tossAfterUsing

you're leveling a claim i might agree with, but i don't think you're doing so in an appropriate way (as in, if everybody behaved this way when similar feelings arose, we'd have a real shit community)

if you have a problem with the statement, can you address where it's inaccurate? or can you be more explicit with your own assertion in order that the rest of us can address where your inaccuracies are.

"censoring elected officials" is exactly the job of voters, no?

alternatively, the FBI is sponsoring "free" for whoever wants it.

Mhm.

Also missing from the parts of the discussion i've yet read, is the question of what sort of software we're using.

At the risk of using a buzzword, decentralized comms could reduce the risks of constitutional shutdown. And maybe even be better.

> However, you need to consider that if someone controls the economy of a country, they control the government of that country as well.

What do you mean? the FED is just a bunch of private institutions, and they don't control the US government.

convenient, since they were going to have a lot of blowback from their HK stance.

having technologists teaching the lessons to themselves is just jerking off... HN has more potential than that.

for everybody else to learn lessons is a great objective, but doesn't need to be the objective among this crowd.

Wish this were more well understood.

> Let's not act like the United States was a shining example of freedom and democracy before WWII, either.

Maybe we don't bother mentioning these very obvious historical circumstances.

Instead, we can talk about what technological solutions exist already, or could exist in the near term, which would obviate these institutions of oppression.

I am very interested in tools like Whatsat[0] and Sphinx[1] which protect communications between participants...

but what about my browsing. Do i just need to migrate all my "real" searches to Tor (already pwnt) or Beaker (insufficient, frankly)?

How can we continue to define ourselves as free persons while we exist among these dark patterns?

0 - https://github.com/joostjager/whatsat 1 - https://sphinx.chat/

> I don't think many deserve being painted as a victim of this situation.

Especially the least educated individual users are largely victims of this situation. Any who could possibly educate themselves further are proportionally less victimized and more complicit/approving.

Open standards are the answer, and the more individual demand we can create for these products and services, the better served we will find ourselves.

It wouldn't be such a problem to have YouTube colluding with Chinese censors if we didn't depend so much on YouTube to disseminate information.

> Is this serious? Or is this a "I don't like evolutionary psychology, so I'm going to throw the problems of the entire field at it"?

Came to say the same. From different angles...

from the article:

"""The idea is that, in the modern world, we have sort of modern skulls, but the wiring—the cognitive structure of the brain itself—is not being modified, because enough evolutionary time hasn’t passed. This goes for evolutionary functions like mate selection, parental care, predator avoidance—that our brains were pretty much in the same state as our ancestors’ brains."""

But, nobody is saying our brains are in the same state. Rather that our brain's state is impacted in the same way as our ancestors, because we have inherited the genes that produced the structures that influence the brain states which are possible/likely.

edits: readability

Wonder if that's why sunlight is considered a good treatment for sick people?

that's the magic of his very stable genius

well.. we could occupy zuccotti park again, except now it's illegal to have more than 100 people in the same place together.

sincerely,

"the civil liberties lobby"

I think this is prevalent in computer use generally. I came up on Dos & Win 3.1, and at every level the OS is trying to abstract the functionality from you.

Imagine trying to understand what a "driver" is without having a sense of what computer programming does... no way.

What i'm saying is: it's not just the IDEs... it's a mentality about computing.

And for one thing, it's the "i can do this quicker with an IDE" or "i can do this faster with a computer"

surely a computer can make things happen quickly, but truly understanding your tools takes much much longer than anybody realizes.

> At least this way you will get some control

doubt it.

> this will result in a temporary market recovery followed by the continued deterioration of stock prices

that's what zerohedge calls "the dead cat bounce" right?

> cover cost of insurance for massive testing

how about just massive testing. no insurance necessary

> That doesn't apply here.

So long as the appearance of inflation never occurs.

wonder how often the author regrets not getting it.

I thought everybody had exactly the same brain structure.

the internet needs more of this :)

> Observe the existence of free webcomics and you see your answer.

Yeah... so, I'm coming to think of the difference as:

having a job = getting paid for spinning wheels you wouldn't other wise spin

working = doing things you enjoy, for a payoff.

By that metric... i guess i'd rather work, than have a job.

Does anybody actually want to work though? Or simply to have the cash on hand to pay for things they actually want.

Serious question ^^

I personally find it rewarding to finish tasks & make things... being employed to do so is a luxury, but i still don't want to have a job.

Maybe i don't understand... what restrictions exist on multiple property ownership?

Exactly this.

reducing incentives toward central planning would remove downward pressure on decentralizing systems. I vote for more decentralized systems.

Seems entirely possible for the local government to hold the LLC accountable for following local rules without having to know who's behind the LLC

The meta-conversation going on within these threads is more to the point of folks suggesting hard-to-implement laws about who can own what, and how much of a thing they can own, and what sort of penalties exist to control the way that the population of owners can develop.

All that secondary stuff seems too chaotic to control... better to just -

a> allow for the LLC to do what it was designed for: protect the owner from liability beyond the cost of the house

and, b> let the municipality fine the LLC according to whatever rules exist about whether it's morally reprehensible to remove a renter for failing to pay a fine

we people are incredibly dumb.

stick to your fiat bro, that's going to be the best store of whatever type of value you're creating.