Also, reintroducing prohibition. Alcohol has been the vasoline on the lens for many one night stands. (Also, ban vasoline)
Actually, this is an interesting thing because it goes to show the world is quote complicated. A lot of people who would agree that truth is an important ideal, but do we start banning anything that can be used to mislead?
It isn't like social media face-altering filters are unique or special. 30 years ago there were people taking their digitally scanned photos and removing blemishes or adding some hair. Do we ban photo editing software? Maybe we ban photographs altogether? If we ban photographs we should probably ban spell-check and grammar check...
Actually, this is an interesting thing because it goes to show the world is quote complicated. A lot of people who would agree that truth is an important ideal, but do we start banning anything that can be used to mislead?
It isn't like social media face-altering filters are unique or special. 30 years ago there were people taking their digitally scanned photos and removing blemishes or adding some hair. Do we ban photo editing software? Maybe we ban photographs altogether? If we ban photographs we should probably ban spell-check and grammar check...
Liberation, not control.
Leadership, not domination.
It's something easy to disregard, but do so at your peril. The exercise of raw power has a timer attached to it, and it's tempting to pull those levers once they're in front of us.
Leadership, not domination.
It's something easy to disregard, but do so at your peril. The exercise of raw power has a timer attached to it, and it's tempting to pull those levers once they're in front of us.
I'm surprisingly nonplussed at the idea that it would be manufactured by Ikea. It probably has some name that's 317 letters long too.
I think this protip might be an sj original...
People love grapes, but they tend to go bad quickly.
The two things that can happen is they start to dry out or they can get something nasty growing on them.
So my solution is to take tap water, add add a couple squirts of lemon juice, add your grapes, and refrigerate. They'll last much longer.
The water hydrates the grapes, and the lemon juice creates a fairly hostile environment for most pathogens.
People love grapes, but they tend to go bad quickly.
The two things that can happen is they start to dry out or they can get something nasty growing on them.
So my solution is to take tap water, add add a couple squirts of lemon juice, add your grapes, and refrigerate. They'll last much longer.
The water hydrates the grapes, and the lemon juice creates a fairly hostile environment for most pathogens.
I was agreeing with you, but then just expanding somewhat.
I have an entire section about opportunity in the graysonian ethic for just these sort of reasons.
I have an entire section about opportunity in the graysonian ethic for just these sort of reasons.
Opportunity is the father of invention, but not everyone has the same opportunities. That doesn't mean they don't have opportunities, it means they need to keep their eyes open for the opportunities uniquely presenting to them. You can attract more opportunities or drive them away by your actions.
People end up spending too much time upset that someone somewhere had different and maybe better opportunities than they do. They might blame the world's systems, but there's literally no system that can affect temporal or physical proximity.
Jon Bon Jovi and his high school sweetheart Dorothea Hurley have been together for 40 years and married for 31. Many women might go "why can't *I* be married to Jon Bon Jovi?", and the answer is simply that you didn't go to high school with him, you never had a chance. Abolishing capitalism wouldn't have changed anything. Changing who was president or in congress wouldn't have changed anything. Having a king or an emperor wouldn't have changed anything. You just weren't there, don't dwell on it.
On the other hand, every day we're surrounded by our own lives, and there are opportunities totally specific and unique to each of us. Instead of dwelling on the ones we don't have, we should instead focus on the ones we do have or could have if we put in the work.
People end up spending too much time upset that someone somewhere had different and maybe better opportunities than they do. They might blame the world's systems, but there's literally no system that can affect temporal or physical proximity.
Jon Bon Jovi and his high school sweetheart Dorothea Hurley have been together for 40 years and married for 31. Many women might go "why can't *I* be married to Jon Bon Jovi?", and the answer is simply that you didn't go to high school with him, you never had a chance. Abolishing capitalism wouldn't have changed anything. Changing who was president or in congress wouldn't have changed anything. Having a king or an emperor wouldn't have changed anything. You just weren't there, don't dwell on it.
On the other hand, every day we're surrounded by our own lives, and there are opportunities totally specific and unique to each of us. Instead of dwelling on the ones we don't have, we should instead focus on the ones we do have or could have if we put in the work.
I feel like the alternative to liking and reacting is 1000 messages saying "lol" "i agree" "i liek this"
Besides, my lizard brain does some important stuff, like telling me to eat when I'm hungry and to fear Cthulhu when I stare into non-Euclidean geometry not meant for this world.
Besides, my lizard brain does some important stuff, like telling me to eat when I'm hungry and to fear Cthulhu when I stare into non-Euclidean geometry not meant for this world.
