What’s this?? A politician in a position of power taking a stand on a principle with integrity?? Especially these days?
How did he sneak in?
They’re usually not allowed in the establishment.
Hmm… Suddenly I can’t trust him anymore. That’s how fucked I am with the political class. Like, immediately it just pops “what’s his angle besides some PR glow?” - that’s where my mind goes instantly.
It’s exhausting…
We lost track of what money was supposed to be for… a representation of the resources and services in circulation. In which it was supposed to facilitate trade by creating tokens to facilitate transactions without the requirement of trust in the absence of a good, like when a farmer would need a tool from a blacksmith but the goods that the farmer has are only available when harvested in which the tool that the blacksmith has is required to retrieve them. In the presence of trust, the blacksmith was going to still trade and expect the goods when time was due. In the absence of trust, like in relation to a stranger, this trade wouldn’t go forward. Money as a representational token solved this sort of common issue. And this became a necessity when tribes went above the Dunbar’s number.
Cut to now…
What the hell is an economy even supposed to represent anymore? It is certainly not a representation of the resources and services in circulation, that’s for sure. 6 out of 9 planetary boundaries already breached all to ensure the survival of this abstraction. Some even call it Moloch as a reference to the pagan god which required human sacrifice. I thinks it’s worse, as it requires the sacrifice of everything, not just humans. But it is certainly a clever nod to something that was only real because people believed it to be.
Back to your project. A FOSS Barter Facilitator. There’s nothing I don’t like about this. Just make sure the protocols remain open to federation of future FOSS Barter Facilitators and you have a slice of Utopia to challenge the dystopian hell we’re in.
You have something here that can alleviate people’s lives in times of great need. Resource collapse is imminent now. If that is not at least partially avoided, that makes the collapse of the global economic system inevitable. What happens after that is a fool’s errand to even attempt to guess. We only know it’s not gonna be peaceful and nice given the stupidity in human nature. Scarcity always leads to the forming of new predation systems. That is how predation was formed in Nature. The incapacity for self-regulation led to animals to reproduce and consume more than the regenerative availability of their setting allowed, leading them to predate on each other. This is how violence emerged in Nature and still does to this day. When we lose track of self regulation we return to the scavenger’s rule of the wild.
But this helps in giving people access to trade without the requirement of capital tokens. Huge spikes in inflation, unemployment and mass migrations are only going to increase in volume and in rate as resources continue to collapse worldwide. We’re in a feedback loop and war and A.I. will only accelerate the velocity of it.
Or, you know, we could have more ideas like yours and reduce resource intake, increase individual resiliency and in doing so, lessening the panic in the common struggles.
So…
I’m certainly saving this post and link and share it with anyone who is inclined to listen.
I’m not a coder, so I thank you for such a wonderful contribution to the world.
I understand your tempered position. I really do.
But allow me to go on a bit of a rant here…
All the big tech companies in Silicon Valley have aways been heavily subsidised by the U.S. government without the U.S. taxpayers having any stakeholders’ position afterwards. These should have always been partially within the public owned infrastructure given how they were funded by the public. Amazon is probably the most ridiculous case in the world in how long they weren’t profitable and remained subsidised by the government to even be able to exist.
So, in regards if FOSS should be tax funded… yes. Because of the very reason I just mentioned. All big tech was and still is tax funded. With them taking even more money from people as costumers after already having taken money from them as taxpayers. While also just selling everyone entirely as a profile to get ad revenue from or as a surveilled citizen to serve on a platter to whichever government they want to influence further. This is insanely corrupt as a system. It should’ve not been allowed to even establish itself.
I think everyone who supports FOSS and open protocols is very aware of the pitfalls and uphill struggles to implement them against the current system. But I find that the general apathy and the further complacency of the general public is the true paramount adversity.
When you say “this is me being a realist”, it is you accepting the reality that was imposed onto you by the people who are benefitting from its’ imposition. Even more than the typical manufactured consent of capitalism, this is enforced submission to those rejecting the manufactured consent. Because from the rest of your comment, and the fact that you are here on Lemmy, you clearly do not consent to this reality, but you’ve accepted it as an inevitability. Which it isn’t, as we are not in the grounds of that reality having this exchange right now.
Taxpayers should fund FOSS and open protocol software because it protects them long term. One quick example would be how to this day nobody can close protocols on email and how anyone can create their email and host the server if they so desire. It obviously requires skill and knowledge, but if one has them, nobody can prevent them from doing it for themselves or even others if they so desire. This is an absolute insurance that the system can’t dictate one’s individual terms.
