Britain's young communists are ready for revolution
Britain’s young communists are ready for revolution
A teenaged goth and a ponytailed man were smoking outside the Revolution Festival. “I’m outside because someone who is 16 years old and needs to be chaperoned everywhere is being a little dick and neEmily Lawford (New Statesman)
[Video] Israel TV airs pity video about how traumatizing it is for their prison guard rapists to be on trial for raping Palestinians
like this
Maeve likes this.
Trump’s FBI Spent Nearly $1 Million on Redacting Epstein Files
Mexico’s ‘Gen Z Rebellion’ Exposed as Right-Wing Plot
Mexico’s ‘Gen Z Rebellion’ Exposed as Right-Wing Plot
Intent on toppling Mexico's popular president, local oligarchs and an international right-wing network backed a youth-led anti-corruption uprising, Wyatt Reed and Kit Klarenberg report.Consortium News
And talked about arresting Benjamin Netanyahu and respecting international law. And being extremely pro Palestine when nobody dared to, gaining him immense popularity and creating many copycats.
Seriously does nobody have a memory span of more than 2 weeks?
For you, I'm sure. I don't think most voters care much about Palestine. And it's certainly not what he spent most of his time talking about.
Don't fool yourself into thinking you're the average voter.
" ... Pe-heeeeeggy Hill"
-- John Redcorn
Overheard a conversation at my college. The one answering was from US.
"Do Europeans celebrate thanksgiving?"
- "Yeah it's in the bible."
How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]
Solved: Thanks to all who commented, especially those who took the time to respond to my follow-up questions. Your responses were enough to convince me of the value of buying a custom domain in order to keep one's true email address private w/ the added benefit of working on websites that block known domains of temp/forwarding service providers.
Key takeaways:
- Forwarding services' shared domains are useful for blending in w/ the crowd. (credit to @Cricket@lemmy.zip)
- Custom domains are handy when you don't care about blending in and you want to use a website that blacklists known domains of disposable/forwarding service providers, including the paid-tier domains.
- Deciding whether to enable catch-all:
- Enabled: You can make up new addresses without having to configure the alias manually each time, but it's also easier for spammers to guess valid addresses.
- Disabled: It's more difficult for spammers to guess valid addresses, but you'll have to configure your aliases manually unless you have regex matching for automatic creation of new aliases. With regex matching for automatic creation of new aliases, disabling catch-all has few if any downsides.
- Regex matching: Seems to provide the best of all worlds by making it harder for spammers to guess valid addresses without having to configure aliases manually each time.
- For aliases, including a string of random characters after the company name makes it harder for spammers to guess your other aliases and/or learn where else you have accounts by spamming emails to every
$companyname@example.comand seeing which ones bounce back. (credit to @erebion@news.erebion.eu)
Original post:
I've recently signed up for an email forwarding service w/ aliases so that I can keep my true email address private when I sign up for new websites and services. I should clarify that I'm less concerned about concealing my identity as I am about protecting my real email address, identifying who leaked my info when my email address is compromised, and being able to stop the spam by turning off that alias.
While updating my existing profiles to point to aliases instead of my real address, I've hit a snag - some sites (Steam, Slack, etc) won't allow me to update my email address to any known domains from my email forwarding service.
On these sites that block email forwarding addresses, for now I'm either updating my existing email address w/ a plus sign if the website allows it, otherwise I'm just leaving my existing email address unchanged. It's not the end of the world, they already have my real email address, and I can probably go a Very Long Time without needing to check those inboxes anyway, but I'm still miffed that I can't completely migrate my existing accounts to my new scheme.
I've read numerous posts about the benefits of custom domains to enable portability of email service providers, and I'm wondering if custom domains are the answer to these sites that disallow forwarding addresses, but I have questions:
- How do other people deal with this situation?
- Do these websites that block known email forwarding domains typically work on a whitelist or blacklist model? If the former (whitelist), then I'm thinking a custom domain will have the same problem, but if the latter (blacklist), then I reckon a custom domain with catchall might work.
- Particularly owners of custom domains, do you find your custom domain is allowed more often than not or do you run into the same problem?
EDIT: Clarified my objectives.
walmart@curious_dolphin.net
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Western liberals: "my god, he's a Russian agent in the White House!"
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Well, Trump is willing to give Putin everything he wants on a silver platter, haven’t you looked at the latest peace deal the U.S. and Russia penned for Ukraine?
theguardian.com/world/2025/nov…
Americans helping Ukrainian war effort call US peace plan a ‘betrayal by Trump’
US volunteers who have poured into Ukraine to help amid war are dismayed by Trump’s continuing pressures on KyivBen Makuch (The Guardian)
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
No, graphene isn't being targeted by the french government.
There's been some posts about Graphene leaving france and accusing the government of targeting them.
This isn't happening. What happened is that le parisien posted an article that presents what french law enforcement think of grapheneOS, which is obviously mostly crap, then present part of graphene's respone, which does in fact include their references to human rights organizations, large tech companies and others using GrapheneOS, unlike what grapheneOS claims. The main flaw with the article is the fact that the author takes what the french law enforcement says at face value, which is not a good move.
If you haven't been following this you may be wondering how this was extrapolated into the government targeting them. Well, it's because government owned news sites also reported on this. This is because le parisien's article got regurgitated by a bunch of other news sites looking for an easy article to get ad revenue from, normal news site behavior. The government news sites are fully editorially independent from the government, which the GrapheneOS lead should know, since that's how the canadian CBC works.
For chat control, that measure isn't supported by the majority of french meps, just the (massively unpopular) head of state and his minority government. No similar law has been passed nationally, in fact, a law that guarantees privacy rights is making it's way through the legislature (tuta article). If chat control passes, it affects several of the countries (germany and belgium, afaik) they moved to as well, anyways.
Graphene's announcement also disparages the other two big privacy roms, both based in france, which is odd and makes me personally think this may have more to do with the visible hatred the project lead has for those projects.
Please tell me what you think, and if I missed anything important, because it really seems like a big nothing-burger to me.
if I say I use Signal or Grapheneos, peoples who consume major newspaper jokingly say : "oh, you're using the criminal thing, you must be a drug dealer/terrorist". It's a joke, but still, I can see that the misunderstanding of those tools are in their head. So French news does a good job to make them look bad.
And recently the Anssi (French agency for security and information system, depending from security ministry) , published a public pdf about mobile phone threat in France since 2015. They talk about hacker, security breach, tools and tips for population to prevent risk. They recommend to use Signal over Sms. But they never mention Grapheneos or any other rom.
You forgot that french juges have used the facts that people installed Linux, Signal, /e/OS and GrapheneOS has evidence to charge them!
I think they were leftists activists charged for eco-terrorism but I don't remember all the details but you should take a look. La Quadrature du Net has done some blogging and court things over this events of dark times.
You forgot that french juges have used the facts that people installed Linux, Signal, /e/OS and GrapheneOS has evidence to charge them!
this sounds insane but common for judges; do you have any sources for this?
Yes, sorry I was too lazy to provide any sources here are a few (mostly in french sorry). It was called the 8 December case or "L'Affaire du 8 décembre" in french.
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8_Decemb…
- lundi.am/Affaire-du-8-decembre…
- lemonde.fr/societe/article/202…
- laquadrature.net/2023/10/02/af…
- laquadrature.net/2023/06/05/af…
- web.archive.org/web/2023060713…
Edit:
- archive.is/lemonde.fr/societe/…
Sept militants de l’ultragauche mis en examen pour « association de malfaiteurs terroriste »
Arrêtés mardi, ces militants sont soupçonnés de projets d’actions violentes ciblant des policiers, sans qu’un projet précis de passage à l’acte ait été identifié à ce stade.Samuel Laurent (Le Monde)
Except that for the moment, no decision of the judges shows that they have retained the fact of having Linux, Signal, /e/OS or GrapheneOS installed, even in the case of 8 December. And I'm talking about not the investigating judges here, but the decisions of the judges of the court.
These articles speak only of investigating judges, not of conviction.
Trump bars South Africa from 2026 G20 summit in Miami
Trump bars South Africa from 2026 G20 summit in Miami
Trump cites his claims of "white genocide" against white farmers in South Africa and its refusal to symbolically hand over the G20 presidency as his reason for barring the country from next year's summit.TRT World
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.m.youtube.com
Radeon Software for Linux 25.20.3 Released - "Exclusively Open-Source" With RADV
Radeon Software for Linux 25.20.3 Released - "Exclusively Open-Source" With RADV
With the great upstream support for AMD Radeon graphics in the Linux kernel and Mesa, most desktop users / gamers / enthusiasts are best off just using the latest code shipped by their distributions or via the enthusiast-supported third-party archive…www.phoronix.com
i just got my first amd/ati hardware and it was nice not having to take an extra step to reviewi/set-up better nvidia support; the best available was automatically provided like the article says.
With the great upstream support for AMD Radeon graphics in the Linux kernel and Mesa, most desktop users / gamers / enthusiasts are best off just using the latest code shipped by their distributions
it got so bad for me in the past, that i just avoided nvidia the last 2 times i bought hardware.
Ubuntu 26.04 LTS - The Roadmap
Ubuntu 26.04 LTS - The Roadmap
The Desktop team has just returned from our engineering sprint in Gothenburg, and as we begin the development cycle for Ubuntu 26.04 LTS, I’m excited to share what’s coming next for Ubuntu Desktop.Ubuntu Community Hub
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Snap is interesting for me it can do more things than flatpak and has some really interesting sandboxing features coming up such as permission prompts for filesystem access.
But Canonical management is a significant hindrance. The Snap Store simply cannot be trusted after so much malware got in and they still have not improved their processes. So many snaps including Canonical's own, are still using core22 for some reason. And there's the broken snaps Canonical pushed on users.
I would love to see a snap repo that takes the best parts of Flathub and Fedora Flatpaks. Because as a technology, I think snap beats flatpak (if you're using AppArmor). But it's Canonical's poor management that really drags it down.
On the other hand:
- Loop-device exhaustion (slow, though Ubuntu has increased the limit via a patch).
- A single point of failure due to Canonical’s repository imposition (a closed garden).
- Unmaintained branches and snapped apps.
- Implicit installation of snapped apps through the
aptCLI instead of the originally supported packages 🤬 (what the hell, Canonical!? Are you doing the same crap as Microsoft?).
The server-side closed garden is the opposite of an open ecosystem and the open-source community. You can add custom repositories to APT or Flatpak. Every new snap interaction feels like another step toward forcing the user to use it, instead of offering cool features that convince users on their own merits.
The last change (installing snapped apps when you run apt install) was horrendous.
What’s next? Installing snapped apps when the user runs flatpak install?
The only logical reason for them forcing users into their own, proprietary snap store, when a user is trying to install from another source, is they want complete control over that ecosystem. And the only reason for that is so that they can eventually sell it to a huge player like Microsoft or Google or Amazon.
They are completely untrusted with that slimy move.
And like, even if that is possible, the Flathub maintainers would probably reject it on principle. So I'm imagining CanHub with an extra step in the installation instructions that gets you to pipe a curl'd script into sh, at which point, what's the point?
Flatpak recently got a method of preinstalling flatpaks.
A flatpak cannot install a snap on your system. Apt can install a snap because when apt installs and updates packages, it can also run scripts as root. That's insecure and potentially dangerous, so flatpak doesn't have that ability.
The snap bullshit is not bullshit. It's a legitimate sabotage, cheating the user, and making a walled garden.
They're not trustworthy.
Did you read the changes?
They are enabling auto update for some snaps and updating some snaps to a new core. They don't say they're pushing anything else
KDE Going all-in on a Wayland future
cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/39342270
Well folks, it’s the beginning of a new era: after nearly three decades of KDE desktop environments running on X11, the future KDE Plasma 6.8 release will be Wayland-exclusive! Support for X11 applications will be fully entrusted to Xwayland, and the Plasma X11 session will no longer be included.
Well shit. I would like this better if more things played nicely with wayland, as wayland itself seems pretty great. Remmina for example can't do multi-monitor outside of x for example and this is breaking for me when i remote into my work computer.
I realize that this is the fault of remmina and not wayland. Any RDP client recommendations that work on wayland for this?
Primarily my aforementioned issue with Remmina not being able to span multiple monitors while running under wayland.
I think when I looked it up I saw the Remmina devs have been aware of this problem for a couple years now, but the problem is surprisingly difficult for them to fix for a few reasons I can't recall at the moment.
Try the suggestions here: discussion.fedoraproject.org/t…
I've personally tried upsetting Wayland, setting the GDK backend, and setting qt_qpa_backend. Since remmina is a GTK app (or am I miss remembering?) I think it wouldn't be the last one.
It's worth a shot.
How do I run an app with X11 in Xwayland?
I have an app that I would like to run, but when I try to run it, it spits out this error: Unhandled exception. System.Exception: GLFW error: Wayland: The platform does not support setting the window position at Glib.Window.Fedora Discussion
Honestly for the best. X11 was great for what it was, but Wayland is the future. XWayland covers X11 apps that haven't been ported yet.
Now I just wish Cinnamon would hurry up and move to fully default Wayland.
It may be the future, but it's unusable for me.
I have a high dpi screen. Upscaling does not perfectly work for me in every program, but simply setting it to Full HD does work and looks fine.
However, when I set it to the lower resolution in Wayland, I have 50% of the display active with black bars all around.
So far, there seems to be no fix for this?
Same thing happens if you start older, lower resolution fullscreen apps (retro games and such).
I tried it on KDE (or rather, it forced me to after it simply updated to Wayland by default). I tried to set it up correctly, but it just didn't quite work.
I also need no fractional scaling, but some software does not honor that anyway (e.g. VST interfaces).
Simply reducing the resolution is a simple fix, also easier on the GPU, but Wayland will not fill the screen and intead just shows the tiny original 1:1 image in the middle.
Doesn't work for me either. Wayland broke my volume keys, and my left ctrl and caps lock keys. Also makes jellyfin go black.
X11 just works...
Linux is not UNIX. And X isn't part of POSIX.
Also, Wayland works on FreeBSD.
Linux is not UNIX. And X isn't part of POSIX.
Please refrain from replying to things I haven’t said. None of your points invalidate mine.
It does have a relation. KDE worked just well on most Unices for decades. "Going all-in" on Wayland means that they'll drop support for all operating systems except Linuces and FreeBSD. There are two explanations for that:
- They don't care about (most of) Unix.
- They actively despise (most of) Unix.
I'm not quite sure where you're misunderstanding me here. Care to elaborate?
One of the great aspects of Open Source is that you can continue to use any software you like for as long as you want. Enjoy Xorg (or your other favourite X11 server).
Of course, a majority of Xorg devs disagreed with you which is why they started Wayland to begin with. And a majority of desktop Linux users disagree with you now as three quarters of them have switched to Wayland.
Wayland offers a lot that X11 does not at this point. So, nobody is coming back. But if you are happy with X, stick with it.
You are going to lose access to a lot of apps though. There are very few Wayland only apps now but there are going to be many more in the coming years. And when toolkits like GTK5 go Wayland only, you may lose a some you already use.
But if you are happy with X, stick with it.
There is no Wayland on some of the systems I use.
KDE:
“The Unix philosophy favors composability as opposed to monolithic design”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_phi…
Xorg is a monolith with essentially one implementation. Wayland is a modular system with almost every component available from multiple sources.
Saying adopting Wayland means you “hate UNIX” is one of the least thoughtful arguments I can imagine.
God dammit, everytime I have to use wayland I find something that I need to use which doesn't work.
Can we please wait until wayland can actually replace x11 and not pretend just showing a desktop is all it needs to do?
The point is, nobody gives a shit about Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, etc. anymore and your argument is stupid.
Every Unix or Unix-like OS that matters in 2025 is either switching from X11 to Wayland or never used X11 to begin with.
Do you have some examples? Most things I (and others) do are in the category "showing a desktop", multiple desktops with different resolution / scaling / refresh rate, maybe opening a virtual monitor using krfb.
Wayland has been a complete game changer for me regarding performance and reliability (as soon as it hit a certain stability lol).
I use Talon voice. It's software that let's me use the pc still, due to write severe RSI.
However, Wayland doesn't allow a lot of functionality that tools like this need.
Therefore, anyone who requires a tool similar to Talon, needs X11.
KDE is out.
Wayland compositors lack the APIs necessary for Talon and Wayland support is not planned.
Sucks that they just claim that and give up instead of trying to work together with Wayland compositors to make this happen.
I don't understand why they would drop you like this.
Because instead of just using a common well defined API, every developer is supposed to ”work together with Wayland compositors”, of which there are many, none of which are up to feature parity with X. Working together with the (at least) three major compositors is far top much work for most projects, if you can even get them on board.
