h0p3

I adore your name. In case you've not seen it, I think you might enjoy trying out this RSS tool: https://fraidyc.at

I can appreciate this desire. Printing my website is basically out of the question at this point. I rely upon people thinking it worthwhile to keep a copy, and I make it fairly easy for people to do so. I distribute on a number of networks, I offer a number of snapshot archives (e.g. https://web.archive.org/web/*/philosopher.life), and I make it easy to download a complete copy of the entire site (https://philosopher.life/#Readme), as it's just a single html file. I do ask family and friends to see it as a book they will keep in their libraries, and I keep it very small, almost pure text (I don't want it to be any further a burden than it already is). Some store it on a thumbdrive or even keep it as an e-mail attachment. And, that it is nearly pure text is something that I think is exceptionally useful for this problem, as even if there aren't browsers that will be able to render it (that would be sad), there may be tools that can at least read the source (and, in a way, the site is meant to be somewhat readable from source, though it requires some motivation). I also enjoy the knowledge that there are random copies out there sitting on hard drives. I think it's gonna take some luck too.

Is there anyone here who has more than 3 months of using their [[Pinephone|https://philosopher.life/#Pinephone]] as a daily driver (a solid habit) or who knows someone who does? I'd like to speak with you (or them) because I'm in need of patient guidance. I'm willing to live off a commandline if I'm forced to do that.

I appreciate that. Thank you. I hope he starts feeling better. If it ever becomes a better idea (or even a hail mary play), you send him my way, please: https://philosopher.life/#Contact%20h0p3. He can take a look around to decide if he'd be interested.

I'd like to speak with him. We have some things in common, and I'd like to hear his perspective.

Perhaps those in power tend to be evil and don't deserve the air they breathe.

Why do you think it is out of hand, and what exactly do you mean by that? I will have a careful, lengthy discussion with you, if you'd like.

I'll open with the claim that what is moral is not necessarily what is legal.

Hi there. I'm a fellow 4eak. =). Perhaps this is irrelevant or missing the point (and I apologize if so). If I've understood correctly, maybe it isn't really that awesome to you. Often, I see myself just filtering through what looks interesting to find the very few pieces that maintain their persistent salience in my perception (though, I am often wrong).

You should try https://fraidyc.at/. It's a unique tool.

It depends on your privilege. Coercion comes in many degrees and kinds as well. Both are required reading.

I would like to take a moment and pray with you fine folks about the possibility of https://getaether.net/ (it is non-trivially in the right direction). We don't have to outright silence people in mere political games. Until at least the users get to moderate who (or what, and given which conditions?) will be their moderators on a platform owned and computed by the people who use it, [[power|https://philosopher.life/#Power]] will centralize, and we'll see the same problems again and again. We must distribute governance of The Great Human Conversation, and even my worst enemies deserve to have voices and a vote. Decentralize until it hurts, then federate until it works.

Perhaps it is worth [[sharing|https://philosopher.life/#Sharing]] with them now rather than later. I am [[grateful|https://philosopher.life/#Gratitude]] that I have the opportunity. You might even keep a public side and private one separately.

That is a curious response on these boards (I'm glad to see it). My name is h0p3. It's a pleasure to meet you. I am not here to argue with you, but I would like to hear more of your thoughts and feelings on the matter.

That's lookin' good, `/salute`. Your recent interview (https://www.maxwelljoslyn.com/thedrongo/interviews/jacob-hal...) was also a pleasure to read.

I'd like to recommend having a personal site (not simply a professional portfolio) as well. I read through people's accounts on forums often, and it's nice to have an external place to go where they have a stronger stake of ownership and more autonomy to model themselves.

Also, HMU, yo.

Forgive me for being late in replying to you (sometimes I sit on things for a while). Are you suggesting that we must find a way to democratically federate the problem of trusting particular mixnet servers? What solutions would you suggest? This seems a silly exercise, so feel free to ignore it: if you were to redesign the internet from the ground up, what would it look like, particularly with respect to this problem?

I'd read a book about Marxism or from Saint Marx himself with you. Consider me a quiet fan of how you think and interact with the world (you've been on my list for quite a while: https://philosopher.life/#We%20Could%20Probably%20Be%20Frien...). `/salute`.

I ran my own ghetto experiment. Despite resisting (I'm still not going to install it on mobile), it was Plebbit that brought me to Tiktok. Without having visited Tiktok, I've seen thousands of tiktoks that were scraped out and hosted on other platforms. Over the course of the year, I collected well over a hundred videos.

    https://philosopher.life/#:[search[tiktok.com]tag[Link%20Log]]

I went back to the source for each of these and started Liking them. I'd check every so often to see if the "For You" feed improved. It did improve, considerably, but it still doesn't beat the signal-to-noise ratio of having humans pick them out for me. I can scroll through 200 videos on Tiktok and not find a single video worth a Like (I've found one so far from Tiktok's recommendations, and that was from a channel of a video I had previously liked). Perhaps I've misused the algorithm that does the real work for picking out content that will capture my attention, but I'm pretty disappointed. I bet the information they have about me does tell them a great deal, but it's not clear they're going to be able to keep me engaged.