And while the Fediverse may be very small in comparison to the general establishment, it is large enough as proof to present anyone who doubts that there is a way to get back to the true promise of the internet and that we can indeed get back our sovereignty from the conglomerates that destroyed that promise.
And the political winds can change in whatever direction they may, it doesn’t matter, as it can’t and won’t destroy the resiliency of the concept. I just joined piefed.social after the Lemm.ee shutdown, and it doesn’t matter because this is a resilient concept. And that is also the reason it cannot be contained or controlled by anyone over anyone.
Sorry for the very long reply. I hope I wasn’t as annoying to you as I feel I am being. If so, I apologise even more.
Cheers.
deleted by creator
Oh, thanks. That is very good news.
In regards to Meredith Whittaker and Signal… If I remember correctly when I read that rumour, it was in regards of the push that the EU has going on for Message Apps to open their protocols.
Delta Chat for example, already has open protocols with emails. But there’s no allies joining in on the message app front.
As one would expect, Meta is fighting this with WhatsApp and Messenger. The fact they don’t connect both of these, with them being within the same company tells us all.
But I haven’t been following this as closely as I probably should. So don’t know if that Signal rumour is remotely true.
The EU push for it is true though. But if they’ll manage to enforce it is another conversation entirely.
Yeah, I think the same. But if they work towards federation, they’re at least on the right side of things. Unlike Meta, X and most of Silicon Valley.
Good. That means she actually cares enough to go for other possibilities. I’m also certain that there’s at least a portion of their supporters who would crucify her if she wasn’t also on Bluesky.
By the way, do you know if BlueSky is open to the idea of federation? As anyone heard if there’s interest in it?
I read somewhere here on Lemmy someone commenting that the CEO of Signal Meredith Whittaker was inclined to be a part of the push for open protocols as well. Don’t know if that is true though. Didn’t seek to verify it.
But I always want to know who does support the good fight for what the internet is supposed to be.
Yeah, I agree that with the people with larger numbers of followers there’s an inherent fear of losing relevance.
But surely there’s a sunk cost fallacy at play as well. Especially when I see no effort of these people to build a lateral following in alternative platforms. They can use that same volume of followers to platform the alternatives and pave the road for both themselves and others to find a viable way out. Without that effort in sight, I’m forced to question their intelligence or their intentions. Or both simultaneously.
Having said that, I still can’t justify the ones with no great following that decide to stay.
I know people probably think that they’re taking some level of “warrior keyboarding” right to the other side’s doorststep. All in behalf of raising awareness.
But…
these are not FOSS platforms with no algorithmic reinforcement for engagement. Precisely the opposite. So, all that people do is maximise engagement, and with that raise profit margins for the very people they’re trying to “take down”, and who can control what is visible and what isn’t from the get go.
If all these “nobodies” like myself decided to delete their accounts in these platforms and move on to the FOSS alternatives, and if we all continued to seek legislation to continue to open protocols online as the original promise of the internet that was taken from all of us, then people like Elizabeth May would have to leap as well, as the numbers that made them relevant would be gone elsewhere. And with that, these closed gated platforms with their shitty algorithms would be left in irrelevance with a user base akin to the size of something like TrueSocial. Given their current expenses they would be forced to downsize or file for bankruptcy.
This is the only way to fight conglomerates and their grip.
Doesn’t matter if it’s social platforms, digital services, supermarket chains, fast food giants etc etc
Boycotting accompanied by alternatives aligned with decentralisation and further legislation to insure sovereignty for everyone everywhere.
Absolutely.
I can’t fathom what the hell are the justifications that people will fabricate to keep themselves there. I mean, I understand what the Neo Nazis, incels, Maga and so on are doing there. But everyone else? It has to be morbid curiosity at this point, addiction to rage or something like that. Maybe they want to get acquainted with the new Grok AKA the self-named “Mecha-Hitler”… Urghh
I actually had a Mastodon account for a while, but I never got into the microblogging thing. It’s why I never liked Twitter either. Just isn’t my jam I suppose.
But I’ve started to notice some small companies and newspapers having the mastodon link on the bottom of their websites and that makes me glad to see it.
I’m not entirely clear as if you just meant that as a thought experiment… Because I wasn’t suggesting anything in that direction, actually. I was merely stating that the ratio of space required to grow food for the population in cities should match the vertical design of cities themselves. And even include these vertical farming structures within cities themselves. It all needs to match the design of efficiency in housing. Otherwise, it’s just a race to the bottom in how to run out of surface land and resources the fastest way.