Every compositor must reimplement everything previously covered by third party software, or at least define and reimplement APIs to cover that functionality. We have been screaming about this obvious design fuckup since Wayland was first introduced, but nooo, every frame is perfect.
Take a look at arcan-fe.com/ for what a properly architected display server could look like instead of the mess we currently have with Wayland. I’m holding off on moving to Wayland for many reasons, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Arcan becomes mature and fully usable before Wayland. If I get to place a bet on either on Wayland or a few guys in a basement with a proper architecture, I know what I’ll put my money on.
Yes, they were supposed to reach out at some point in the last 17 years, idk what to tell you.
Someone did it for them even: github.com/splondike/wayland-a…
wayland-accessibility-notes/talon-requirements.md at main · splondike/wayland-accessibility-notes
Research on accessibility in the Wayland based Linux desktop - splondike/wayland-accessibility-notesGitHub
That list is hilarious. I especially love how gnome just gives up on Wayland protocols and wants everyone to run a sidechannel over dbus instead.
This is why we can’t have nice things.
I don't get what you mean. Isn't the list just a status quo and not how things are supposed to be forever? What's “hilarious” about somebody painstakingly going through all the features and checking how close they are?
Like I wouldn't put it past GNOME to give up on interoperability at the slightest inconvenience, but I don't see that here?
It’s hilarious that all of this was foreseen 17 years ago by basically everyone, and here is a nice list providing just those exact points. I’ve never seen a better structured ”told ya so” in my life.
The point isn’t that the features are there or not, but how horrendously fragmented the ecosystem is. Implementing anything trying to use that mess of API surface would be insane to attempt for any open source project, even when ignoring that the compositors are still moving targets.
(Also, holy shit the Gnome people really wants everyone to use dbus for everything.)
Edit: 17 years. Seventeen years. This is what we got. While the list is status quo, it’s telling that it took 17 years to implement most of the features expected of a display server back in the last millenium. Most features, but not all.
Pretty good for mostly volunteers, hampered by recalcitrant project leads that actively sabotage any progress and consider “told you so” appropriate.
If anyone cared enough, they could have made that list 17 years ago, and pushed through a set of protocol extensions that allow talon to work.
Why did nobody do that?
It's crazy to me that people complain now. It's far too late for complaints.
Maybe you didn't do it right. Everything Wayland I ever complained about is fixed now.
I fell like if you had put this list into a Wayland protocol extension request, then put a link to that request into KDE’s showstoppers list, this would have been fixed long long ago.
It’s great that most showstoppers are fixed now. Seventeen years later.
But I’ll bite: Viable software rendered and/or hardware accelerated remote deskop support with load balancing and multiple users per server (headless and GPU-less). So far - maybe possible. But then you need to allow different users to select different desktop environments (due to either user preferences or actual business requirements). All this may be technically possible, but the architecture of Wayland makes this very hard to implement and support in practice. And if you get it going, the hard focus on GPU acceleration yields an extreme cost increase, as you now need to buy expensive Nvidia-GPUs for VDI with even more expensive licenses. Every frame can’t be perfect over a WAN link.
This is trivial with X, multiple commercially supported solutions exist, see for example Thinlinc. This is deployable in literally ten minutes. Battle tested and works well. I know of multiple institutional users actively selecting X in current greenfield deployments due to this, rolling out to thousands of users in well funded high profile projects.
As for the KDE showstopper list - that’s exactly my point. I can’t put my showstoppers in a single place, I need to report to KDE, Gnome and wlroots and then track all of them, that’s the huge architectural flaw here. We can barely get commercial vendors to interact with a single project, and the Wayland architecture requires commercial vendors to interact with a shitton of issue trackers and different APIs (apparently also dbus). Suddenly you have a CAD suite that only works on KDE and some FEM software that only runs on a particular version of Gnome, with a user that wants both running at the same time. I don’t care about how well KDE works. I care that users can run the software they need, the desktop environment is just a tool to do that. The fragmentation between compositors really fucks this up by coupling software to display manager. Eventually, this will focus commercial efforts on the biggest commercial desktop environment (i.e. whatever RHEL uses), leaving the rest behind.
(Fun story, one of my colleagues using Wayland had a postit with ”DO NOT TURN OFF” on his monitor the entire pandemic - his VNC session died if the DisplayPort link went down.)
Thanks, this is a much more nuanced take than what I'm used to.
Regarding thinlinc: They seem to be on it: community.thinlinc.com/t/wayla…
Regarding fragmented support: is that true? Why would some CAD software not work everywhere when most other software does? Does the thing really need some specific niche Wayland protocol that's only implemented on one DE for the time being? And if yes, will that protocol really be the first relevant one to not be implemented across the board? I feel like you're conjuring to a problem that doesn't necessarily exist. Do you have an actual concrete example that goes beyond “the subwindow placement for this multi-window program is a bit wonky without impeding usability in the slightest”?
Wayland, TigerVNC, and ThinLinc: The future of remote desktops in Linux
1. The Wayland transition If you’ve followed the Linux desktop world in recent years, you’ve probably heard about Wayland. It’s the modern display protocol designed to replace the decades-old X11 system.ThinLinc Community Forum
Software compatibility is a problem on X as well, so I’m extrapolating. I don’t expect the situation to get better though. I’ve managed software that caused fucking kernel panics unless it ran on Gnome. The support window for this type of software is extremely narrow and some vendors will tell you to go pound sand unless you run exactly what they want.
I’m no longer working with either educational or research IT, so at least it’s someone else’s problem.
As for ThinLinc, their customers have asked about what their plan is for the past decade, but to quote them: ”Fundamentally, Wayland is not compatible with remote desktops in its core design.” (And that was made clear by everyone back in 2008)
Edit: tangentially related, the only reasonable way to run VNC now against Wayland is to use the tightly coupled VNC-server within the compositor (as you want intel on window placements and redraws and such, encoding the framebuffer is just bad). If you want to build a system on top of that, you need to integrate with every compositor separately, even though they all support ”VNC” in some capacity. The result is that vendors will go for the common denominatior, which is running in a VM and grabbing the framebuffer from the hypervisor. The user experience is absolute hot garbage compared to TigerVNC on X.
I have had a lot of luck forcing broken apps to use ZINK (Yes, you can do this on the nvidia propriety driver! Yes, it will use the proprietary vulkan driver as a backend.)
I have a 3060 12GB and have yet to run into something broken that I couldn’t get to work, although it is annoying that NVIDIA still can’t be fucked to have a driver that doesn’t reek.
Yeah I second this. I’ve been on wayland for a few years now and while my needs are pretty standard I also regularly need slightly-off-the-beaten-path features. Not everything used to always work, but in the last, I want to say 18 months, I never found my needs lacking.
Multiple monitors work, adaptive sync works, mic / webcam works, screen / window sharing works, remote desktop and wayland forwarding works, etc.
That’s not to say everything is guaranteed to work all the time, but I am surprised to see people saying that even today they always find something fundamental that is broken when they attempt to switch.
Yeah.
In the first months, there were clipboard issues.
Until 2 years or so ago for me, screen sharing wasn't perfect.
I searched for or filed issues whenever I could, and there's not a trace of a problem left.
I wonder if these people just complain on social media and give up immediately without informing anyone relevant and then feign surprise when shit's not magically fixed later.
I think if you have some use-case that Wayland doesn't fulfill, it's totally fine to just pin some version of Plasma and stick with it. Maybe even switch to Trinity. Chances are it will keep working for like a decade or more.
I still use kdenlive 18.08, because I know how to use that version, and it does what I need it to do perfectly well. They broke something I needed in 19.whatever (I don't remember what it was anymore), so I just pinned it and kept using it ever since. Maybe one day I'll try to figure out the latest version, but there's no real incentive for me to do so.
Yeah, you are right. Just a massive pain to deal with as things continue to diverge and I'm forced to deal with maintaining more and more custom solutions just to maintain functionality.
I want wayland to get there, just not seeing it yet.
The current release doesn't even include a Wayland session yet (nor systemd).
And judging by the project's history, the next major release is likely going to drop in 10+ years.
Source: I'm using it.
Can we please wait until wayland can actually replace x11
Unfortunately there's always devs that refuse to change so long as their setup still works, even if there's significantly better alternatives. The only option for dealing with them is to rip off the bandaid. Either they'll put in the work to keep up or they'll fall into obscurity
You're so right:
- $thing isn't perfectly complete so I won't switch over my project
- but without your project, $thing can't be perfectly complete
- idc lol
“For most users, this will have no immediate impact. The vast majority of our users are already using the Wayland session”
So happy to read this as there is always somebody still claiming that “Wayland does not work” and “nobody wants to switch to Wayland” just because they have not.
Also great to see that the plan is for Wayland on FreeBSD as well so the Open Source desktops can stay aligned. GNOME on FreeBSD is more problematic, not because of Wayland but because of Systemd.
It's understandable on some level: if you're suddenly no longer part of the majority tribe you know you'll get fewer bug fixes and so on.
So bullying and FUDing people into staying with your tribe could pay off.
What I don't get is how they don't realize that they've lost. PulseAudio (through PipeWire) is here to stay. Systemd is here to stay. Wayland is here to stay.
Maybe they just like being contrarian if they can't win.
What made you think that that's a relevant answer?
I specifically said PULSEAUDIO is here to stay, you know, as opposed to manually managing a trillion ALSA devices.
Then I mentioned PipeWire to placate the nitpickers who would point out that PulseAudio (the implementation) isn't actually around anymore, only the device management paradigm.
And somehow you honed into that word, completely ignored everything around it, and said some stuff that sounds vaguely related to the topic at hand, yet has no actual meaning.
Why?
OK, let's see if I remember well:
OSS is obsolete.
ALSA is a basic primitive way to do play audio streams integrated into the kernel.
PA is an abstraction on top of ALSA that helps with network stuff, per-application volume control, …
JACK is an alternative to ALSA/PA for low latency professional use cases: you can plumb it yourself, connect inputs/outputs, …
PW is an efficient implementation of both PA and JACK, which is better than the original PA in latency.
Apparently, this is hardly hyperbole. For example: bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3…
Talk about arrogance. In the window paradigm, only a few desktops ever REQUIRED a similar look and feel for all windows. Apple was the worst offender for that. I suggest that if Edmundson wants a similar look and feel, he should go get himself a Mac and stop mucking up KDE.From a quick look at the proposed patch - and obviously without having the full picture - it’s true that it would add some complexity.
But it's code for the sake of people's convenience, not the other way around, right? IMHO, as long as:
- shading is off by default,
- users get a clear message about limitations and SSD/CSD complications before enabling it,
- the implementation doesn’t introduce impossible-to-maintain logic and limits some weird edge cases like resizing a shaded window,
then it’s worth doing.
I suppose not. Not yet.
I know people are particular about WMs, but having to minimize a window vs keeping the window decoration in place seems like a… very minor distinction.
Is the use case rearranging a ton of windows? Something like that?
RE: use case
It's really nice to be able to see the whole titles. A vertical panel cuts off most text, so you just have a bunch of icons when you minimize. if multiple windows are from the same app it's confusing.
If you use a horizontal panel you have a bit more room, but a significant amount of text is still cut off, and the panel fills up quickly.
Even with as few as 6 windows open (lets say two browser and three file manager, and a terminal) minimizing is a mess. I find it better to just leave the window bar somewhere visible and shade it, since i can read all the text on my window at a glance. Combined with "keep above others", you can get a really nice way to quickly refrence something infrequently while you do most of your work in another window.
A more typical workflow for me is 1-4 windows of a pdf reader, 1-3 file manager windows, 1 browser window, and 1 terminal window. It's just easier to keep it all organized with window shading.
I find it much faster than a bunch of alt-tabbing, or playing hide and seek with the panel just to get a specific two PDF windows up side by side for a second
Despite all its shortcomings, I do believe Wayland is the future. Sooner or later, all the funky decorative quirks will be some relics of the past.
Maybe someday, they will be added back, and we'll once again have that jelly window effect, but at the moment, people actually depend on this thing to do some work, even more true with the Windows exodus.
I'd rather that they focus at the risk of being dull rather than fumbling on this chance.
Yes, I know that popularity isn't everything, but considering how big they (and GNOME) are, they can really make The Year of Linux Desktop(TM).
Damn. I guess it's finally goodbye window shade or goodbye Plasma. I really wish they'd figured out a solution.
I get it though. The edge cases will never be fixed until devs know what they are, and GNOME proved this is an effective way to find out.
Wayland should have been the HotNewShit© that the crazy people use, and everything learned from that experiment should have become the ACTUAL next thing everyone uses.
Pushing wayland like it is now was a bad idea.
I would have loved to wait for it's successor, but "use LTS old versions or eat shit" is apparently acceptable now.
I do like Wayland but it still has some issues that are annoying:
- When using remote input solutions (e.g InputLeap) you have to approve the input capture, and you need a mouse and keyboard connected to the PC to do that, making it kind of pointless.
- Remote desktop also requires the same thing, like, what if I don't have a mouse & keyboard attached? What if it is a PC you are accessing from another country? You can't just fly back to approve the remote desktop request.
This needs to get fixed ASAP in my opinion, since people do need these tools and sometimes you can't connect a mouse & kb to the PC to just approve the request.
input group (set up in pretty much every distro), you can use uinput over netcat for forwarding devices (display server agnostic) without extra privileges. Same with the video group. No idea if anyone used this in an actual remote desktop piece of software tho.
Have you tried out Deskflow?
InputLeap is effectively abandoned and the maintainer has taken over Deskflow which has better Wayland support
GitHub - deskflow/deskflow: Share a single keyboard and mouse between multiple computers.
Share a single keyboard and mouse between multiple computers. - deskflow/deskflowGitHub
No, I haven't, but will check it out, thanks!
I didn't know InputLeap is also abandoned. Heck, I moved to it from Barrier for the same reason 😛
Maduro: US Imperialists are After Latin America's Strategic Resources
November 18, 2025
I ask him how he interprets the current context of pressure, slander, and threats against Venezuela. As he drives carefully in the gentle Aragua twilight, he tells me:“They have gone to great lengths to craft a new narrative—that of narco-terrorism—but, at its core, it’s the same thing they’ve always done: create a pretext to kill a hope. Remember, for example, that in 1954, they accused Jacobo Árbenz, the democratically elected President of Guatemala, of being a “communist” because he had implemented a modest agrarian reform. They orchestrated a coup, a military intervention, and overthrew him. Several decades later, they apologized, acknowledging that Árbenz was not a communist and that they had made a mistake…”
“Ten years later, in 1964, in Brazil, they did the same thing to President João Goulart… And they apologized again a few decades later… And in 1965, they did the same thing again in the Dominican Republic with President Juan Bosch. They accused him of being a ‘communist,’ invaded the country with some 20,000 marines and OAS forces. And many years later, they again acknowledged that Juan Bosch was a true democrat and that the invasion was a mistake. And in 1973, the same script in Chile, against President Salvador Allende. And the same belated apologies.
Maduro: US Imperialists are After Latin America's Strategic Resources - Mexico Solidarity Media
The President of Venezuela gives a wide-ranging interview in which he reiterates his commitment to dialogue for peace, but emphasizes Venezuela is prepared should Washington decide to attack.Mexico Solidarity (Mexico Solidarity Media)
like this
Maeve likes this.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it's costing the economy
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it's costing the economy
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever before, and while it may be consumer smart, it comes at a cost to work productivity and the U.S. economy.Kevin Williams (CNBC)
This is good for the environment. I always held on to my devices for as long as possible, and would eventually install GNU+Linux or custom ROMs to keep them secure and updated after the manufacturer drops support.
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
Could VPNs Be 'Banned'?
With the UK apparently floating ideas of a VPN ban it's got me worried about the future of anonymity online. Now people have already pointed out that a VPN ban doesn't make sense because of all the legitimate uses of one and wouldn't even be enforceable anyway, but that got me thinking.
What if governments ordered websites (such as social media sites) to block traffic originating from a VPN node? Lots of sites already do this (or restrict your activity if they detect a VPN) to mitigate spam etc. and technically that wouldn't interfere with "legitimate" (in the eyes of the gov) VPN usage like logging onto corporate networks remotely
It's already a pain with so many sites either blocking you from access or making you jump through a million captchas using VPNs now. I'm worried it's about to get a whole lot worse
like this
Maeve likes this.
Save End-to-End Encryption in the U.S. - Internet Society
The EARN IT Act, STOP CSAM Act, and KOSA in the United States threaten to weaken end-to-end encryption which puts us all at risk.Allison Cross (Internet Society)
…some sort of carve out…
Oi oi, wotsalldisthen? U got a permit for that VPN, innit?
VPN are not the solution either, even in occidental coutries, there are a lot of webs which are not accesible with a VPN or Proxy, mostly streaming sites, eg. Rakuten and others.
