They can’t wait to start another proxy war, this time with China. They are encircling China with military bases and outposts and then constantly harp on “China’s aggression”. Fucking disgusting.

Nationalize youtube and turn it into a public utility financed by the UN. Create a kind of patreon system that distributes funds to creators similar to how it’s done for music collection agencies.

There are always alternatives, but not until people demand an alternative to constant brainwashing. Right now it’s unthinkable because people insist that there cannot be an alternative and therefor the status quo mustn’t be endangered.

At this stage burning it all down would be preferable although that would never happen until we’re seen widespread system collapse.

What’s wrong with Signal: https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/why_not_signal.md

TLDR: Funded by the CIA, centralized in the US and phone numbers make you personally identifiable.

Yeah, because if we know one thing, it’s that a group of people never has outlandish and crazy beliefs.

Yeah and that is the big lie right there. People have become so indoctrinated with the idea that profit seeking and unbridled greed is somehow neutral and can be trusted compared to things people might decide. That democracy is itself the problem, not the influence of capital on democracy. That we need to abdicate all power to protect us from the people with the crazy ideas. Instead we now get the best or worst of both worlds, capital using the most extreme beliefs to make money or gain power and social media pushing polarization for profit.

The inflation myth is a common fallacy btw. That only happens when essential goods (with “non elastic demand”) become scarce.

PS: Anyway, I did say these things are unthinkable

Let killer cops go free, jail the victims of the failed justice system.

The cruelty seems to be the point.

For news, you could set up a trust and transfer ownership of each news station to the workers for a type of collective. Let them vote democratically how they want to run their news station or news paper. Let them elect editors and managers. Or something similar to that. Financing shouldn’t really be a problem, after all governments can print money and run plenty of ministries and agencies.

You could do the same for social media, just transfer ownership to the collective of the workers. After that it is self-governing. That would be a massive change from corporate ownership, profit optimization and catering to advertising. Of course this is unthinkable.

And yeah I like the interoperability, the EU did something like this, mandating interop for messengers. But I’m not sure it really works.

They’ve been convinced that climate change is a hoax. Nobody realistically knows how to fix people’s beliefs about this.

Well the problem is that the solution is unthinkable. Most people, not just fascists but also liberals, parrot certain ingrained dogma that has been programmed into them. They are deathly scared of regulating or nationalizing news or social media and want to abdicate government power to the seemingly neutral market. Meanwhile PR agencies and think tanks deliberately crafted and spread the climate hoax lie, and that side is where the money is.

The tankies, the people previously known as socialists, know precisely what to do about this shit. Except their system is ruled by the same calculus of power and wealth. So you’d need to deliberately choose a system that will be less liberal to fix climate change and propaganda by the capital.

Ah normal people. My apologies

What about torrenting through a VPN with IPv6? Would that make you vulnerable to this exploit?

“faster than expected” lol

No I don’t use facebook or twitter. But it’s more for personal disgust than for morals. Nothing you or I or ten thousand lemmings do or not do will change the rising domination of social media on our civilization. Same as our individual choices won’t impact climate change. It’s the same illusion that only serves to prevent actual action against a serious threat. Not even thinking or talking about possible solutions. Corporate control of the means of communication is amoral, and accepting it is problematic.

Maybe I’m wrong and network effects can be overcome through a well crafted alternative like mastadon. But capital translates into power for marketing, development, articles and regulation or even legislation.

Normal people have friends and family and would like to use social media to stay in touch with them. There are network effects that make it practically impossible to switch. This is not something that can be done with the power of love and well informed agent in the marketplace.

One solution would be to nationalize facebook and other social media and turn them into public utility coops that are run democratically by giving the workers that work there a vote for who and how they should be managed. And give the users a vote.

Everything else is just fantasy. Facebook is forever. You’d need many billions in marketing and advertising to get enough people to switch. And then it will be the same shit.

Unless of course Elon Musk buys facebook, then it will be trash in less than a year.

Are you saying waymo is a conspiracy like the fake moon landing? 😄

At least this is something that can be fixed with code, while the stupidity of human drivers is forever haha

I hope we’ll soon see single seat driverless cars that are about the size of velomobiles or the podbike.

PS: A while back my PC would start up in the middle of the night for shitty windows updates and wake me up. Things like that can REALLY make you cranky or angry.

Might be a worthwhile experiment to see if the opposite is possible. We definitely should be developing artificial ethics before artificial general intelligence.

It IS important to stop fascist speech because fascist speech is fascist recruitment. That is why anti will fight to deny any fascist a platform.

I recently read a book about anti-fascism What Is Fascism? An Excerpt From “Fascism Today: What It Is and How to End It” | Truthout and it’s very enlightening to read the theory. Highly recommend. These folks have battled fascism for a 100 years and laws and governments are rarely any help. There is “liberal antifa” and for example sued the KKK out of existence and it includes using laws to sue fascists like Rowlings and Musk.

Otherwise there are only the streets.

So how should a civilized society deal with vile speech amplified and magnified that works to bringing and end to civilized society?

See here The Google antitrust ruling could be an existential threat to the future of Firefox | Financials show 86% of Mozilla’s revenue came from the agreement keeping Google as Firefox’s default search engine - lemm.ee

Sorry that was a bit hyperbole it would never be an all or nothing. You’d always have limited grass fed animal husbandry for milk and cheese. But my thought was that there should be some sort of rewilding effort for cows or Buffaloes or whatever their wild form even is or was in Europe.

And I was thinking in the way of harm reduction which is a tactic for drug. You won’t convince a majority of people to not want meant so the demand will be there. So practically artificial meat is the only way.

Sure. But loosing the money to fund development surely won’t help, will it? My point is that there is a real danger here. There are other forces at play which is why you have the chrome dominance already. Long term firefox will fall behind if not maintained. There really needs to be a push to finance firefox or alternatives.

Or imagine if more and more websites “require” some new web protocol to prevent ad blocking, or use of DMCA against browsers or addons altering websites as “web apps”. This is another problem that cannot be solved through individual responsibility.

The term liberalism has a wide history, associating it as a whole to fascism sounds a stretch.

Socialists seem rather illiberal about the definition and allowed use of the word and concept of liberal. They hear “a liberal?” and think “a fascist!”. I suspect that this greatly plays into the polarization between tankies and limbrols here on lemmy.

For example a newer definition of fascism is 1. belief in inequality based on 2. a mythological identity (e.g. race which isn’t real). That is useful to talk about trumpism vs the neoliberal democrats. But socialists completely refute that and insist it’s both the same fascism because capitalism. And that is where any discussion ends in my experience. It’s like we’re dividing and conquering ourselves for the benefit of the fascists…

Of course they are right in terms of foreign policy, which is absolutely fascist towards “shithole countries” no matter who rules in the white house. Neoliberalism is: 1. belief in inequality based on 2. economic or class status 3. personal freedom to die in whatever way seems best to you.

And once the prosperity is distributed away with rising wealth inequality that does lead to plutocracy and then fascism. And I suspect the socialists are right that without an explicit socialist component in your ideology this outcome is inevitable.

But unfortunately their definitions are stuck based on outdated theories written before 1950.