Also, I want to mention that this idea that the entire lives of people would have to be dedicated entirely to farming has always been greatly exaggerated as to scare off people from procuring sovereignty for themselves and their communities. My girlfriend and I grow some of our food. I would say even if I took the task alone with the intention of feeding us both entirely all year round, it would take me about less then 2 months worth of work spread out across two seasons. That out of an entire year leaves a lot of time to spare. Not to mention, that I could use the same time to grow more for more people. After you put what you need in the ground, setting an automatic irrigation system, the maintenance work is not that much of a hassle, especially using the syntropic method within a permaculture design. The early stages of setting this up are laborious indeed, but after that, not really, not really at all.
This all to say that this is another one of those myths that capitalism has ingrained falsely in people as to keep the labour of the masses retained to the benefit of the few who gain the most from it. It’s about insuring the conditions where the elite can keep manufacturing the consent in others to exploit them. And insuring dependency is always the way to do it.
Farming wise, and regarding our current food systems, I think that people in general should learn more about syntropy if we are to communicate better as to what needs to be achieved. As it will mean different approaches depending on geography. Not to mention Urban vs rural settings would also require different approaches as well.
Then it would also be easier to gather support for innovations such as Precision Fermentation. Because using bacterial and microbial life to grow our sustenance is ingenious. The lower the trophic level we consume from, the lesser the destruction. And it would also be faster. Always.
If we truly insure true efficiency, we truly minimise destruction. And maximise the potential for prosperity for all, including non-human animals, plants and all other organisms.
Unfortunately the only efficiency that our current systems are designed for is to maximise profit. Which requires continuous growth, which is unsustainable and will ultimately lead to its own inevitable collapse. 6 of the 9 established planetary boundaries have already been breached. It’s only a matter of time now. As to how much time that will take and how much of the world will be taken with it, that is all tied to massive amounts of data for us to even fathom to process.
And AI is currently accelerating all this race to depletion in all fronts.
So, yeah, optimism right now, would be indeed for fools as you say.
I don’t think white nationalists mind being called white nationalists. The same for zionists or islamists. What these descriptors and the people who stand by them have in common is that they all share isolationism, supremacy and the disdain for otherness. These features are all intertwined and inseparable, like the three sides of a shitty triangle.
One can say being called one of those descriptors when one finds them wrong and disagreeable is obviously offensive to the person in question.
As for if it constitutes hate speech… it’s a mess. I’m not one to police language and speech.
As the defense of every hateful person is that they can just be ignorant. And how true that is. But how convenient as well.
Trying to legislate intention is impossible, and banning words is a terrible idea. And using the elusive concept of the status quo for a barometer of what is acceptable is also not a good idea at all. So… what are we left with? Allowing speech to fight back speech, basically. It’s far from perfect, but is the best we have.
But in this case, yes, this is just someone drumming up fear in the racist bias of a portion of the public.
As for if he is ignorant and believes the nonsense he speaks or doesn’t and is just mad that there’s an actual voice for the people to hinder and reduce the control of the elites, which include him and the moron tech bro brigade he’s a part of…
I would say the distinction is irrelevant.
But that’s just me.
I’m going to hinder the complexity that is required to properly answer your question, for the sake of brevity…
Islamist=zionist=supremacist
You can say that it’s the same product in different colours.
As to this case in particular… It’s a racist trying to call someone a racist to distract from the fact that this is a capitalist that doesn’t like a socialist, because power doesn’t concede and it hates sharing.
Mamdani is actually succeeding at connecting the elite class to all the societal issues in the population’s eye.
So… It’s time for whistling in the racists through the post 9/11 phobia. Which in New York… you can fill in the rest.
If someone wants to add more complexity to my very reductionist take, please do.
Thank you for beating me to it. I 100% agree with you.
But I have to say, in order to meet the nutrient density requirements, they would have to completely reform the agricultural sector. Which I would love, but we know how this goes with these people.
And the fact that in 2025, we keep stacking people on top of each other to the point that more than half of the world’s population is living like this in cities, which is integrated in a vertical axis, but the energy consumption of the same people is still spreading elsewhere on an horizontal axis… that is foreboding the worst of outcomes in this regard.