Snowflake is another thing, often used by journalists in totalitary countries.
usenix.org/conference/usenixse…
How can you ban a VPN (virtual private network)?
I have a VPN setup at home and at my parents home, I can connect either as if I was at either location physically. My office has VPNs for connecting between offices and connecting from remote locations. And dont get me started about being and to purchase a VPS in any country you want, and run a VPN on it.
Does this mean people and companies can no longer setup their own VPN's.
If this is about privacy and anonymity, evey bowsers on any device has a unique identifying fingerprint that allows it to be identifiable even using a VPN. So what is this ban even targeting?
The Hidden Tracking Method Your VPN Can't Block -
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.www.youtube.com
So what is this ban even targeting?
UK is one of the forerunners in regard to online ID checks, for example for porn sites. Brits now regularly use VPNs to escape those checks
Though a VPN does not provide you with guaranteed anonymity, it only allows you to access webpages and local services as if you were at that physical location, or on that specific network.
Connecting to your work office VPN and browsing Facebook does not make you anonymous, it's just makes you look like you are sitting in the office.
And this is my point actually, what are they trying to ban, is it the use of a VPN completely, or is it for only VPN that spoof locations out of country. (Which is what allows someone to circumvent the age-id, at the moment.)
Now that being said I work with people in the UK and they VPN into our office for network access and project file access. Does anyone see how this could impact access for Brits working with global firms for example?
That's the whole point of the discussion: what does "VPN" mean in this context? Is it only these VPN providers that let you be elsewhere, or VPN technology and traffic in general. The prior could be limited by blocking traffic to specific IP addresses that belong to VPN providers, albeit in a very laborious and expensive cat and mouse game. The latter would affect all VPN traffic including that which is used to safely connect to work sites for example. Which would be stupid and damaging.
Even if VPN providers could be banned at IP level, what's stopping you from spinning up a host in another country, setting up wireguard on that?
I understand they are frustrated that their excellent child protection plans and user information gathering is so easy to circumvent, but their proposed solutions are just absurd.
If you have a VPN then chances are you have a credit card, which means you are an adult, which means you can access porn. The VPN is your age verification 😀
Anyway, age verification has only one reason, access and control of user data, nothing else. The resposability of the children is by the Parents and not by webpages or services, apart impossible to control the access by childrens, when they use the PC of the parents to websites which already have the ID from the adults. Nobody else as the parents can control it.
Apart it isn't a rule which is worldwide, with countries without age control in their server, easy accesible from everywhere but out of the control by goverments.
I have moments when I think "I might get banned for this", this is one of those moments.
You may try to ban vpns but you can not really, people usually find ways around censorship. We are notorious for this stuff, as a species.
Its infuriating to me when people just roll over for the powers that be. They may ban some nodes, others will pop up, those will get banned too and so the cycle of cat and mouse begins.
You can host your own vpn with wireguard. It takes a bit of figuring out, sure, but you can literally do so with a raspberry pi. Stick it in a network of choice and voila.
Oh they may control stuff, but this is not a game that can be won, human repression is a futile effort, it may work for a while, but there is a reason why regimes fall. See the wall of Berlin and so many other examples.
Fret not friend, for hope dies last.
I had my Internet crippled in China in 2012 after I used Hamachi to log into my home computer in Australia.
The crippling got worse if I repeated my action eventually disabling the internet completely for about an hour.
I played this game a few times to pick up on the pattern.
Anything can be made illegal. Enforcement is tricky. At the moment it is very easy to block Wireguard protocol at the ISP level, some even do it. But that would probably push Wireguard and others to invest more in obfuscation.
As a sidenote, it bugs me that Wireguard does not support obfuscation out of the box, and you have to put it on top of wireguard.
People used to not use VPNs too - until they realized how useful they can be by spread in pop culture and increasing tech awareness of the general public.
If commercial VPNs are banned the tech savvy will move onto a replacement immediately, and the knowledge will slowly expand through social circles and social media until it has similar penetration in society.
A VPN ban would be both harmful (to business and consumers short term) and pointless.
I do this. I already had a cloud vps with a vpn on it for remote access so i figured i might as well set it up to route traffic as well.
Still get loads of sites blocking me
You know the endpoint is known good since you're the admin and the IP is not in a known VPN exit blocklist.
Of course economically it makes sense to share tunnels with family and friends.
Lots of places are applying that sort of regulation already. Problem is, how do you know which IPs are VPNs? There are some obvious ways, and many people block some VPNs already but you can't block every VPN. I can spin up a VPN right now and open it up to users in other countries. It's impossible.
The gov could theoretically maintain a repository of "known" VPNs that they could require sites to block, though. They could even force them to be blocked at the DNS level. This would probably be fairly effective.
But that's also most certainly going to be abused as well.
They are only interested in retail, anonymizing VPNs
Okay, and how will they know which ones those are?
If you spin up your own VPN you are still 1:1 linked to that IP address
I don't think you read that entire sentence. I wasn't talking about spinning one up for my personal use.
Yes they can ban it, you will face repercussions if you violate that ban just like if you violate the ban your country probably has on heroin or machine guns.
You can get around it by using doh and a http proxy configured in your web browser, not at the os level.
I don't know what a software "stack" is but government can packet sniff to see if that kind of software is used but the vendors in this cat and mouse game apparently can sometimes fool the packet sniffers.
China cannot block all VPN's so it is looking good for us geeks. However we need to educate the masses.
However we need to educate the masses.
Well that's kind of the earlier point, the working masses already know. What they might not understand is that they can use a VPN outside of the office and how it benefits them.
I imagine it'd be a jurisdiction issue for what you propose. If, say, the UK mandates that websites block VPN nodes, that will affect websites served from the UK (creating a Great Firewall of Britain). But what about websites served outside the UK? Those websites can't possibly tell if a user is from the UK and using a VPN, vs outside the UK and using a VPN, so they can't only block UK visitors—they'd have to block all VPN traffic, which is probably not worth it from a business point of view. I suppose the UK could then deem that website illegal in the UK and block them, but then that'd only block the website for non-VPN users in the UK... But if the website owner is outside the UK they can't be punished for violating that law.
More probable (though I still think unlikely) is that a country could sniff for e.g. Wireguard packets and block those. But again that's unlikely because of businesses using VPNs to let employees access company intranets at home.
To go a little further, I used the example of heroin and machine guns in my other reply, but there are lots of countries where people licensed to use these (or technology that’s similar like oxycontin) are allowed or there exist analogs (like bump stocks or binary triggers) that avoid the law.
Heck, in the us any knucklehead can get on the good boy list for heroin or machine guns they just need to pass a bunch of checks and submit to a series of audits and inspections.
The point of banning vpn use would be to keep people from using the technology to skirt identity laws, not to prevent the use of the technology altogether, so it’s likely any ban would take the form of legal wording that looks like “use of computer networking technology to conceal ones identity or aid or abet or perpetrate any crime is unlawful under this section.”
So again, yes they absolutely can do it and no it wouldn’t mean corporations would suddenly have to turn in all their edge devices.
I’m really surprised that on this instance no one has replied with the “laws are threats made by the dominant social economic class” copypasta. Fake ahh anarchists…
Can anyone end the Ukraine war if Kiev refuses every compromise?
Can anyone end the Ukraine war if Kiev refuses every compromise?
Why every attempt at a Ukraine deal collapses under pressure from Kiev and BrusselsRT
No, and again, that doesn't apply in any way. Russia isn't going to surrender when they are winning the war, it isn't a real option. Either Ukraine and Russia successfully broker a peace deal, or Russia continues advancing at an increasingly rapid pace. That's the reality of the situation, the war is increasingly unpopular in Ukraine and corruption from the Banderites in charge is causing erosion of support.
There isn't a realistic way for Ukraine to win millitarily.
How to transfer a lot of storage?
I want to transfer 80 TB of data to another locatio . I already have the drives for it. The idea is to copy everything to it, fly it to the target and use or copy the data on/to the server.
What filesystem would you use and would you use a raid configuration? Currently I lean towards 8 single disk filesystems on the 10 TB drives with ext4, because it is simple. I considered ZFS because of the possiblity to scrub at the target destination and/or pool all drives. But ZFS may not be available at the target.
There is btrfs which should be available everywhere because it is in mainline linux and ZFS is not. But from my knowledge btrfs would require lvm to pool disks together like zfs can do natively.
Pooling the drives would also be a problem if one disk gets lost during transit. If I have everything on 8 single disks at least the remaining data can be used at the target and they only have to wait for the missing data.
I like to read about your opinions or practical experience with similar challanges.
No raid. Instead ship 2 or 3 copies of data spread across different storage devices.
Honestly, is tape still a thing? Because this is exactly what it was good at.
Will the disks be permanently in-place there or are they just a means of transport? Either way, traveling with that much spinning rust there is always a good chance for bit-flips or damage.
ZFS is up to the task if you can connect all the disks at the same time at the target location. You don’t really have to keep track of the order of the disks - ZFS will figure it out when mounting the pool. The act of copying the data from the disks will effectively perform a scrub at the same time.
If you will only attach one disk at a time, it is a bit more of a coin toss. Although - ZFS single disk volumes do support scrubbing as well.
Thinking about disk corruption in transit would be one of my worries - X-ray scans, vibration and just handling can do stuff with the bits. Tgz, zip or rar files with low or no compression can provide error detection, although low recovery. Checksum files can also help with detection. Any failed files can perhaps be transferred over the network for recovery.
Thx.
The disks are only meant for transport at this time.
The more I think about it, the more I lean towards btrfs, because even if they don't use btrfs on the target server the copying process will do the error correction based on the checksums in btrfs itself. I hope btrfs does it the same way as ZFS in this scenario.
It’s a good idea to use what you know. I don’t have much experience with btrfs but if it does what it says on the tin then it should be safe to use.
Copying the contents at the target is a good strategy. If the drives are to be put into 27/7 use later I would probably consider wiping them and run an integrity test before putting them to use, as once they start being used it will be too late (and stay as a doubt in the back of my mind).
I'd use XFS as it's excellent at copying big files of data (7z. img/iso/qcow2, 4K Videos).
For large amounts of smaller files (Like photos, odt, and PDFs), I'd use Ext4.
U.S. Army secretary warned Ukraine of imminent defeat while pushing initial peace plan
U.S. Army secretary warned Ukraine of imminent defeat while pushing initial peace plan
The meeting between Army secretary Dan Driscoll and the Ukrainians was the latest example of the rift inside the Trump administration about how to end the war.Dan De Luce (NBC News)
“The message was basically — you are losing,” one of the sources said, “and you need to accept the deal.”
Are they losing?
For the past three years, the news from Russia has been about young men leaving the country because Putin keeps updating the laws around the draft/conscription to feed his war machine.
I'm sure Ukraine is in a similar position, but it doesn't sound like a clearcut win for Russia, either.
They are very obviously losing right now. Ukraine is suffering from a critical manpower shortage, the west is not able to provide them with weapons, the economic situation in Ukraine is unravelling, and there's a huge political scandal.
Meanwhile, the news from Russia for the past three years has absolutely not been that. Even Ukrainian media admits that kyivindependent.com/bloomberg-…
I guess UK regime propaganda is still trying to pretend otherwise though. Given that Russia isn't gang pressing people into service it's not clear what basis the Brits have for their bombastic claims.
The reality is that Russian economy is stable and growing, it's able to outproduce the west militarily, and its trade is now oriented towards BRICS. Given the stark difference between Russia and Ukraine in terms of available manpower, resources, and economy, it's pretty clear to anybody who can do grade school math that Russia is going to win the war.
Bloomberg: Russians who left abroad increasingly return home, boosting economy
Around 1 million Russians left the country after the start of the all-out war due to their opposition to the invasion or out of fear of mobilization.Martin Fornusek (The Kyiv Independent)
Given that Russia isn't gang pressing people into service
I wouldn't take that as "given".
And with the new law, draftees are immediately banned from leaving the country.Those who fail to show up at a recruitment office promptly will soon face a raft of new restrictions related to banking, selling property and even gaining access to a driver's license.
Already before the reform, people who refused orders to serve in the military have faced a possible prison sentence of up to 10 years. (NPR)
As part of their efforts to combat draft evasion, authorities earlier this year launched an electronic register of conscripts to serve online summonses in some Russian regions. They also introduced a series of legal restrictions for those who ignore the summonses, including banning their bank transactions, suspending their driver’s licenses and blocking foreign travel. (AP)
I quoted the NPR and AP articles, since you seem allergic to reporting from the UK.
I wouldn’t take that as “given”.
There is zero evidence for that being true. Meanwhile, the fact that it's happening in Ukraine is very well documented responsiblestatecraft.org/ukra…
I quoted the NPR and AP articles, since you seem allergic to reporting from the UK.
You're confusing the regular draft for the reserves that Russia has had since the soviet times with the war draft here. There was exactly a single time that there was a call up back in 2022.
Finally, you only have to consider the size difference in overall population. Even if there was the same rate of desertion on both sides, then Ukraine would still lose.
Ukraine's 'Busification' — forced conscription — is tip of the iceberg
Western media is largely ignoring that Kyiv has to rip young men off the streets amid recruitment shortages and desertionsIan Proud (Responsible Statecraft)
like this
Maeve likes this.
Your responses have nothing to do with the parts of my comment that you're quoting.
In the first quote (I wouldn’t take that as “given”) I was responding to your claim that Russia wasn't press-ganging citizens into service. I then quoted two articles which themselves cited Russian sources (I'm pretty sure the State Duma is Russian) that said the Russian government was changing the draft rules and imposing severe penalties on people attempting to avoid the draft.
The second quote was pretty straightforward (I quoted the NPR and AP articles, since you seem allergic to reporting from the UK.), so I don't know how you went from that to "confusing regular draft for reserves", but I'll respond to that, too.
I'm not confusing the regular draft for reserves. Both sources explicitly use the terms "draft" and "conscript" to describe the people I'm talking about.
And I directly addressed your claim explaining that there is no evidence of gang pressing happening in Russia, and that you were referring to the regular reserves draft that's been happening long before the war.
I’m not confusing the regular draft for reserves. Both sources explicitly use the terms “draft” and “conscript” to describe the people I’m talking about.
Yes, you are absolutely confusing the draft with the call up to the front line. I'm also guessing that you didn't actually read the article you linked because its says the same thing I'm saying:
The bill’s authors say the measure is intended to ease pressure on military conscription offices and streamline their activities, which includes performing the physicals and assigning conscripts to various military branches.Even though the bill will make conscription a year-round process, it stipulates that conscripts will enter military service only during a few spring and summer months as before.
All Russian men aged 18-30 currently are obliged to serve in the military for one year, although many avoid the draft by using deferments granted to students, those with chronic illnesses, and for other reasons.
Even your own source is admitting that there is no increase in conscription happening.
like this
Maeve likes this.
You keep changing the argument you claim I'm making.
Here's the comment, as a reminder.
I called into question your claim that press ganging (coercion into military service) wasn't happening, by citing sources that the Russian government was changing the rules of the draft and imposing severe penalties on people who tried to avoid it.
The sources you cited literally support what I said:
Even though the bill will make conscription a year-round process, it stipulates that conscripts will enter military service only during a few spring and summer months as before.
Do you even understand what the term press ganging means?
like this
Maeve likes this.
You've tried to move the goalposts twice now, by:
- Claiming my argument is about a "call up to the front line". (I've said draft/conscription since the beginning.)
- Claiming my argument is that an increase in conscription is happening. (I implied press-ganging was happening, and said nothing about a change in the amount of conscription happening.)
I am and have been ignoring anything you threw out that tried to weasel away from the central argument:
The Russian government is coercing (which is how press-ganging is used to mean in normal conversations; this is not an academic conference) people into military service.
Conscription/the draft already technically meets that definition, but piling on prison sentences, suspending drivers licences, banning leaving the country, and restricting bank transactions all make it clear that Russian men are being coerced into military service.
I have not moved the goalposts. My position has been perfectly consistent. You are misusing a loaded term to fabricate a narrative.
Let's be crystal clear since you are struggling with the definition. Press ganging is not a synonym for conscription. It refers to the illegal and forcible impressment of individuals into military service. What that looks like is kidnapping people from streets or their homes outside of any legal framework. That's what you implied is happening in Russia, and it is a blatant falsehood.
What you are describing in Russia is the legal process of conscription, which includes standard penalties for evasion. These penalties like fines, license suspensions, and travel bans are common consequences for dodging a mandatory draft in many nations, including many US allies. To call this press ganging is deliberate sensationalism.
Meanwhile, in Ukraine, the very phenomenon you mistakenly accuse Russia of is a well documented reality. There have been numerous verified reports of recruiters literally grabbing men off the street and from public transport to forcibly conscript them, often without any paperwork or due process. That is what actual press-ganging looks like. It is happening there, not in Russia.