Yes, I should not have a produced them (or, at the very least, it was not wise enough to do so when I did). Looking back, I am not convinced it was moral for me to produce more persons. I [[love]] [[1uxb0x|https://philosopher.life/#1uxb0x]] and [[j3d1h|https://philosopher.life/#j3d1h]] more than I know how to put into words. I do not regret being a [[father|https://philosopher.life/#Be%20A%20Good%20Dad]]. If I could do it all over again, I would have waited to be older by 6 years, and I would have adopted or fostered, like my esteemed brother, [[JRE]].

Edit: Feel free to voice a justification with your downvote. I have answered the question in good faith and with my skin in the game. Are you looking for honesty or not?

I bet there are some exceptions when you look very closely, and I think you're glad there are some exceptions.

Bravo. It's gorgeous. I hope to see more iterations of this and others like it. TW-5 is well-suited to this problem, and I look forward to seeing what can be done in WASM too.

This might not be relevant to you, but in case my braindump may spark a serious conversation: //mere// virtue signaling is closer (but still not quite right). Part of the problem is that signaling (and, the more I look at this word, the more problematic it becomes, as I'm not sure what doesn't count in at least one's lightcone), virtuous or otherwise, need not be intended; agents can accidentally give away information. The virtuous agent may signal, and their signals may be both virtuous and appear otherwise to the vicious and virtuous alike. Part of the problem with the phrase "virtue signaling" is that there's a positivistic definition of the concept, but there are also justified manners in which to engage in that practice. Virtue signaling need not be fake or reduced to appearance (assuming we set aside the problem of representing a thing-in-itself). The virtuous agent may also perform or signal knowing they are signaling, and they may do so in virtue of performance. Maybe "Vicious Virtue-Signaling" is more appropriate. There are likely many attempts to label this thing we're worried about. This strikes me as the closest answer: when one aims to signal one's goodness in a deceptive manner that treats the other (including one's future self) as mere means, one has engaged in immoral or vicious virtue-signaling.

Anonymity comes in degrees and kinds, and, alongside radical decentralization, it can improve our ability to solve some problems of justice for which there are no other solutions. However, there are limits to what it buys us, and huge costs, too.

I hold anonymous giving and anonymized trust in high regard, nomad. Quite fallibly, I put my skin in the game on the wire like few ever have. I hope we learn to wear the Ring of Gyges without being unduly affected by it. Let us be the change we want to see in the world (https://philosopher.life/#Contact%20h0p3). Some say I'm a madman out here in the desert. It's a pleasure to meet you.

I'll read your blog. Point the way, please.

Dude. Thank you for sharing.

What did you do when you saw it?

What would you say back?

Are you leaving any easter eggs for your own offspring?

I will not defend Urbit, though I count myself lucky to read fossuser's posts where I find them. I would argue about digital land ownership and what the internet's users (and possible future users) need though. I'm interested in what the internet is for (like everything else). Would you like to have a serious conversation about that? That does seem a worthy topic, even if Urbit does not address it effectively enough (I'm still not convinced it won't centralize power). I suggest the workers must own the means of production. What do you think?

Hi there. Thank you for your note. If you head to either https://philosopher.life/#%24%3A%2Fthemes%2Ftiddlywiki%2Fvan... or https://philosopher.life/#Wiki.gif - you can change it to whatever you prefer (including just deleting it). That should work on mobile as well.

I'm grateful that you would take the time to speak with me. I know it's an expensive thing to do.

I'll start with ~~a humorous point for an autistic person~~ the worst kind of pedantry. An object cannot be no one's and mine at the same time. If I own it, then it isn't no one's. To the degree the CPU is indeed yours, then it is someone's CPU. Obviously, there's some conversational implicature embedded in your claim here, and that's what we're here to clarify.

For the record, I'm on your side. Your overall argument is something everyone needs to hear. So, I'm not here to destroy your assertion, but I think it should be weakened. There's a lot packed in there.

I take your proposition to mean, roughly, that the CPU in your possession is something only you have a cluster of moral claim rights to (which corresponds to a cluster of moral obligations of others to you regarding that CPU), with no possibility of overriding reasons, caveats, or provisos. Now, you could be speaking about political claim rights, but I don't think that's the case here (correct me if I'm wrong). Is that a fair interpretation, and do you wish to maintain that? Can you think of any exceptions? Are there any adjacent possible worlds in which that is not the case?

Hello there. It's an honor to meet you.

I suggest you are incorrect to assert that "no one is entitled to my CPU time." I agree, however, that advertisers do not have that moral claim right.

Your work is fascinating. Thank you for sharing. It's a pleasure to meet you.

Thank you. =).

https://philosopher.life/#2021.04.03%20-%20nkbghost%3A%20no%...