who is saying that? who is saying that if you have an account on a defederated instance that you can’t also have an account on their instance?
- 0 Posts
- 9 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 11th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
if he took it to court, he’d go to prison for lying UNDER OATH
he’s right there. he has the pamphlets. he’s giving them away for free. it’s 100% available to anyone who wants it. no one is stopping you from doing anything, they’re just not helping.
If defederation is censorship then refusing to take a pamphlet from someone handing them out on the street is censorship
Both sides committed voter fraud
Okay, let’s take it to court. If you’re right, you’ll win and if you’re lying you’ll go to prison.
17·1 year agoIs it wrong to pirate movies…
…lemme stop you right there
holding the delusion that people are naturally good
Nope! Just recognizing the truth that I, within myself, can be better and that I can accept the idea of being taken advantage of by the occasional bad faith actor in exchange for being able to be part of a broader community of people who do the right thing most of the time.
Cynicism is laziness masquerading as intellectualism. It’s the “step 1: give up!” of philosophies.
1·1 year agoHave you seen The Good Place? There is a part of this where they’re investigating the “points” system that is used to determine who does and doesn’t get into the eponymous Good Place. It’s a dead simple system: you do a good thing and you get some points, you do a bad thing and you lose some points, the more gooder or more badder the more points get added onto or subtracted from your total, and anyone over a certain threshold gets into the Good Place. It makes perfect sense, and it’s exactly the kind of system I think most people would design if they were the ones given the task. I know it was my first idea when I considered the problem, and it seems like that system worked well enough when it was first rolled out. On investigation, the characters find out that
spoiler
no one has gotten into the good place for centuries because the nature of trying to survive in a system as complex and interdependent as the one humans live in means that everyone has to either choose to simply go without what they need to live or participate in some form of evil. There’s even a character who understood the nature of the good place, and led every second of his life abiding by the principles that he know would allow him to gain entry. He dropped off the grid, became self-sufficient, and is self-sacrificing to the point of being personally miserable. He does everything he can to maximize the good he puts into the world, and he accumulated about half the points he would have needed under that system to get into the good place.
This is something that comes up in leftist circles from time to time as well, and a place where I break from doctrine. There’s a common phrase that popped up as a reaction to what you said above, “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism”. Everything involves exploitation of the environment, or of labor, or generating waste and other externalities that you’re just not gonna deal with. You’re gonna have to do something unethical in order to create more value than you invest in something. But, on the other hand, we need to live here. We don’t have the luxury of designing a system from scratch with ethics at the forefront, our kids are hungry today. So you do your best, you keep your consumption to a comfortable minimum, you use the paper straws when you can, you try to shape policy toward decency with what little power you have and you don’t hold yourself responsible for what’s out of your hands. There are no ethical consumables, but their can be ethical people.
the misunderstanding is in that I don’t understand where defederating is in any way censorship, but everyone is treating it as though it’s censorship. Defederating is just refusing to help spread someone’s speech, which is perfectly fine and reasonable. The message I refuse to signal boost is still there, people can see it, they can even choose to boost it further if they want. The people who originate the message are not locked out of the instance that defederate them either. But everyone acts like this is the equivalent of putting a gun to someone’s head and demanding that they shut up and I’m honestly really confused about it.