Your argument tries to blur the line between a legal state run conscription system and outright criminal abduction. They are not the same. The goalposts have not moved. You are just trying to score a point on a field that does not exist in reality. The facts are clear, and your conflation of them is intellectually dishonest.
like this
Maeve likes this.
That's three times now. We'll add:
- Claiming I'm trying to "fabricate a narrative" as if there's some massive conspiracy.
to the list.
Do you seriously think I'm some part of some government operation to "weave a story"?
I'm a rando on the internet who thinks Russia is coercing men who don't want to be in a war to become soldiers.
Whether they corner them with infrastructural tactics or send armed men in unmarked vans to kidnap them off the street is immaterial.
Whether these tactics are practiced by Russia or by "many nations, including US allies" is immaterial.
It would be press-ganging and coercion if Ukraine did the same thing. It's press-ganging and coercion if the United States does it.
Standing on ceremony behind a dictionary definition and whether government says it's legal is such a weird stance to take when the issue is these people don't want to serve in the military, and the government is coercing them into it.
The only person inventing massive conspiracies in this conversation is you. Now you can add straw man arguments to the growing list of nonsense you are producing.
I think you are nothing more than a troll who argues for the sake of it, without a single honest bone in your body. You are the epitome of a reddit debate bro, substituting sophistry for genuine argument in a pathetic attempt to score imaginary points. You are very transparent.
You keep trying to conflate two entirely separate issues, a sad attempt at an argument I have already dismantled in detail. You have brought forward nothing new and you're just regurgitating the same old drivel here. Take the L and move on.
like this
Maeve likes this.
I think you are nothing more than a troll who argues for the sake of it, without a single honest bone in your body. You are the epitome of a reddit debate bro
You won't or can't address my argument above, so you switch to personal attacks.
You introduced the word "press-gang" and tried to turn this into an argument about the dictionary definition of the word.
You also tried to retroactively rewrite my argument. (You're not talking about the draft, you're talking about the reserves. You're not talking about the draft, you're talking about "calling up to the front line.")
And you claim that I'm trolling?
My position has been that Russia has been coercing citizens into military service and I've been consistent on that point.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
I’m also guessing that you didn’t actually read the article you linked because its says the same thing I’m saying:
Articles aren't for reading, they're for headline skimming so you can look like you have sources. If they fail, there's always another one to try, you can even pretend that means evidence is overwhelming!
like this
Maeve likes this.
As part of their efforts to combat draft evasion, authorities earlier this year launched an electronic register of conscripts to serve online summonses in some Russian regions. They also introduced a series of legal restrictions for those who ignore the summonses, including banning their bank transactions, suspending their driver’s licenses and blocking foreign travel. (AP)
dude I've been reading about the ukrainians running kidnapping squads grabbing kids off the streets for like two years straight but uh yeah sure it's russia having manpower issues
like this
Maeve likes this.
Whether or not Ukraine has kidnapping squads doesn't mean Russia can't also be having manpower issues.
Both can be true at the same time.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ e Maeve like this.
I didn't say either of those things you're saying.
This is what I said :
I'm sure Ukraine is in a similar position, but it doesn't sound like a clearcut win for Russia, either.
If it's mirrored on both sides, then why the fuck would you bring it up as a reason to think Ukraine isn't losing?
What you're doing is actually moving the goal posts, by the way
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ e Maeve like this.
why the fuck would you bring it up as a reason to think Ukraine isn't losing?
I was bringing it up as a reason to think the case for Russia winning wasn't a clear slam dunk.
Resorting to conscription to fill your ranks is not something you do when you're "obviously winning".
And before you make a claim about Ukraine resorting to conscription, too, at no point have I claimed Ukraine was "obviously winning" either.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Why is that a reason, if that particular factor is a wash for both sides?
Resorting to conscription to fill your ranks is not something you do when you’re “obviously winning”.
Uhuh. So when the Soviets were flattening Berlin they weren't obviously winning? When the US had sunken the entire Japanese Navy and were systemically saturation bombing the Japanese mainland, they weren't obviously winning?
like this
Maeve likes this.
I quoted the NPR and AP articles, since you seem allergic to reporting from the UK.
Lol, "because you don't like these extremely biased sources, I quoted some sources with the exact same extreme bias"
like this
Maeve likes this.
I usually try to cite multiple sources because one or all may be biased, but it's less likely that multiple sources will misrepresent reality in exactly the same way.
It is possible, but it is less likely.
I quoted all three in my original response, and he only responded negatively to the one based in UK, implying that he considered the other two met some minimum standard of quality.
He also quoted those same sources in his responses to me. If he thought the same way you do, I would have expected him to dismiss them outright, like you are.
but it’s less likely that multiple sources will misrepresent reality in exactly the same way.
Not when you're selecting sources that all have the same bias. Like, how many sources are you citing that aren't Western neo-liberal and Zionist aligned? Zero.
implying
So he didn't say that, you're just assuming.
If he thought the same way you do, I would have expected him to dismiss them outright,
Or he would cite them to demonstrate that even media that shares your bias supports his position
It's possible, but he didn't say that, and our argument continued without your help.
It is weird that you're white-knighting so hard for him.
Why are you here?
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ e Maeve like this.
The NPR article I linked above was citing a Russian source.
The AP article was citing Russian legislation, which I assume (and I could be wrong) is public record.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Putin backs US plan for ending Ukraine war as Trump gives Kyiv deadline to accept
President Zelensky says Ukraine faces one of the most difficult moments in its history, as the White House pushes its plan.BBC News
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ e Maeve like this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Taiwan puts $40 billion toward buying US weapons and building a defense dome
Currently, Taiwan has set an increase in its defense budget to 3.3% of its GDP for 2026, allocating $949.5 billion Taiwan dollars ($31.18 billion). U.S. President Donald Trump has demanded Taiwan raise its defense spending to as much as 10% of GDP, a proportion well above what the U.S. or any of its major allies spend.Lai had previewed the announcement in an op-ed for The Washington Post on Wednesday, saying the special budget would be used to purchase arms from the U.S. He told reporters Wednesday, however, that the budget has nothing to do with the government’s tariff negotiations with the U.S.
US empire and wealthy capitalists aren't the same thing, although their interests sometimes align.
All the billionaires in Taiwan are Taiwanese.
Wealthy capitalists, if they're not based in the US, have moved to those places, not to Taiwan.
An intermediary.A native of a colonised country who acts as the agent of the coloniser.
I don't get the point you're trying to make.
I said the wealthy capitalists went to not!Taiwan because the billionaires in Taiwan were already there.
Who is or is not a comprador has nothing to do with where wealthy capitalists relocate.
I don't get the point you're trying to make
Then you're trying very hard not to get it. Try harder, I believe in you👍
I was saying that the billionaires were not moving to the island of Taiwan.
You're talking about US Empire, which, as mentioned in my other responses in this thread, is irrelevant to the physical movements of billionaires.
Even if Taiwan declared itself to be US Empire island #76, it would not change the fact that billionaires did not move to the island of Taiwan.
I was saying that the billionaires were not moving to the island of Taiwan.
Man, you really are a dishonest little troll aren't you: "oh I was just saying this thing completely unrelated to the topic at hand. Oh, you thought I had a point? Nope, just making random statements for no reason."
Fuck off
This was the statement I was responding to:
It’s basically an island that all the wealthy capitalists ran away to after China imposed economic democracy.
Here was my response :
Wealthy capitalists, if they're not based in the US, have moved to [Singapore (or Switzerland, or the UAE)], not to Taiwan.
Where was what I said dishonest or irrelevant?
Edit: reorganized for legibility
They aren’t caught between anything. Taiwan is very much aligned with western imperial countries. It’s basically an island that all the wealthy capitalists ran away to after China imposed economic democracy. They love America and America loves them.
Wealthy capitalists, if they're not based in the US
Are you talking about this part? If so, what I was saying was that billionaires moved to either the US or the three countries I mentioned.
That means the billionaires from China also did not move to Taiwan.
You can also look at the wiki for Taiwan's billionaires. Only one was born in China and not Taiwan (Hong Kong, specifically), and I'm pretty sure he moved to Taiwan way before the events we're taking about in this thread.
Zelenskyy faces the biggest corruption scandal of his presidency
On November 10, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) exposed an alleged $110 million corruption scheme at state-owned nuclear company Energoatom. The charges are supported by a fifteen-month wiretap and over seventy searches carried out as part of a major investigation called Operation Midas.
According to NABU officials, the investigation uncovered a criminal enterprise run by Timur Mindich, a film producer and a former business partner of Zelenskyy. Additional suspects include former Minister of Energy and recently appointed Minister of Justice Herman Halushchenko; former Naftogaz CEO and Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov; former Minister of Defense and current National Security and Defense Council member Rustem Umerov; and Ihor Myroniuk, former deputy head of the State Property Fund and former advisor to Halushchenko.
Mindich fled Ukraine the day before his premises were raided and is reportedly now in Israel.
Zelenskyy faces the biggest corruption scandal of his presidency - Atlantic Council
Amid Russia’s ongoing invasion, Ukraine in now facing the largest corruption scandal of Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s presidency over alleged kickbacks in the graft-prone energy sector, writes Suriya Evans-Pritchard Jayanti.Peter Dickinson (Atlantic Council)
Did you not read or understand this part?
A single search will reveal to you the same thing a much deeper dive into academic works will.
My hard drive keeps clicking like files are being accessed but I'm not doing anything in that filesystem and the indicator light doesn't indicate any usage.
I'm running a NAS on Fedora Server with LUKS encrypted Btrfs hard drives in a USB-C multi-bay enclosure. I noticed that one or both of the hard drives keep making the same sound as when I'm lightly reading or writing files from it (the closest it sounds like to my ear is something like copying to a Wi-Fi connected device where there is a bottleneck somewhere other than the hard drive, so it has bursts of activity a few times a second between idle time). Using iostat -x on my two main hard drives, I do see periodic activity every 10 or so seconds but I'm definitely not accessing anything in them, and the activity indicators on the USB enclosure are still and not blinking to indicate activity.
Should I be worried about this? To my paranoid mind it feels like something is slowly reading my files with some exploit to bypass the indicator light to fly under the radar. But I just did a clean install of Fedora Server 43 (over the previous installation which was 42) and I never installed anything outside of the official package manager and Docker registry. I've also never had this issue on Fedora Server 42 as far as I know, and the NAS is on my desk so I feel like I would have heard it ages ago if it was something frequent. There's also no unexpected network activity on the Cockpit dashboard that would indicate that files are being uploaded, though I feel like if some malware can suppress the indicator light on a USB enclosure it can probably also hide its network traffic.
Is there something standard it's doing that could explain this? Like does Fedora 43 more frequently tell the drive's controller itself to do things like defragmentation or bit rot prevention when it's idle? That's the only explanation I can think of where the drive is clicking but no data is actually being transferred that would trigger the indicator light, since the operation would be entirely within the drive itself.
If the drive previously wasn't making this noise (as in it had been filled with data, been in use for days-weeks and wasn't ever making this noise) and it doesn't happen in response to data writes (even hours after the fact) then it might be a cause for concern that the drive could be dying.
In general it's a good idea to have back-ups of any important data but I'd really ensure that's the case here and assume it could imminently fail. In general the sound of hard drives changing (that is sounding different in either idle noises or active writing/reading noises) is a cause for concern for potential drive failure though it could be other things and as drives age they can sometimes change sound signatures as mechanical components age without necessarily failing (could go on working fine for years).
That said there are normal processes in drives that can make noise:
- Some sort of operation driven by your OS itself, I won't begin to get into all of them but there could be something accessing things in the background, doing file table or journaling operations, writes, checks, etc on the file system itself, just low level maintenance stuff.
- SMR drives may continue to write and shuffle data for quite some time after being written to, especially if it was a large amount of data. Though this should still even in the case of multiple terabytes probably be resolved within 12 hours.
- Many drives, especially high capacity enterprise drives do make a -soft- clicking sound as a result of the arms sweeping the surface when idle but not off to if I recall correctly spread around lubricant or some sort of basic mechanical maintenance. It's part of the normal drive operations. It's possible it occurs more frequently in response to a massive amount of writes previously like filling a drive or may not be activated until a certain amount of data is written, I'm not really sure how that works as that would probably be proprietary information to the manufacturer.
Should I be worried about this? To my paranoid mind it feels like something is slowly reading my files with some exploit to bypass the indicator light to fly under the radar.
How would it do this? Is it installing hacked firmware to your enclosure too? I doubt you're that valuable of a target.
If you're worried about malware then back up your stuff, nuke the install and reinstall from scratch. I wouldn't worry about it if this is the only thing you're seeing and find it unlikely.
From experience, if the drive starts making clicking noises, often, and it never did before, I agree, it could be a sign that the drive is starting to die.
Best practice at that point is to make a backup of vital files. No one wants to wake up one day to a dead drive without a backup.
Even now, on one my machines one of the drives is starting to switch to READ only, which usually means something is failing and the PC tries to minimize damage by switching to that. I van fix it with a chsk on terminal but I assume its days are numbered.
OP needs to backup. Just in case.
Just to make sure - it’s not some cable hitting a fan in a case, right?
I’ve seen systems before where a cable is too close to a fan, and you don’t hear a noise until the fan speeds up.
GitHub - martinpitt/fatrace: report system wide file access events
report system wide file access events. Contribute to martinpitt/fatrace development by creating an account on GitHub.GitHub
these are not two sides. The system is working as some intend so needs to be dismantled, at least large parts of it, to fix it.
People always forget, nuance exists.
we don’t have capitalism. But fuck any ism, just find the broken shit and fix it. People think there’s one trick, one system, one thing that will fix shit. Nothing will but work, time, effort, good judgement. What worked yesterday, won’t work tomorrow, at least without updating it.
Yeah, capitalism is fucked. I don’t want to put in another fucking ism, I want to buckle the fuck down and fix the shit that’s wrong.
It has a corrupt form of capitalism. It also has corrupt socialism.
So, do the good shit and I personally belive a socialist style system will result. It’s the work against the corruption that is the hard part.
I’m well aware. I guess good luck instituting socialism then. I bet you get far.
To not be a dick. Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. We have don’t have a coherent system, we have aspects of many, but the western ‘cult’ worships at the alter of capitalism. But we have a very corrupted version of it, that includes socialist, and authoritarian, and fascist tendencies. Things are far too entrenched to simply say, replace the system we have with this other one.
No system has ever been instituted to its definition, there is always unique challenges and differences and personalities. Spending time instituting a whole scale replacement, is time that will be wasted. Instead, we need a strategy of implementation through attrition. Forget the isms, just work on addressing the problems, and eventually we can build a better system.
I don't think you're understanding me. There's absolutely nothing socialist about western countries. Western countries don't have a "corrupted" version of capitalism, that's just capitalism in action.
Ideologies like Marxism-Leninism are useful because they help us better understand the world, and what we need to do to move onto a better world. Destroying the capitalist state, replacing it with a socialist one, and gradually appropriating and collectivizing all production and distribution is a time-tested method for doing so.
It has a corrupt form of capitalism.
I AGREE! We must return to a more pure form of capitalism by repealing the Chimney Sweepers Act 1788! Boys younger than eight should be allowed to be apprentices! Master sweeps should be allowed to take them on without getting their parents' consent, a four year old young man is able to make his own decisions!
we don’t have capitalism.
🤦 To say that is to say you don’t have even a Wikipedia-level understanding of capitalism.
People think there’s one trick, one system, one thing that will fix shit.
No, people don’t think that.
Nothing will but work, time, effort, good judgement.
Correct.
What worked yesterday, won’t work tomorrow, at least without updating it.
Correct.
I don’t want to put in another fucking ism, I want to buckle the fuck down and fix the shit that’s wrong.
People who don’t learn or develop theory can buckle down all they want, but they’re not going to get very far because they don’t understand anything.
It is a lot of work, time, and effort, and some of that is necessarily intellectual work, if you actually want to succeed in changing the world. Otherwise it’s like saying you want to be able fly without developing theories of physics, aerodynamics, and internal combustion engines.
I’m not going to reply to any more stupidity in here. Go theorize all you want. I’ll just leave one comment.
Otherwise it’s like saying you want to be able fly without developing theories of physics, aerodynamics, and internal combustion engines.
Check a history book, that’s precisely how we started flying.
The Wikipedia page for the Wright brothers suggests otherwise. Preceding theory informs practice, which in turn informs theory, ad infinitum. They wouldn’t have gotten off the ground without standing on the shoulders of giants’ previous theories, or without creating/updating theories from their experiments and then putting those theories to the test in practice.