The permaculture philosophy and the syntropic method would have to be integrated. And with it, vertical indoor farming in cities as a necessary response. But this would mean the end of monocultures and pesticide use. No more plowing either. Terrible for the microorganisms in the soil, means terrible for everything else. Soil policy would have to be in place as a baseline… it’s a lot.
But I keep saying this… Environmentalism, veganism, sustainability and ethics are all the same thing. The very same thing. It’s trying to insure that our lives as both the individual and the mass population causes the least destruction and suffering as possible. And that we can aspire to be net positive to all biological life on the planet. If the general population understood this, we could be heading somewhere. Unfortunately without understanding entropy and how the trophic balance is achieved, I doubt that one can understand syntropy or what the hell I’m even talking about right now.
But yeah… Syntropy vs Entropy is hard to explain in a small paragraph to the ADHD crowd of our time, I guess.
So… Optimism is just not in the cards. Not for me at least.
In my opinion it lacks the core essentials of game design.
But one ought to get used to it. With the A.I. boom, procedurally generated is no longer secluded to the dungeons and “rogue like” games, as the future in the mind of a lot of game devs these days is how it augments the possibilities of any given game. And while in theory it is true, in practice it translates into very bland gaming. Because it lacks the intention and precision in hitting whatever makes the contextual gameplay interesting and engaging in the first place.
But… to each their own, I’d say.
The basis of understanding the trophic levels is paramount. Whenever one consumes from a trophic level, one is destroying more from the levels below. If people decided tomorrow to only consume carnivorous animals, they would be requiring even more animals, and therefore even more plants, meaning even more microorganisms. The quantity of energy one gets from one animal is less than what the energy intake of that animal was. Always. The larger the animal, the larger the loss. This does not change. Not even in the scavenger’s rule of the wild. Not even amongst other organisms in this planet. Never. It’s basic understanding of entropy and biology, but somehow this eludes the general population. However, the complexity of how trophic balance is achieved is more complex than this.
But still, this is why consuming from the lowest level possible ensures the lowest destruction possible. And why I am a big supporter of Precision Fermentation. Using bacterial and microbial life to grow our food as directly as possible is ingenious.
Sustainability, veganism, ethics… it’s all the same. We should all aspire to live our lives ensuring the minimum destruction possible. And if one uses one’s energy for the protection and the betterment of all life, not just oneself, or just animals, but plants, mycelium life, and microorganisms as well, the better it is to life itself on earth, regardless of species and categorization.
Syntropy vs entropy.
Oh, there’s an app called “HappyCow”. It’s an app that helps anyone find vegan restaurants or restaurants with vegan options with geolocation. It’s a very famous app amongst Vegans. And it’s not recent at all.
I install it when I travel for the reasons you just describe.
I’m sorry to hear about your hard time. Hope that app helps you the next time you travel.
I just caught your comment. Sorry for the late reply.
Yeah, looking around as you said brings me nothing but a sense of loss.
I’m 40. And I’ve been at this for what it feels so long now… what it’s about 20 years of this to me probably feels like a blink to you. But anyway, to me it’s not the ignorance that upsets me the most, it’s the people who know what I do and even share the anxiety of it, and do nothing differently.
I hope wherever you chose to move to, that you found peace of mind and a more tolerable climate.
Thank your for such reply and the link as well. The text you linked shares a lot of inspiration for these trying times.
And oh, how we definitely need it.
Why this level of vitriol and condescension in this exchange?
I’m also going to repeat… Taking your stance to an extreme, and you have yourself a reductionist view of the world with nothing but intolerance or hatred for those who don’t share it. Sounds familiar?
I don’t know what’s going on in your life, you could be going through something and I don’t want to add more to the pile of what you’re already dealing with. So I’m just gonna leave this here, because I suspect that even my concerning tone right now will read as passive aggressive to you. It isn’t. But I can’t control that.
So take care.
Notice that my comment was meant as a compliment to him. And a dig to myself for not allowing the belief that this might just be a decent person. That was the joke. That we are almost all conditioned to have a pavlovian level of reaction towards politicians, in which they speak and we doubt them immediately.
I know two people that are members of political parties and they are genuinely two of the best people I know. But at the same time, they are not raising ranks within their respective parties. Which are also not the biggest parties to begin with. I don’t doubt that there are decent people that are trying to be decent politicians. I just think that the capital influence and its respective interests don’t usually allow these decent ones to reach actual positions of power and they even get actively placated as a result of their integrity hindering the consolidation of that very same capital influence.