It's interesting the preamble where it was previously called a code of conduct and it was renamed to a code of ethics hints at the sort of backlash I'd expect since the term code of conduct implies teeth that can bite you for not following it. I certainly would have a problem calling software enforcing behavior like that libre.
It sort of reminds me of one of those things that discusses the difference between being a boss and being a leader. A boss points and yells and says this is how you're going to do it or else. A leader tries to exemplify good behavior and present a vision for the future and model it so other people want to follow his lead rather than being forced to follow their lead.
The 4 freedoms and particularly the 0th freedom was what I had in mind for sure.
It sort of reminds me of one of those things that discusses the difference between being a boss and being a leader. A boss points and yells and says this is how you're going to do it or else. A leader tries to exemplify good behavior and present a vision for the future and model it so other people want to follow his lead rather than being forced to follow their lead.
The 4 freedoms and particularly the 0th freedom was what I had in mind for sure.
Because there aren't enough teslas to redeem even a tiny fraction of dogecoin. There are currently 132.7 billion in circulation. That would imply redemption requiring around 1 billion teslas. Tesla has only sold about 4M cars in 15 years. That suggest that it would take 3,750 years to get enough Teslas to redeem dogecoin assuming there was never another dogecoin minted. Thus, there would be an equivalent to a Tesla bank run where Tesla can't possibly provide the Teslas required to redeem all the dogecoin.
I know you're just joking around, but I think it's a really interesting conversation to have about exactly what strategies end up working in the long term for surviving.
Looting is an extremely short-term strategy. In the case of food, if everything gets looted then nothing new gets grown, and eventually everyone starves to death. In the case of hard assets like gardening tools, if those assets are then used to establish productive industries, then that might not be so bad but if they're just used up and made useless, then they end up getting used up and that's the end of that.
It seems like in terms of percentage, an individual facing a collapse would have a 1-20% chance of surviving after the collapse. Traders would have a good chance, as would tradesmen, farmers, and people with leadership skills who weren't part of the previous leadership hierarchy would find success.
Access to violence would potentially be useful, but only if paired with leadership and vision. Pure bandits would kill off their prey completely. Statecraft ends up being about taking enough to support yourself while leaving your subjects alive and perhaps even thriving.
Looting is an extremely short-term strategy. In the case of food, if everything gets looted then nothing new gets grown, and eventually everyone starves to death. In the case of hard assets like gardening tools, if those assets are then used to establish productive industries, then that might not be so bad but if they're just used up and made useless, then they end up getting used up and that's the end of that.
It seems like in terms of percentage, an individual facing a collapse would have a 1-20% chance of surviving after the collapse. Traders would have a good chance, as would tradesmen, farmers, and people with leadership skills who weren't part of the previous leadership hierarchy would find success.
Access to violence would potentially be useful, but only if paired with leadership and vision. Pure bandits would kill off their prey completely. Statecraft ends up being about taking enough to support yourself while leaving your subjects alive and perhaps even thriving.
That's a good point, and it speaks to a reality I've started to understand -- FLOSS projects don't exist in a vacuum. They need to attract users and developers and the like, and so only projects that can survive long-term will survive long-term.
I saw some questions lately about why projects tend to have a dictatorial structure, and the only answer I could come up with is that virtually no projects could start and get up to scale without a benevolent dictator in charge. If another method can work, then it would work, and we'd have those methods in use.
I saw some questions lately about why projects tend to have a dictatorial structure, and the only answer I could come up with is that virtually no projects could start and get up to scale without a benevolent dictator in charge. If another method can work, then it would work, and we'd have those methods in use.
There isn't anything that says that a project needs to blindly take every donation and code commit or it's no longer libre, for sure. At the end of the day, FOSS projects require leadership and that leadership does have decisions to make. Especially when the project is providing services besides just writing FOSS software.
That being said, my original point still stands with respect to claiming to be libre but then stacking conditions on top of the use of the software or source code. It might not seem such a problem when you agree with the limitations, but if the shoe was on the other foot and a piece of software required you to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and Savior or agree with the terms of the MAGA movement then the problems with such practices becomes rather clear.
That being said, my original point still stands with respect to claiming to be libre but then stacking conditions on top of the use of the software or source code. It might not seem such a problem when you agree with the limitations, but if the shoe was on the other foot and a piece of software required you to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and Savior or agree with the terms of the MAGA movement then the problems with such practices becomes rather clear.
Seems to me that being able to 3d print repair parts for something you either couldn't possibly get parts for or would need to do something drastic and energy intensive to get parts for is a nice proposition.