Marx, Engels, and Lenin didn’t sit in a room and build castles in the sky. They (1) learned their predecessors’ theories, (2) deeply investigated the contemporary moment of the world, (3) updated preceding theories and developed new ones based on those investigations, (4) tested those theories in the real world, and so on in a dialectical manner.
The Wright Brothers did not know everything about flying, physics, engines, etc. They knew enough to do it, and did. In the years since we have written millions more pages and tried so many more things that if I want to fly, I don’t need to reinvent the airplane. This is the superpower of humanity, we don’t have to reinvent every time.
We all know enough about capitalism, socialism, etc. to act. Instead we prefer to sit and wank longer about the best possible society; meaning all we can do is endlessly talk about the best possible society.
The only way to actually build one is to learn what’s needed and act. Who cares what label it has, who cares if the theory is sound or not. If it doesn’t work in practice, you iterate forward.
The vast majority of Marxist-Leninists in the west only gradually come to understand and accept existing socialism, like the former USSR and current PRC. It's usually a years, even decades-long process of studying Marxism-Leninism, existing socialism, and peeling back layers and layers of anti-communism instilled from birth.
AES countries are not "totalitarian," at least not evenly. They have all been dramatically liberating for the working classes, while being horrfying for capitalists, landlords, fascists, slavers, etc from their prior systems. In the west, we get an exaggerated boogeyman version of these countries beamed into our heads, from the ruling class perspectives, to prevent us from seeing how we could benefit by learning from them.
Marxism-Leninism is by no means black and white. Nuance is build into Marxism, its key philosophical outlook is dialectical materialism.
However I think that the censorship that goes around such countries also makes it harder for us to know anything other than for example China might want to show us, we dont really have much idea of how internal dynamics work there and if u choose to believe personal testimonies its not pretty…
I'm not a capitalist, the amount of freedom I'd have if I lived in the PRC would increase dramatically. Despite popular misconception, we do have a good idea of what goes on in China. They have english-speaking news like CGTN, their processes are observed and reported on, and if you believe personal testemonies it's actually fantastic:
The problem is that western media obfuscates or slanders a lot of this reporting. It's a much more insidious form of censorship, it pretends it doesn't exist. China controls and censors the speech of capitalists and wreckers, yes, and this is approved by the vast majority.
Studies show strong public support for China’s political system
Conventional narratives in the West hold that the government in China lacks popular legitimacy and only retains power through coercion.Jason Hickel
But the reason its undemocratic is that there isnt really anything to challenge the CCP or its policies, and dissent is punished and censored, people have historically been happy under monarchs, but doesnt make them democratic..
Democracy means rule by the majority. Ethnic minorities are happy with China, I have no idea what you're referring to here. You keep making vague, unbacked statements like this, or saying "personal testemony isn't pretty," but when given actual evidence of the opposite you try to say it doesn't matter.
The CPC's policies come from the bottom up, and are implemented from the top-down. The CPC has over 100 million members, and itself is democratically run. This is a socialist democracy, not one of competing parties but one focused on cooperation and cohesion. Capitalists and fascist dissenters are punished and censored, just like socialists and communists are in capitalist countries. The difference is class based, which is why Chinese citizens love their system while westerners hate theirs.
Fun graph.
Is it okay to say otherwise? No repercussions to saying anything bad about the government? Or even perceptions that there may be repercussions?
I say this wittingly at risk of suffering the same heavy downvotes as the responder who merely concluded "the china one raises some questions…". Someone (or more ideally everybody) needs to stay curious and question things...
Studies show strong public support for China’s political system
Conventional narratives in the West hold that the government in China lacks popular legitimacy and only retains power through coercion.Jason Hickel
People always forget, nuance exists.
Amen.
(to noticing and remembering nuance exists)
(ps, Good luck with that other conversational cascade here... recent experience taught, that one's not at all inclined to nuance, open minded conversation, or entertaining ideas (nuanced or otherwise), or anything other than unreasonably repeating dogma with fallacies galore.)
The Case for a Third Reconstruction
The scale and depth of the attack on our institutions means that there is no simple way for a pro-democracy coalition to flip the lights back on after Trump. We need transformative thinking.
I don't really get how that contradicts needing a 3rd reconstruction that dismantles the government agencies that carry out that kind of shit and didn't even exist until WWII rather than dismantling a democracy?
you guys are just upset it is happening at home now and not Iraq.
Can't argue with you there, but that's also part of what makes me question who's best interest would be dismantling U.S. democracy instead of dismantling specific agencies within the government, with no plan for where we go next?
Because it kinda seems like those agencies would carry on doing whatever they want even after a union fully dissolves. They would just have fewer obstacles in their way.
When you think about how an American agency, for example, the CIA operates this playbook in other countries, what is their intended goal?
Their goal is to destabilize a country in order to remove any obstacles to taking full control. They usually achieve destabilization by undermining public trust in a system and the leaders of that system, so that the public will either dismantle the government for them or be less resistant once it is dismantled (see the Soviet Union in the late 80s). Once that happens, they already hold all the resources and power, and install somebody they already have lined up.
Considering that there seems to currently be a global campaign to spread disinformation and install far right leaders across the globe, it makes me question if this is happening everywhere bc global destabilization is the goal.
Currently, just about anywhere in the world, who holds the majority of the resources? The people or a small group of oligarchs? When destabilization happens and a local government collapses who has the upper hand when it comes to filling the power vacuum?
I don’t really get how that contradicts needing a 3rd reconstruction that dismantles the government agencies that carry out that kind of shit and didn’t even exist until WWII rather than dismantling a democracy?
- You don't have a democracy, you live in a dictatorship of capital
- You never completed the second reconstruction, what makes you think you can handle a third
What makes you think oligarchs haven't been continuing to undermine and dismantle the second reconstruction this entire time, and aren't using their established global institutions (like banks, corporations, and conservative think tanks) to do exactly what they've been projecting and accusing progressives of doing?
Do you honestly think there isn't a good chance a global cabal of far right conservatives might be ready to use their collective wealth and resources they hoard and pass down for generations to take full global control?
Or Steve Kangas on the Origins of the overclass and the crimes of the CIA
Steve Kangas
Kangas ran the Liberalism Resurgent website. This included several articles on the activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.Spartacus Educational
They are attempting to undermine and dismantle it. It took over 50 years of scheming and clawing their way into government to gain enough power to try and tear down from the inside out.
And they will continue to attack and try to dismantle it. That's what enemies and bad actors will always do. That's why the article lays out a strategy for creating a system that allows more flexibility in response to these attacks.
the disinformation campaign has been running since the mid 1930's and it's been taught in our schools and disseminated via legacy media since the 1940's.
a key feature of the campaign is to make americans predisposed to outright reject the alternatives that have already been proven to work in irl and all of those alternatives are aligned with what @Cowbee@lemmy.ml already told you.
anything else is going to be a rinse and repeat of what we already have.
a key feature of the campaign is to make americans predisposed to outright reject the alternatives that have already been proven to work
Not just with socialism. This was the response to the civil rights movement of the 60s/70s, to the environmentalism of the 80s/90s, and to the anti-war movement of the 00s/10s.
Every progressive position is pillared as unworkable, overly expensive, and jobs-killing.
Meanwhile, we sink $1T/year into chat bots that spam your Twitter feed with racist porn and armies of tweaked out sheriffs deputies to crash their cars into anyone they consider illegally brown
those were all socialist aligned movements:
the civil rights movement -- the black panthers in particular -- was literally socialists and bombed (also literally) because of it. MLK jr.'s cadre took great pains to ensure that their efforts didn't get labeled as socialist because of it. the environmentalists of the 80's/90's -- green peace in particular -- was also heavily socialist influenced and got labeled as such for not making efforts like MLK jr did.
now-a-days, the campaign misinforms americans that leftists don't reliably vote despite examples like clinton and obama proving otherwise and there being enough green, psl, dsa, cpusa votes to counter republicans easily. this misinformation is done to cover for the fact that the democrats don't want to adopt platforms that left leaning voters want and this is most recently self evident in kamala harris' campaign and its attempt to sway republicans to vote democrat rather than shore up her democratic base.
🙄 reconstruction was a response to oligarchs who wanted to ignore progress. They have always fought laws and regulations that threatened their power. There was literally a civil war fought over this.
America's unending struggle between Oligarchy and Democracy
Even after losing a war, they continued to scheme and manipulate others to stack the decks in their favor. They continued to do it after the first reconstruction, and the second reconstruction, and they will certainly do it again after the 3rd.
That's why it is (and always will be) a completely bullshit argument that the safety nets, laws, and regulations created to keep these assholes in check, allegedly no longer serve a purpose and only serve to place an unfair burden on society based on the mistakes of the past.
The callousness, selfishness, and greed that fueled the "mistakes" of the past were never unique to the time period. They have always just been human flaws, and should serve as reminders that every human is corruptible. The worst traits of humanity are never just magically going to disappear someday. They exist in every corner of the world, under every government. They always have and they always will.
America’s Unending Struggle Between Oligarchy and Democracy | The Nation
A new history charts the three-centuries long contest between elites seeking to uphold a racial and economic order that benefits them alone and the forces of democracy seeking to dismantle their power.The Nation
No no no. In socialist countries, the Big Government is in control. There's no freedom. Everyone lives in fear. You don't even own your own toothbrush.
Anyone who supports socialism is a Tankie who just wants to kill rich white people for fun and doesn't understand how awful their lives will be afterwards.
Folks can't remember Bush Jr at all, much less Clinton, Bush Sr or Reagan. They can barely remember Obama, except through a haze of nostalgia.
What's notable about Trump isn't his fascism - plenty of presidents have been openly fascist. What's notable is how many middle class white people are getting sucked up into the current dragnet.
Which socialist country would be the best example?
Capitalists only have the power they do because of the state, if we smash and replace it they have no power.
The state, as well as the public and private military and resources they hoard and control.
The USSR, PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, and many more serve as valuable lessons for us. We can't cleanly map their conditions onto ours, as the US is a dying Empire rather than an underdeveloped/agrarian society liberating themselved from colonialism like many of these countries were before socialism, but we can still learn from their methods.
As for the millitary, that's an aspect of the state. Capitalists only control the resources they do because the state backs them up. Revolutionary history teaches us how this unfolds.
USSR
Uhh....
History should teach you that the co-founder of the Heritage Foundation was traveling around Moscow and Eastern Europe when the Soviet Union collapsed, but it never really gets talked about for some reason.
A conservative who essentially birthed Project 2025 and is famously quoted as saying "I don't want everyone to vote," was sneaking in computers and other electronics to Soviet dissidents while teaching soviet politicians all about American "democracy" just prior to the collapse.
Then he and several other members of Heritage were ready to fill the power vacuum and help establish the first go between for U.S. and Russian capitalist businesses.
"You capture the Soviet Union --I'm going to capture the states."-Thomas Roe, Heritage Foundation board member and founder of the State Policy Network
to fellow Heritage Foundation board member Robert Krieble.
In 1989, the Krieble Institute was created "to promote democracy and economic freedom in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe."
1989: A Republican in Moscow (WaPo article about Weyrich holding mock elections)
PBS Documentary about Weyrich and Krieble involvement in Collapse of USSR Playing For Power (2012)
The Right-Wing Network Behind the War on Unions
Inspired by Ronald Reagan and funded by the right's richest donors, a web of free-market think tanks has fueled the nationwide attack on workers' rights.Mother Jones
I'm aware of the dissolution of the USSR. It lasted for nearly a full century, and the causes of its dissolution have been studied by every single communist party in existence thoroughly. They didn't dissolve because a random far-right Statesian whispered evil things, that was a symptom of the dissolution.
Further, without the US Empire, there aren't going to be nearly as many ways for the remaining capitalists to exert their will or coup.
its dissolution have been studied by every single communist party in existence thoroughly
What's their conclusion?
It's much the opposite, living in those places was and is very good, especially when viewed over time and not as an individual snapshot. The USSR, for example, managed to double life expectancy, provide free, high quality healthcare, education, and low-cost or free housing for all, lowered working hours, and had one of the fastest growing economies in the world while democratizing society. The PRC is on track to become the world's indusputably most advanced country in the following decades. What's going on is that socialism and socialist countries have been systemically demonized in the west to prevent the working classes from seeking an alternative.
I'm not a genius by any stretch, but I've studied these countries, engaged with theory, organize in real life, and more. I'm smart enough to understand this, which I'd say everyone is if they put in the effort. Intelligence isn't nearly as striated as liberals would have you believe.
No, lol. This was like a bingo-card for generic, lazy, unsourced anti-communism. I've heard every one of these arguments before.
- Deaths by the state - Capitalists, fascists, sabateurs, Tsarists, landlords, and kulaks were targeted by the state. These weren't random killings, but targeted attacks towards classes of people that had taken up arms against the people, and as such this was popularly supported. The communists weren't butchers, nor were they killing people willy-nilly.
- Famine - Prior to collectivization of agriculture in the 1930s, famine was common in Russia. The kulak system of farming, itself a bourgeois model, was extremely exploitative and very inefficient. The 1930s famine was the last outright famine outside of wartime, and was caused by a combination of weather disaster (which collectivized farming was capable of resisting better) and kulaks killing their crops and livestock to resist the Red Army.
- Life Expectancy - Life expectancy climbed not just because of general sanitation, but because housing and employment were gaurunteed, healthcare and education were free and high quality, and millions were directly lifted from poverty. Housing itself didn't just increase in quantity, but quality, as prior living conditions outside of major cities were in horrible shacks. Deaths due to hypothermia went down dramatically thanks to improved soviet housing.
- Lend-Lease - The soviets are understood to have been capable of beating the Nazis without lend-lease. Lend-Lease was very helpful, no doubt, but it arrived after the soviets had turned the tides on the Nazi onslaught. The Red Army was responsible for 85% of the combat against the Nazis, and their large investment in heavy industry prior to the war was crucial in their success, despite coming into the 20th century far behind the rest of Europe.
From 1941 to 1945, total lend-lease aid to the Soviet Union accounted for only 5% of the Soviet GDP in total. And it is a salient point that the majority of the aid was received after the tide of the war had already turned against the Germans on the Eastern Front. The Soviets had already won the critical battles of Moscow and Stalingrad. Germany was already losing the war when Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union had any significant effect, and that effect was minuscule compared with Soviet production at the time. By the time the first Sherman laid its tracks on Soviet soil, the writing was already very much on the wall for the Third Reich.Although Stalin, Khrushchev, and other Soviet politicians were very complimentary about the Lend-Lease program helping them win the war, the statistics tell a very different story. The noted historian David M. Glantz points out in this regard,
“Lend-Lease aid did not arrive in sufficient quantities to make the difference between defeat and victory in 1941–1942; that achievement must be attributed solely to the Soviet people and to the iron nerve of Stalin, Zhukov, Shaposhnikov, Vasilevsky, and their subordinates….”He further states that without Lend-Lease, the Soviets still would have won, but the war would have taken 12 to 18 months longer.
- Foreign Aid - In all reality, the USSR, Cuba, PRC, and Vietnam don't recieve much, if anything, in aid. The US Empire is the one that relies on aid, though it doesn't call it that. The US Empire runs on imperialism. Through export of capital, setting up comprador regimes, and outsourcing while maintaining monopoly on tech, the US Empire plunders the entire global south. Unequal exchange with the global south keeps the south underdeveloped, it's equal exchange with fellow global south countries like the PRC that is causing actual development in the global south.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
5 Myths & Misconceptions About the Soviets in World War II | TheCollector
The Red Army and its actions are the subject of much historical debate. Here are some of the biggest misconceptions and the realities behind them.TheCollector
genocides
Big fat 0, unless you mean the genocide communists thwarted in 1945
World wars
Holy shit lmao, the sheer desperation and illiteracy it takes to try and pin the world wars on communism when ww1 started before there were any communist countries and ww2 was started by genocidal german capitalists. You are flailing, my guy. Red, mad and nude in the extreme.
Also, format your shit
This is another ridiculous comment.
- The US being "better" to live in - As I explained, the US is an imperialist country that plunders the world for its resources. It isn't a closed loop with a system that works, it's a global parasite.
- Surviving without aid - Socialist countries recieve sanctions, embargoes, coup attempts, and genocide from capitalist countries, not aid. The US Empire has committed genocide against Koreans, Vietnamese, and far more to serve its own interests. Socialist countries do often start in the third world, not as imperialist countries, and develop on their own labor and not via imperialism like the US Empire.
- Communism on paper - There's absolutely nothing about communism that requires people to be in perfect order for it to work. I genuinely have no clue what you mean by this, I've heard this before but it doesn't actually make any sense.
- Communism and democracy - Communism and socialism are more democratic than capitalism can be, because the working classes are in control, rather than private capitalists.
