications, so no, it doesn’t “lock people out of finding work.”

Employers may use credit report information to verify an applicant’s identity and to look for signs of excessive debt or past financial mismanagement. Source: https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/why-employers-check-your-credit-report-and-what-they-see/

Employers discriminate very openly against applicants for a variety of reasons. Nepotism is one such way, AI filtering is an emergent way - there are plenty of other practices.

Good luck getting a job if you were ever convicted of a crime, no matter how innocuous, or even had a police report filed against you (for certain jobs with clearances) - with no convictions, evidence, or arrest. Even being arrested with charges dropped can disqualify you effectively.

And you better believe if you actually got arrested, every local newspaper has doxxed you - with full name, mug shot, even potentially your employment history and rough home address. All it takes is a name to get somebody’s address because people search websites exist to compile all of the wonderful publicly available information.

and they are struggling to keep it up to date with the latest Arkenfox updates, despite putting out new releases.

Keyword is Arkenfox user.js. Which is not Firefox updates.

If the LibreWolf maintainers are overwhelmed at the frequency of commits of a project that tweaks Firefox preferences (which amounts to “sesame street numbers” according to Arkenfox developers) because they are short on time and resources, so what?

Not going to get into a huge debate, but I disagree that it’s a good thing or even remotely ideal. I don’t there should be such huge separations in society to the point where you can point somebody out as “rich” and “poor” - especially pegging an entire neighborhood as poor or mostly poor.

We can do better to provide quality housing and the ingredients of dignity to everyone.

We need to redefine society if we want to truly unify, and it starts with an universal human bill of rights. Ensuring individual and community-based sovereignty with guiding concepts like direct democracy are important first steps. Dependence on externalities and reliance on impersonal entities like corporations (which largely capture governance, science, and everything else they can) needs to stop if we want to realize a world that is worth living in for ourselves and future generations.

Society is our doom if we continue to allow pollution, waste, and destruction of our environments on levels we have never seen before, while experts and other people in the know stand silently and cover the situation up, or are largely ignored if they are actually crying out. Environmentally-caused disease and chronic illness are rising to levels that we can no longer ignore or cover up.