- Sweden - Sweden is a capitalist country that, like the US, depends on imperialism to fund its safety nets. Like the US, Sweden is a dictatorship of capital.
No, I'm not "brainwashed," I've just done far more research into the subject of socialism and communism both in theory and in practice. It's like you're trying to be someone's hyper-conservative uncle right now, I've heard all of these before and none of them are valid.
You’re just brainwashed.
You just arrived here on Lemmy, parroting every Redditor talking point, and we’re brainwashed? Sorry to pop the corporate media bubble you’d been living under.
Also brainwashing isn’t real, in fact it was a CIA cold war psyop. The True Story of Brainwashing and How It Shaped America
“Here, then, is the brief history of brainwashing,” [Timothy] Melley writes in a 2011 paper for Grey Room. “The concept began as an [O]rientalist propaganda fiction created by the CIA to mobilize domestic support for a massive military build-up. This fiction proved so effective that the CIA’s operations directorate believed it and began a furious search for a real mind control weapon. The search resulted not in a miraculous new weapon but a program of simulated brainwashing designed as a prophylactic against enemy mistreatment. This simulation in turn became the real basis for interrogating detainees in the war on terror.”
Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing”
Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing”
I’ve become very skeptical of the concept of “brainwashing.” Over the past few months this skepticism has boiled over into open and explicit disagreement with even well-meaning pushers within the Marxist-Leninist corner.redsails.org
God, what a nightmare
But maybe I'm just not smart enough to read this graph correctly. Maybe it's actually upside down.
So what you're saying is that the CPC siezed power and then life in China immediately, rapidly improved to the point where their life expectancy is now higher than America's? Excellent, glad we're on the same page.
and actually started heavily using vaccines and antibiotics
Oh, did they not have those things before the evil communists took over? How interesting
You can't collectivize all of production and distribution if you keep smashing the state, you'll just create a bunch of communalist cells at best, at worst you'll recreate capitalist relations and a new state. The state must wither, and it does so by erasing the basis of the state, ie by erasing class. You can't erase class without collectivizing all of production and distribution.
Anarchism is primarily about communalization of production. Marxism is primarily about collectivization of production.
When I say “communalization,” I mean anarchists propose horizontalist, decentralized cells, similar to early humanity’s cooperative production but with more interconnection and modern tech. When I say collectivization, I mean the unification of all of humanity into one system, where production and distribution is planned collectively to satisfy the needs of everyone as best as possible.
For anarchists, collectivized society still seems to retain the state, as some anarchists conflate administration with the state as it represents a hierarchy. For Marxists, this focus on communalism creates inter-cell class distinctions, as each cell only truly owns their own means of production, giving rise to class distinctions and thus states in the future.
For Marxists, socialism must have a state, a state can only wither with respect to how far along it has come in collectivizing production and therefore eliminating class. All states are authoritarian, but we cannot get rid of the state without erasing the foundations of the state: class society, and to do so we must collectivize production and distribution globally. Socialist states, where the working class wields its authority against capitalists and fascists, are the means by which this collectivization can actually happen, and are fully in-line with Marx’s beliefs. Communism as a stateless, classless, moneyless society is only possible post-socialism.
Abolishing the state overnight would not create the kind of society Marxists advocate for advancing towards, and if anything, would result in the resumption of competition and the resurgance of capitalism if Marx and Engels predictions are correct.
Guardrails are only enforceable by the state. Without the state to smash capitalism and enforce guardrails against corruption and the power of greed, capitalism and authoritarianism will always step in to fill the power vacuum.
This is why communism has always failed within a few months to a few years of initiation: lack of guardrails and laws that are effectively enforced against capitalism or authoritarianism. It’s why every “communist” state in history devolved into an authoritarian, anti-communist political structure very, very quickly. Hell, even in Russia communism was effectively dead by 1918.
We are so close to having the technology to implement direct participatory democracy (A.K.A., political communism), where things like presidents and premiers and politicians in general just don’t exist, and only minor functionaries and coordinatinative councils remain to carry out the people’s directives.
What is still needed, however, is a highly educated and literate population that values education, facts, and meritocracy - thereby suffocating conservatism and strangling it to death - and for that population to have an exceedingly tiny level of economic inequality, such that the wealth is returned properly into the hands of the Working Class that created it, and most people can then acquire the mental headspace to focus on more than just daily survival needs (as in, focus on community-level or even nation-level subjects).
A strong state is not necessarily a dangerous one. What makes ours dangerous is that power is concentrated at the top, with those who have money (capitalists) calling the shots. A distributed, citizen-directed state that is utterly immune from money and power hierarchies can be built that will only ever feel oppressive to those who are inherently abusive, greedy, and malicious.
•to move us from our undemocratic present to a more democratic future, we need to institutionalize our commitments to a more inclusive and responsive democracy in more durable forms. These might encompass everything from alternative economic regulatory institutions and new approaches to anti-discrimination to a more universal safety net that secures the essential guarantees of health, housing, and income that individuals and communities need to thrive.
•A second reconstructionist strategy lies in containing reactionary power and backlash. We should presume that there will always be efforts to roll back egalitarian expansions of democracy. Part of how democracies survive and thrive is through institutions that contain the potential resurgence of anti-democratic policies and forces. The democratic institutions of the future will similarly need to develop ways to contain authoritarian power. This will require laws and institutions that respond to techniques that are emerging in the current moment, such as new forms of state and private surveillance, or the weaponization of presidential control of funding flows.
•The third institutional transformation strategy is to democratize our governing institutions, making policymaking more directly responsive to and shaped by ordinary constituents. One important area is the balance of power between the branches. Even before Trump, the trend has been to centralize power in an imperial presidency. The legislature, by contrast, has been central to past moments of democratization. Any future reconstructionist agenda will need to be built on congressional majorities and a legislature willing to check and permanently shift away from the overreliance on presidential power.
There is a difference is saying "I does what it does" and "what it does is per design". The latter assigns a responsibility.
In OP Aziraphale gives socienty the responsibility to fix a broken system incrementally and Crowley gives the people in power the fault of intentionally creating a bad system and calls for revolution.
But you don't need to misuse language to assign responsibility.
What? I am interested... How else would you assign the responsibility to people that designed something intentionally bad, if you cannot used language?
"Misuse [of] language" is a concept I cannot even begin to wrap my head around...
Do I loose the warranty if I use language in unintended ways?
It is their responsibility for breaking the system.
You just 'misused' language to assign responsibility to people for breaking the system.
Saying the system was always designed for this removes responsibility.
No? Responsibility is not a binary concept. Someone can kill someone else, and would be responsible for that death, and the people around that killer could also share responsibility for not noticeing their unusual behavior. And the system could also be responsible for not giving the killer the support they needed, which drove them to kill someone. And the people that designed or constructed that system could also be responsible for not caring enough about these kinds of deaths to prevent them systemically.
What dystopian surveillance things from your country you can't escape?
Or have to go through great lengths to escape.
In my country you can't buy any medicine without showing your ID... I mean, you technically can, but if you are registered they "give" like an 80% discount, so everyone thinks it's a great deal, not realizing that's the normal price, they are just pretending you can still go and buy a simple cold medicine without sharing your ID, phone, email, and street address with the drug store and whoever they decide to sell that information to, you just have to pay absurdly more. Yeah, you can lie about all the other information, but not really about your ID number. Probably soon, to get the "discount", you are going to have to verify your email or phone number as well.
- credit cards, debit cards, and now cashless vendors
- flock cameras
- google, fb, and amazon scooping everything I do online
- license plate readers on cop cars and on random parking lots
- my work computer taking screenshots, listening, and even scanning how long I spend reading an email to make sure I am not ignoring the nonsense the company directors send us about how great AI is and that we all have to use it EVERY FUCKING DAY
- membership cards
- I can't think of more right now, but there are more
escape the big tech tracking by installing uBlock Origin
Cloudflare and AWS say "Hi" 👋
UBO is a very good tech that I strongly recommend too though. Just gotta be aware of its limits.
credit cards, debit cards, and now cashless vendors
FWIW in Belgium you can get prepaid nameless cards. The post and their bank partner know it's yours (due to KYC) but not the shops and for online shops you can use drop boxes.
For membership cards I specifically reject because of that. It's optional though so IMHO it's precisely the easiest thing to escape, just say no.
That's quite interesting, did you have other sort of compulsory ID before the national one? Like, what did you use to register to stuff, like enrolling in school or college, opening a bank account or getting a retirement plan, etc.
In my country we have both the state and national ID. I guess very long ago you could use your state ID to register to stuff, but as they pushed for more standardization everything started to require your national ID instead, and your state ID card was more a proof that you are who you claim to be (like, you have to collect a parcel somewhere and show it belongs to you, or if you are stopped by the police you can show your state ID)... but usually people just use the driver's license because it has both ID numbers and your picture, so it's a valid document for everything.
For a lot of people for a long time your insurance card (that didn't have a photo) was the only "identification" you had. Otherwise you had to bring your school ID, work ID etc.
Most people don't have drivers licenses cause they take the train. When you sign up for banks etc you usually have to get a bunch of official documentation from the local ward office with your information.
Proof of identity in Japan has always been a bit of a hazy problem. You sign most documents still with a family stamp, so the idea of what legally is defined as identifying is kind of vague.
Most local offices aren't networked up, so when you move you have to register with your local ward office and the japanese beauricratic army goes and gets the previous ward office to fax over your info.
"My Number" is the japanese governments attempt to get all that stuff wired together in one database.
You can't escape when you currently appears life in one of the millons cams anywhere and even with this life in YouTube, additional to the surveillance of big corporations, banks and the own ISP. Privacy nowadays is relative, you can only patch the biggest holes. 100% privacy is stay at home and reading a book with the smartphone turned off.
youtube.com/results?search_que…
skylinewebcams.com/en/webcam.h…
etc.. adding millons more used by police and govs with face recognition soft.
EarthCam - Webcam Network
EarthCam is the leading network of live streaming webcams for tourism and entertainment around the world with 4K streaming technology.EarthCam
Reality Check: EU Council Chat Control Vote is Not a Retreat, But a Green Light for Indiscriminate Mass Surveillance and the End of Right to Communicate Anonymously
Contrary to headlines suggesting the EU has "backed away" from Chat Control, the negotiating mandate endorsed today by EU ambassadors in a close split vote paves the way for a permanent infrastructure of mass surveillance.Patrick Breyer
- You have to hand over a huge amount of personal info about yourself & others to estate agents when renting a property - which they then sell to advertisers & you have no opt-out
- Similarly, landords can require you to use a proprietary app for rent payments, which of course collects & sells your private data too
- Burner phones are effectively illegal (telcos are required to collect & retain ID of every phone number they register)
- Telcos and ISPs are required to collect & retain logs of all your activities for a minimum of two years
- In some cities police can detain & search you & your property for no reason, and require you to remove any facial coverings
- It's illegal to refuse to hand over passwords to cops (6 years jail is the max term I think)
- Police can hack your device, take over your social media, delete or modify your data for an investigation, or survey any digital device if they "think it is likely to be used by someone subject to a warrant" (this particular bill was announced and then rushed through parliament in less than 24 hours to give the public as little time as possible to protest it
- Some social media sites (including github(wtf)) are now required to age-verify all users beginning next month. Which will obviously lead to mass leaks & breaches of private data which the gov will turn a blind eye to
This is Australia. I hate it here
The insane amount of personal information that essential companies (e.g. electricity, property managers, etc) is getting out of control and our digital privacy laws are still in the dark ages.
Github is great but it's owned by Microsoft. If that alone doesn't dissuade you, their integration of their Copilot AI to speed up the creation of vibe-coded projects might. This latest change would.
Luckily there is at least one FOSS alternative, codeberg.org. Its base, Forgejo, is self-hostable, therefore security is in your hands.
In my country it's becoming ever more common that when I visit someone and that person lives in an apartment, the building has a doorman/security and they ask for my id.
Also all supermarkets want to know your id number, but there at least I can say "no thanks".
ID verification for phone numbers.
ALMOST every bank now forces you to have a phone application to authorize payments and each banks implements it in their own way, no standardized way like TOTP (RFC 6238) or Passkeys (WebAuthn), and sometimes those apps force you to use a verified phone (no custom ROM basically) because of security. So if you have no battery (or phone number, because some banks still send you codes trough SMS), you can't authorize transactions.
Most banks use 3rd party, non local AI companies to verify your identify with your face.
Chile :3c
Sidetracked a bit but last week I was in the UK. I tried to visit a website (not porn actually, just private messaging on BlueSky) and it asked to verify my age. Initially I thought "Meh... OK... let's see the process" which then lead to installing an app maybe (I'm not sure tbh as I was in rush). Clearly I didn't want to do it because the DM was potentially urgent (scheduling to meet someone ASAP) ... so what did I do? I switched from my browser to my VPN, connected from Austria, refreshed... no age verification. It took me a grand total of 5s to bypass the system.
TL;DR: maybe you can actually escape even though you are convinced you can't.
Can I be the Genx here and just … yeah, we’ve always had to work for survival. Like each and every organism that find a niche. They are all working… even photosynthesis is a kind of activity.
Good grief.
All critters have to work. Think about it.
But plants kind of live in the real world, and I live in violently enforced fantasy bullshit. Literally the majority of the resources, of that work, goes to maintaining inequality and oppression, not to anyone's survival.
Take every penny in advertising policing 'genAI' and military budgets. Just the most obvious inarguable 'this couldn't possibly be for anything else', and it's over half of the minerals work hours and CPU cycles,
So the amount we have to work is at least twice as much as the actual amount to survive, and the benefits are no more than half as much. And all of it in deeply bullshit conditions, usually in ways that are 90% oppression 10% productivity at best.
And these are kinda conservative estimates.
So get peter thiel's dick out of your mouth before you speak, boot licker. You won't sound nearly as fucking stupid.
Touchy much?
I’m not the one complaining about the hours per week I work or my compensation… just saying…
Honestly— we’re just another organism on the planet.
Separate yourself from the system — a hatchet in the wild… and you’ll find you’ll still have to work. The native Americans had to hunt and build domeciles and make clothes… maybe farm… fish… it’s work all the way down to the first turtle.
You put a lot of work into coping with the amount of billionaire dick you suck.
Admittedly, this is very refined copium, the cognitive dissonance is very smoothe, the choices you're pretending don't exist and horrors you need to pretend are inherent are very refined. A+ rhetoric, gotta respect the evil game.
Still get the billionaire dick out of your mouth before speaking, boot licker.
First: we’re all here because we want to weaken the current corporate hegemony. So… yeah… down with big billionaires. You and I are on the same team. (Unless you don’t get the Orwell reference.)
So… I just want to get this straight.
Let’s say it takes X amount of work to support your needs. Your PB&Js and Captain Crunch… whatever it is.
So… In your world… let’s say you eat for free… whose precious calories get burned in the acquisition of the calories upon which you are sustained?
I'm not averse to the idea of doing shit. I'm averse to 99% of the value of everything i do being stolen and given back in the form of thugs who k8dnap my neighbors and gas my friends and might kill me at any second and nobody will care, and will not contribute to that system.
But it is actually possible to eat for just about free. The precolumbian peoples of north America had actually cultivated a sort of abundance that allowed for very nearly this in some places. Doesn't work with our current population, and I like building shit¹ so it's not the utopia I'd choose, but is in fact possible. Shit was basically rock candy mountain. And I'd be okay going shit for other people. I do in fact. It can be fun, when work isn't made miserable. They didnt choose to be here any more than I did, and in light of tgat they should be allowed the necessities of life.
I'm not interested in what you have to say about any of this, what with the billionaire dick youre choking on.
¹also toilet paper and antibiotics
I’ve tried to remain civil but since your dream job is “going shit for other people,” I agree we don’t have much in common. Yes — that’s a quote.
Allow me though to ask you to leave your ignorant, toxic, homophobic, ugliness at Reddit where they need people like you to undermine their efforts at community building.
I checked out your zero original post profile and discovered you’re just a little rage bait bot. Cute. Keep undermining Lemmy. We will persevere.
Oh… and wanna know how a rage bait bot reveals itself? It has to have the last word. Hang in there.
Deserving to live and surviving are not the same. In the natural condition if you don't gather or hunt, you have no food. You die. You do not deserve anything.
Even in society you are not entitled to others working for you. However, in a civilised society we should provide for those incapable to provide for themself due to ethics.
I think it would incredibly more desirable for society to have a firm social safety net (housing, food, healthcare). We have the technology and means to do so without breaking a sweat.
If we try it and society stagnates, we can always tweak it to incentivize certain types of work. Myself, I believe society would see vast improvements when people aren't surviving and living in shambles. I believe many of our current issues would be quickly solved once we are broadly able to slow down and think for a moment.
Deserving or not deserving doesn't really factor into the equation. We need to create and build a world worth living in. I want to live in a world where people are more free, healthy, and safe - where work is directly benefiting our communities instead of people being forced to slave in hostile work environments to barely make it.
In general I agree. People should be able to make informed life choices without pressure. However, I don't think universal basic income is the solution (see below). In Germany we have no public university fees and you can get Bafög; which is a far from ideal conditional income enough to cover housing and food while you study. You have to pay a part back once you are done, but far from all (at most 50%; often less than that). I wouldn't mind a study UBI.
I am for social security and social services that allow you to make an informed choice of what you want to do. Beyond that I am for "you have to work". But I am looking at "work" from an European perspective with all the protection laws in place and not an American perspective.
The main problem with UBI (Universal Basic Income) is that while tests showed benefits (highly depending on countries), financing UBI is difficult. So far no larger country has completely adapted UBI at least partly due to that reason. Also, no study was long enough to see the "people are less incentivised to work" issue.
If you choose to have a child entirely on purpose in 2025, you're just a piece of shit, or fanatically devoted to 'The Revolution' and think its gonna happen any day now, because you're delusional¹.
¹you had better not use that child as an excuse to stand the fuck down. That child is why you belong at the absolute front of every police encounter, risking your life for their future. If you have a child and are not regularly trying to kill police Nd the wealthy, that child should be taken from you, be ause you do not give a shit about them, they only exist for your own self gratifying natalist bullshit.
Narcissistic delusion is not the basis for an entire human life. That person you're bringing into the world has to exist for decades, and the next few decades¹ are not something I would condemn anyone to. Doing that is sick, its selfish, and its abusive.
Maybe once we start fixing shit, and there's a chance of not deliberately putting a child through hell.
¹we can't even imagine a future that isn't hellish anymore. Even our fictions have forgotten utopia.
I guess you had a pretty unpleasant life so far? Not everybody's has sucked. But I don't think I need to form a coherent argument against 'all reproduction is inherently morally bankrupt ' - it's such deliberate bait that it rejects good faith discussion off-hand.
Is there a more coherent argument to be made against hyper-natalists? Yes, I think that could plausibly be upheld. But that would be a more nuanced stance. The world, despite its trajectory, is not a hellscape.
I'm not delusional about climate change and fascism. Your children will not have your life, asshole. You cannot promise them that. You cannot comprehend how grim this shit is going to get. I'm not really joking about my plan to die in the water wars.
Nobody who breeds right now, in 2025, should be allowed to keep them unless they're going hard on revolution. Like, anything short of the parents from 'one battle after another' you shouldn't be allowed to keep the kid, you are not responsible enough to care for a child.
This was not the case, arguably, 20 40 60 years ago. This is not anti natalist, this is considering the life that will be available to ypur hypothetical child, the life you are forcing someone to have to live.
You're right everything's fine, would you be willing to buy some land in the Marshall islands off me?
No? I dont have any special fucking knowledge you don't have access to, 'Cadillac desert' and 'desert' are not the fucking necronomicon; you can get them like anywhere. Zlibrary, Anna's archive, your local library, wherever the fuck else. You just want to keep pretending, so why the fuck would you?
Any excuse to do what you want with no consideration for the lives of others, right?
I could explain how now is different, but you don't care.
I'm against inflicting the hell world weve made on a living thing.
By all means, fuck like mormob rabbits once we fix shit, but if you're breeding on purpose before that, you are not fit to raise a child.
I mean…ya…but this “quote” doesn’t appear to me to be talking about the wealthy…but rather addressing the notion that poor people and the unemployed have no value if they don’t have employment/can’t find better employment.
Could be wrong.
You know, when i originally read this, the way i interpreted it was that he was saying that if you need to earn money to live you don't deserve to live.
I much prefer the version that is an indictment of the phrase "earn a living" as implying you don't deserve to live if you aren't "working" in the modern sense of earning money at a modern job vs doing what's necessary to stay alive like all nature's critters.
"If you don't earn money, you don't deserve to live."
This is how I interpreted it and it definitely feels true, that's how capitalism treats us.
For clarification, I initially read it to mean that anybody "poor enough" to have to work to earn money does not deserve to live. I.e., rich people are human, everybody else is subhuman.
Your interpretation I saw a few moments later, and that the post was criticizing that phrase. Basically, the polar opposite of my first impression.
Ah yes it can be interpreted multiple ways, I see your perspective 1) there are people who don't need to work in order to earn money, they are the highest class of humans.
2) Then there are people who have to work to earn money, they are considered pitiful but still essential cogs in our economy,
3) then there are people who do not earn money and they are the ones who capitalism deems worthless.
No, you're confusing trade itself for capitalism, and severely downplaying the immense siphoning of material wealth that goes on, especially at an international scale. Capitalists steal the value created by workers, workers are not on an even playing field with capitalists. They sell the only commodity they can, their labor power, while capitalists leverage their ownership of capital to fix labor prices around subsistence wages.
Regulation can't fix capitalism or save it from the tendency for the rate of profit to fall. We need to move onto socialism, where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and production and distribution are oriented towards satisfying needs rather than profits.
Not necessarily. Capitalism functions by the following circuit:
M-C...P...C'-M'
Money is used to buy commodities, such as machinery, raw materials, and labor power, then production happens, then higher value commodities are the result of said production and sold for greater sums of money. M' is fed back into this system, and M'' is output at the end, over and over. The increase in value comes from unpaid labor, ie wages that don't actually cover all of the value created, because capitalists cannot profit otherwise.
Socialist systems don't have equal pay for everyone (that isn't the goal to begin with), but also don't have this system of capital ownership as the principle aspect of their economies and as such private ownership is phased out over time in these countries.
I think you will see plenty of private ownership in any country. Unless you accept the paper only "public property" with a ruling class of "I am the state" philosophy.
Every country has billionaires, in capitalist countries they buy politicians and in authoritarian countries they are the politicians, but inequality is there nonetheless.
Publicly run industry doesn't normally function with the same circuit of turning money into a larger sum of money that I described, nor are administrators a "ruling class." Inequality in distribution exists, but isn't necessarily the problem, equalitarians that seek equal distribution for everyone are exceedingly rare. There's a qualitative difference in outcomes for the working classes in socialist countries where public ownership is the principle aspect that manifests in dramatic uplifting of their material conditions, whereas the point of the capitalist system is said inequality. The sheer scale of inequality in capitalist systems far surpasses socialist countries.
In the USSR, for example, the gap between the wealthiest, ie professors and scientists at the top and the average factory worker towards the bottom, was about ten times. In capitalist countries, that number skyrockets to billions. In the PRC, which has a socialist market economy, the number of billionaires is going down while the GDP and GDP per capita of the PRC is growing dramatically year over year, alongside real wages.
Yes, Stalin was not ruling class. Not at all. Benevolent caretaker. Same as Maduro, the Kims and Xi.
PS: lol at professors being the wealthiest in the USSR. Big lol.
(Oh wow. No one replied with this quote yet...)
“We should do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian Darwinian theory he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living.”
― Buckminster Fuller
It's an insult if you intend it to be. In a vacuum, calling someone tennis-playing wouldn't necessarily qualify as an insult, but context specific instances might make it one.
Also, since you said there's nothing wrong with being brown-eyed, there's similarly nothing wrong with being a dicksucker or a dickrider. It only becomes an insult if you're trying to ridicule someone on the basis of that
Brother it's called culture shift. Language changes. You're making a declarative statement without providing justification for it. Also, you're gonna have to show some evidence from where you got this narrative that the terms 'dickriding' and 'dicksucking' were originally used to shame homosexuals and women.
Furthermore, this is a sentiment I've seen paraded only by YOU. Things like the 'r-word' or 'n-word' are at least popularly agreed upon 'no-no's' so that's also saying something about this idea of yours
I did provide justification for it, it's an insult almost always levied against straight men acting as sycophants for other straight men. Neither of them are having sex with each other, it's meant to make the submission especially shameful by drawing on the societal disgust towards gay men and straight/bi women. Socially, it has always been an insult to outright call straight men "gay" or the f-slur, because the shame and hatred for queer folk is built-in. This just extends that to the act of submission.
Secondly, I by no means made up this analysis, it's existed for a long time (as did analysis of the r-word before it became accepted as ableist by the general population). Here's some example articles/threads/etc:
- thegayuk.com/is-*removed*-a-ho…
- reddit.com/r/askgaybros/commen…
- reddit.com/r/AskGayMen/comment…
- reddit.com/r/lgbt/comments/sfn…
- medium.com/@thedrick/casual-ho…
The list goes on. It isn't a culture shift, it's still a pejorative that is only insulting if you think the act itself is shameful or bad, and it's nearly always used against straight men.
Here's a comment from one of the threads you posted:
Who gives a fuck, it's an insult, people don't throw out insults with a deep dark plan in mind, they do it to piss someone off at being called something.I've called someone a cunt, does that mean I think vaginas are the ultimate insult? Am i deeply woman hating? No, of course not, I was mad at someone being a cunt, so I called them a cunt.
Stop reading into things, and ignore the people in this thread that think you can imply/infer deeper meanings from the surface language people use.
About sums up how i feel about this issue. Most people using the word aren't intending to insult homosexuals. You and everyone that takes offence with this should go outside.
If i say someone is 'riding d' I don't give a fuck who or who doesn't do it. I'm alluding to a specific action using a metaphor. It's basic literature. Stop getting offended by everything.
Also i don't see the point of the first article you linked
Ah yes, telling a pansexual man that he needs to go outside because I recognize the way problematic language you personally are a fan of using works. Excellent strategy there. By your line of logic, we should keep using the r-slur, racial slurs, etc, if it weren't for the fact that people already successfully pointed out the same things queer people and feminists have been pointing out about words like "dicksucker."
Rather than telling people not to be offended by homophobic language you enjoy, you should be capable of self-critique and learn to be a bigger person. There are good reasons we no longer call people the r-word, or f-slur, and these same reasons apply to calling people "dicksuckers." You aren't referring to the literal actions, but likening real submissive actions to gay sex as a means to make the submissive actions more shameful. Your intent does not matter when it comes to the messages your words actually convey.
As for the article, it's Lemmy.ml's slur filter, you can replace the removed part with "c-sucker" spelled out.
By your line of logic, we should keep using the r-slur, racial slurs, etc
Yes i actually believe this. I'm an absolutist when it comes to this stuff, and i don't apply this thinking in isolated instances. I have no qualms with a non-black person using the n-word—and i say this as a black person myself. Obviously, this is a fringe opinion, but it is what it is.
Rather than telling people not to be offended by homophobic language you enjoy
Why do you still follow this line of thinking? It's not that people are offended by homophobic language, it's that you're looking for homophobia where there is none. That's what i take issue with.
You aren't referring to the literal actions, but likening real submissive actions to gay sex as a means to make the submissive actions more shameful
Refer to the quote linked above and whether you think calling someone a cunt all of a sudden makes me misogynist because it's also a vulgar synonym for vagina
Again, you're using emotions to make an argument. From a purely logical standpoint there should be no issue with using whatever is considered a 'slur' if there is no mal-intent. 'Slurs' are social constructs already, and I don't believe in social constructs.
Yes, calling someone a cunt is also misogynistic.
😂
I can use the term 'wigga', and it wouldn't nearly carry the same impact as the 'n-word' does. This is a social construct.
Rather than policing language, I'd rather focus on the structural factors that continue to perpetuate racial discrimination.
I'm not gonna lose my marbles over a Caucasian who uses the n-word while rapping a song that happens to contain, and I find it pretty cringe that anyone does tbh
Again, the words only carry meaning insofar as you ascribe it to them. The n-word, other than its dark past, means nothing on the surface. The fact that only blacks are "allowed to use it" is proof enough of this point. The idea that blacks are incapable of themselves self-perpetuating racism by their own use of the word, but somehow white people 'can?' seems itself racist to me.
It's a needless social construct that should expose itself as such with the death of capitalism.
Words have meaning, and this meaning is decided culturally. What you're arguing is more akin to saying capitalism dying will also cause words to cease having meaning. Further, refusing to fight the cultural hegemony of the bourgeoisie and letting all language, art, and culture be shaped at their whim makes it more difficult to kill capitalism once and for all. If you join an org, you'll see this also in real life, the substitution of bourgeois structures and culture with proletarian structures and culture.
Language conveys certain data. Slurs and language that carries bigoted undertones help reinforce bourgeois culture and divide the working classes. We don't transcend this by telling people not to be offended, but by showing solidarity and refusing to use these same terms.
Words have meaning yes, but I'm opposing the 'objective meaning' that is assumed when a non-black person uses the n-word EVEN in a non-malicious manner. This is what I'm rejecting. I'm not suggesting that people should be free to level identity-based hate language towards groups, I'm saying that this idea shouldn't be applied mechanistically.
I'm also not saying that we should ignore the cultural hegemonic fight in the way we wouldn't transphobia or misogyny, but that language isn't necessarily always an expression of ideology. You can absolutely have language that isn't ideologically tied. This is why blacks can use the n-word without the perception of animosity that would come with a white person using it. This is because they directly challenged ideology and the language adapted in accordance. In fact, having certain words that are "off limits" ironically sustains working class divisions because it has failed to do away with social constructs invented by the bourgeoisie.
You're mistaking the fact that being more careful to not use bigoted language hasn't dismantled capitalism as meaning it sustains capitalism, but that doesn't follow. Having solidarity and empathy in how we use language is important for protecting marginalized communities and keeping bigots out. Again, if you join an org, you can better see this in practice.
The very fact that you acknowledge that words have meanings generally understood by the public should also help you see how using words with bigoted undertones helps perpetuate that bigotry.
Are you deliberately missing my points or what? I'm referring to 'objective meaning'. I've repeated this ad nauseam. Realistically, there's nothing stopping anybody from creating a new 'slur' once the old one becomes unfashionable. This is why it's a pointless endeavour to police language. Rather, focus on opposing the structures that would afford the persistence of oppression through demeaning language.
see how using words with bigoted undertones helps perpetuate that bigotry.
So you think black people also shouldn't use the n-word?
You do realize you can do both, right? Like, you don't have to pick between not using slurs and organizing, you can do both. The fact that new slurs get invented doesn't mean we should give slur use a pass. I understand your points on "objective meaning," and I am directly telling you that language and communication aren't just meaningless, varying in interpretation from person to person, but are decided socially and interpreted socially.
As for the n-word, there's a large difference between marginalized groups disempowering the word and non-marginalized groups perpetuating its power.
Slurs are socially constructed; opposing its use affirms its existence. I'm saying there's no point in opposing it because that's not how you get actual social change! The slur use exists insofar as oppression exists. The slur CAN'T exist without oppression. What you're promoting is literal idealism that Engels critiqued.
there's a large difference between marginalized groups disempowering the word and non-marginalized groups perpetuating its power.
There is something deeply racist about the idea that the only thing a white person can do by choosing to disregard a social construct is perpetuate oppression—and further that there be no nuance on the matter.
Slurs are socially constructed; opposing its use affirms its existence.
It exists whether you affirm it or not.
I’m saying there’s no point in opposing it because that’s not how you get actual social change!
Wikipedia: Paradox_of_tolerance
Dissent: A Struggle, Not a Debate | Liberal appeals to truth will not stop fascists.
At the base of that anti-fascist reasoning is a well-founded objection to the idea that white supremacist speech, which is white supremacist organizing, is best felled with more speech rather than disruption. It requires an extraordinary ignorance of history to presume that, in defending the unbounded protections and privileges of white supremacists, we also somehow ensure the fair treatment of people historically marginalized by the media and oppressed by the state. Shutting down white supremacist and other oppressive speech reflects a robust understanding of how speech functions in the world.Speech is used to do far more than express opinions and ideas about the state of perceived reality. We do all kinds of things with words. In 1962 the philosopher J.L. Austin introduced the notion of speech acts. All speech is enacted through speech acts, Austin argued; the act is the thing done or achieved with our utterances. Some speech acts assert opinions, some describe states of affairs, but many utterances also complete or attempt certain actions: demanding, promising, ordering, threatening, persuading, and so on. Whether their propositional content is true or false is less relevant than whether, for various contextual reasons, they succeed in performing their intended acts. (A judge, for example, has the authority to perform the speech act of sentencing someone to prison, while I do not.)
When we limit our concerns to questions of which ideas and opinions we should permit in various publics, we miss the entire terrain of how speech works. Contemporary debate consistently, and incorrectly, treats speech simply as a tool for sharing opinions and holding up various representations of the world. This view found its ultimate expression in the notorious July 2020 Harper’s “Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” which advised that “the way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away.” It was a given for the signatories that what was at stake was no more than the circulation of “ideas,” some of which, they admitted, are bad.
But when political figures and groups gather and speak in the public sphere, they’re not only positing beliefs about the world, offering their thoughts up to the so-called marketplace of ideas. Such speech is not so much organized around expressing the interiority of the speaker, or describing something, as much as it is organized around the listener. When, for example, Tucker Carlson speaks in horror about “The Great Replacement” of white people and their privileged standing, he indeed offers a false description of the world, the falseness of which has, time and again, been pointed out. But the utterance doesn’t primarily function as a description to be tested for truth or falsity; the listener, if white, is being told to feel threatened or, if non-white, is being imperiled by being named as a threat.
Counter-speech, insisting on the anti-racist truth, might challenge the constative elements of the racist utterance. But pointing out the truth often does little to disrupt the performative force of white supremacist speech acts. My argument is not that racist, fascistic speech should not be tolerated only insofar as it is understood as an action, rather than some sort of mythic “pure” speech. That sort of reasoning—attempting to define the line between speech and action—has bogged down all too much First Amendment scholarship. I merely submit that liberal appeals to truth will not stop fascists.
There’s something peculiar about “free speech” discourse: it has all too many people sounding like the state, insistent on establishing immutable rules and laws, under the pretense of a universalist approach unbesmirched by histories of oppression and power. But it is both offensive and fanciful to pretend that we’re in some sort of Habermasian ideal speech situation, which the woke left is now undermining with a tirade of cancellations. This is the “white ignorance” that philosopher Charles Mills argues can reconcile “liberal egalitarianism and racial hierarchy.” As long as we live under racial capitalism, some people’s speech will always be freer than others. Limiting the excesses of white supremacist and transphobic speech acts in our midst is the least we can do.
- sh.itjust.works/modlog?actionT…
- lemmy.world/modlog?actionType=…
"There's nothing wrong with being Jewish or having a big nose, so calling someone a Big-Nosed Jew as an insult isn't bigoted!"
Least obviously disingenuous bigot.
Lemmy has a weird issue with being super restrictive of ableist language, beyond reasonable, in some spaces and completely ambivalent in others.
I had someone say I was as useless as accessibility kitchen items, which mostly just means I'm extremely useful to specific people and viewed as a joke by intolerant people who don't care about others...
Weirdly good compliment. Really telling in the idiot using it.
Anarchists are to liberalism as libertarians are to Republicans.
Every so often you'll run into one that is serious and intellectually rigorous to the ideals they profess, but most of them are simply (liberals/republicans) but also want to be cool.
My point is that it's not necessary to use language that puts down entire groups of people in order to offend someone. The phrase, "bigoted piece of shit," is obviously 'insulting language,' but it is categorically different from calling someone a slur.
I see people going around saying that the only way they can possibly offend people with their insults is by calling them slurs. That's nonsense. And it's very ironic that these same people get really, really mad at me when I call them something like "bigoted piece of shit," which just proves my point - if it were actually true that slurs are necessary to get that 'sting,' then they wouldn't get so upset when I call them out for being the bigoted pieces of shit they are.
Saying that you need slurs in order to insult people is basically an invitation for people to lay into you as harshly as they like, short of using slurs. And I am more than happy to accept that invitation by calling such people what they are.
I still have such dissonance about this. I want to say "Look at this idiot" and point out something unintelligent that an objectively evil person does. But because intelligence is an inherited trait, we can only use negative language when referring to a person for evil that they do by choice? Or something? So, evil people bumbling can only be mocked for the evil intent and not for their inability to be evil with skill and intelligence?
I dunno. Trump is a numpty and if that offends the numps or whatever group that term was originally a slur for then I apologize.
edit: to be clear, the r word seems objectively shitty to use and I don't. I just have yet to find an objective litmus test for where the line is between that and "silly" cuz I swear there's always someone there to explain the etymology of "silly" and how it's origins were shitty in some way
But because intelligence is an inherited trait
I don't think this is true, practically speaking. Intelligence is like endurance running speed in that there are heritable components to it, but at the end of the day environmental factors dominate on who is or isn't faster than another.
I can make fun of someone for being dumb in the same way that I can make fun of someone for being a slow runner. It's only problematic when their slowness is actually caused by something out of their control, like some kind of health issue.
By this logic fat shaming is acceptable?
I mean, yeah, in many contexts. For example, when a professional athlete shows up to training camp after putting on a bunch of fat in the off-season, that's fair game. It's literally their job to maintain their bodies and if we're allowed to criticize their job performance then we're certainly allowed to criticize their maintenance of their physical fitness. There's obviously a clear parallel here between that and other public figures where their intelligence may be fair game for criticism.
More broadly, when people are engaged in unhealthy habits of any kind (from smoking to sleep deprivation to overwork/stress to terrible relationship decisions to unhealthy eating/exercise habits), I think it's fair game for loved ones to point that out and encourage steering their lives back towards healthier choices. I'm not advocating that we go and make fun of strangers, the range of acceptable conversation in our day to day relationships is going to be different.
No, that's not OK to mock people's medical conditions, and it's always a good idea to exercise some empathy and humility to know that things might not always be as easy for others as for yourself. But I've never been on board with the idea that fatness is somehow off limits, in large part that I don't believe that most people's fatness is inherently innate. Correlations between moving to or away from high obesity areas (most notably between countries or between significant changes of altitude, but also apparent in moves between city centers and suburban car-based communities) make that obvious that fatness is often environmental.
TLDR: I make fun of Trump's fat ass all the time.
Amazon in discussions with USPS about future relationship
Amazon.com (AMZN.O) said Thursday the e-commerce giant is in discussions with the U.S. Postal Service about its future relationship and considering its options before its current contract expires next year.
The Washington Post reported Thursday new Postmaster General David Steiner plans to hold a reverse auction in early 2026 that might create more competition within the Post Office for Amazon's business by offering access to postal facilities to the highest bidder, rather than directly to Amazon. It would make the company compete with national retail brands and regional shipping firms.
People’s Republic of China (PRC) State-Sponsored Actors Use BRICKSTORM Malware Across Public Sector and Information Technology Systems
In comedy of errors, men accused of wiping gov databases turned to an AI tool
Two sibling contractors convicted a decade ago for hacking into US State Department have once again been charged, this time for a comically hamfisted attempt to steal and destroy government records just minutes after being fired from their contractor jobs.The Department of Justice on Thursday said that Muneeb Akhter and Sohaib Akhter, both 34, of Alexandria, Virginia, deleted databases and documents maintained and belonging to three government agencies. The brothers were federal contractors working for an undisclosed company in Washington, DC, that provides software and services to 45 US agencies. Prosecutors said the men coordinated the crimes and began carrying them out just minutes after being fired.
In comedy of errors, men accused of wiping gov databases turned to an AI tool
Defendants were convicted of similar crimes a decade ago. How were they cleared again?Dan Goodin (Ars Technica)
Why the F is a single contractor able to delete an entire DB without any kind of sign off by a manager for that operation, unless they were and to sign off for each other.
Imagine if a junior messed up the command? Every system I've worked on has had these controls mainly for the latter issue, by the former also shouldn't have been possible.
Why won’t Steam Machine support HDMI 2.1? Digging in on the display standard drama.
Valve tells Ars its “trying to unblock” limits caused by open source driver issues.
Have you looked at the HDMI Forum member list and board of directors?
- hdmiforum.org/members/
- hdmiforum.org/about/hdmi-forum…
It includes pretty much every manufacturer who makes decisions which ports to include on their devices. They have no interest in DisplayPort adoption.
HDMI Forum Board of Directors - HDMI Forum
The HDMI Forum is a non-profit corporation governed by an elected Board of Directors from member companies. The Board approves and directs Working Groups to develop specifications for the HDMI... Read More »HDMI Forum
Jan. 6 Pipe Bomber Finally Arrested Half Decade Later
The FBI sucks at its job but wants you to salute them anyway
EU's Top Court Just Made It Impossible to Run a User-Generated Platform Legally
EU’s Top Court Just Made It Literally Impossible To Run A User-Generated Content Platform Legally
The Court of Justice of the EU—likely without realizing it—just completely shit the bed and made it effectively impossible to run any website in the entirety of the EU that hosts user-generated con…Techdirt
like this
copymyjalopy e BrikoX like this.
Pentagon Claims It “Absolutely” Knows Who It Killed in Boat Strikes. Prove It, Lawmaker Says
cross-posted from: news.abolish.capital/post/1160…
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan said, “If there is intelligence to 'absolutely confirm' this, the Congress is ready to receive it.”The post Pentagon Claims It “Absolutely” Knows Who It Killed in Boat Strikes. Prove It, Lawmaker Says appeared first on The Intercept.
From The Intercept via This RSS Feed.
Pentagon Claims It “Absolutely” Knows Who It Killed in Boat Strikes. Prove It, Lawmaker Says.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan said, “If there is intelligence to ‘absolutely confirm’ this, the Congress is ready to receive it.”Nick Turse (The Intercept)
'A Human Rights Disaster': Report Details Torture and Chaos at 'Alligator Alcatraz'
cross-posted from: news.abolish.capital/post/1159…
Two immigration detention centers in Florida have gained notoriety for inhumane conditions since Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, in close alignment with President Donald Trump's anti-immigrant agenda, has rapidly scaled up mass detention in the state, and a report released Thursday detailed how human rights violations at the two facilities amount to torture in some cases.
Amnesty International published the report, *Torture and Enforced Di**sappearances in the Sunshine State*, with a focus on Krome North Service Processing Center and the Everglades Detention Facility, also known by its nickname, "Alligator Alcatraz."
As Common Dreams has reported, many of the people detained at the facilities have been arbitrarily rounded up by immigration agents, with a majority of the roughly 1,000 people being held at Alligator Alcatraz having been convicted of no criminal offense as of July.
Amnesty's report described unsanitary conditions, with fecal matter overflowing from toilets in detainees' sleeping areas, authorities granting only limited access to showers, and poor quality food and water.
Some of the treatment amounts to torture, the report says, including Alligator Alcatraz's use of "the box"—a 2x2 foot "cage-like structure people are put in as punishment—which inmates have been placed in for hours at a time with their hands and feet attached to restraints on the ground.
— (@)“These despicable and nauseating conditions at Alligator Alcatraz reflect a pattern of deliberate neglect designed to dehumanize and punish those detained there,” said Amy Fischer, director of refugee and migrant rights with Amnesty International USA. “This is unreal—where’s the oversight?”
At Krome, detainees have been arbitrarily placed in prolonged solitary confinement—defined as lasting longer than 15 days—which is prohibited under international law.
"The use of prolonged solitary confinement at Krome and the use of the ‘box’ at 'Alligator Alcatraz' amount to torture or other ill-treatment," said Amnesty.
The report elevates concerns raised in September by immigrant rights advocates regarding the lack of federal oversight at Alligator Alcatraz, with nearly 1,000 men detained at the prison having been "administratively disappeared"—their names absent from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's detainee locator system.
"The absence of registration or tracking mechanisms for those detained at Alligator Alcatraz facilitates incommunicado detention and constitutes enforced disappearances when the whereabouts of a person being detained there is denied to their family, and they are not allowed to contact their lawyer," said Amnesty.
The state of Florida has not publicly confirmed the number of people detained at Alligator Alcatraz.
One man told Amnesty, "My lawyers tried to visit me, but they weren’t let in. They were told that they had to fill out a form, which they did, but nothing happened. I was never able to speak with them confidentially.”
At Krome, detainees described overcrowding, medical neglect, and abuse by guards when Amnesty researchers visited in September. ICE has constructed tents and other semi-permanent structures to hold more people than the facility is designed to detain.
The Amnesty researchers were given a tour of relatively extensive medical facilities at Krome, including a dialysis clinic, dental clinic, and a "state-of-the-art" mental health facility—but despite these resources, detainees described officials' failure to provide medical treatment and delays in health assessments. Four people—Ramesh Amechand, Genry Ruiz Guillen, Maksym Chernyak, and Isidro Pérez—have died this year while detained at Krome.
"It’s a disaster if you want to see the doctor," one man told Amnesty. "I once asked to see the doctor, and it took two weeks for me to finally see him. It’s very slow.”
Researchers with the organization witnessed "a guard violently slam a metal flap of a door to a solitary confinement room against a man’s injured hand," and people reported being "hit and punched" by officials at Krome.
In line with the Trump administration, DeSantis and Republican state lawmakers have sought to make Florida "a testing ground for abusive immigration enforcement policies," said Amnesty, with the state deputizing local law enforcement to make immigration arrests and issuing 34 no-bid contracts totaling more than $360 million for the operation of Alligator Alcatraz—while slashing spending on healthcare, food assistance, and disaster relief. Florida has increased the number of people in immigration detention by more than 50% since Trump took office in January.
The organization called on Florida to redirect detention funding toward healthcare, housing, and other public spending, and to ban "shackling, solitary confinement, and punitive outdoor confinement" in line with international standards.
"At the federal level, the US government must end its cruel mass immigration detention machine, stop the criminalization of migration, and bar the use of state-owned facilities for federal immigration custody," said Amnesty.
Fischer emphasized that the chaotic and abusive conditions Amnesty observed at Alligator Alcatraz and Krome "are not isolated."
"They represent a deliberate system of cruelty designed to punish people seeking to build a new life in the US,” said Fischer. “We must stop detaining our immigrant community members and people seeking safety and instead work toward humane, rights-respecting migration policies.”
From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.
Alligator Alcatraz Is an 'Extrajudicial Black Site,' Immigrant Advocates Say as Detainees Disappear
According to the Miami Herald, over 1,000 detainees in Florida’s immigrant internment camp have effectively “disappeared,” with family and attorneys unable to track their whereabouts.stephen-prager (Common Dreams)
It can be hard. I have yet to see an elegant way to navigate threaded chains of comments. It's like "UltimateGamer386 [actual content]". On Reddit, at least Old Reddit, the upvote and downvote controles were the only buttons and were located immediately before the actual comment, so you could go from button to button, then press down arrow to read the comment.
I have enough vision to navigate to some degree, at least on a desktop. For laptop or phone it has to be a screen reader. I really should be reading braille more.
I was just thinking the other day that a dedicated semantic tag for user replies like or or would be nice, and they could be nested.
I wonder if semantic tags like
<
article>, with controls embedded in
<
nav> or similar tags, could work anyway.
Study reveals that dark web users show significantly higher levels of depression, paranoia, suicidal thoughts, self-injury, and digital self-harm compared to surface web users
FAU Study Finds Connection Between Poor Mental Health and Dark Web Use
A new study of 2,000 U.S. adults shows dark web users report much higher rates of depression, paranoia, suicidal thoughts, self-injury and digital self-harm than surface web users.www.fau.edu
deforestgump [he/him, comrade/them]
in reply to Spectre • • •cool.
HeerlijkeDrop
in reply to deforestgump [he/him, comrade/them] • • •dreugeworst
in reply to HeerlijkeDrop • • •HeerlijkeDrop
in reply to dreugeworst • • •Mijn top 1 zijn zoute krakelingen maar zij zijn Duits, ik denk. Dan salmiak en daarna dubbel zout. Als ik zin in iets minder hardcore heb, dan zoet en zacht.
Trouwens, het Nederlands is niet mijn eerste taal, dus zeg me als ik een fout ergens gemaakt, alsjeblieft 😄
dreugeworst
in reply to HeerlijkeDrop • • •Duitse drop mag ook hoor. Persoonlijk ben ik meer van de salmiakdrop, maar krakelingen zijn ook lekker
ik zou eerder 'krakelingen zijn mijn nummer 1' zeggen, maar ik spreek niet veel Nederlands meer tegenwoordig, dus misschien is dat een anglicisme
HeerlijkeDrop likes this.
folaht
in reply to HeerlijkeDrop • • •Op de eerste plaats staat 'zoute krakelingen', maar die zijn volgens mij Duits. Dan komt salmiak en daarna dubbel zout. Als ik zin heb in iets minder hardcores, dan gaat mijn voorkeur uit naar zoet en zacht.
Trouwens, Nederlands is niet mijn moedertaal, dus vertel me alsjeblieft als ik fouten heb gemaakt en waar 😄
HeerlijkeDrop likes this.
HeerlijkeDrop
in reply to folaht • • •jack [he/him, comrade/them]
in reply to Spectre • • •huf [he/him]
in reply to jack [he/him, comrade/them] • • •SpookyBogMonster
in reply to huf [he/him] • • •Ok, so I was in the UK a couple years ago, and while I have some pretty stark disagreements with our Trot friends, it was the trot orgs who were most adamantly pro-trans.
Most UK ML parties are still on the "being queer is bourgeois decadence" thing, in 2025.
JKR will be the Lenin of CPGB-ML before anything else
Horse {they/them}
in reply to SpookyBogMonster • • •funny you should mention that!
::: spoiler CW:Transphobia

:::