+1 for Syncthing

Congratulations. I give you a 9/10 in condescension.

You didn’t read the article, did you? It’s not about reading tomes but books. Doesn’t matter if it’s an e-book or a really long slideshow on TikTok. These kids have never read the entirety of the text which is ordinarily contained in a single tome regardless of the format in which they didn’t read it. If you don’t understand why this is alarming, odds are you haven’t either. And considering you didn’t even read the article…

If you can’t explain something in simple terms, that means you don’t understand it yourself. Which is why you’re being so needlessly aggressive and throwing accusations in the first place. It’s because you have such a tenuous grasp on your own theoretical framework that you feel threatened by anyone displaying an opinion that seems to contradict it. You don’t care about righting wrongs, about teaching or even about learning yourself. You only care about protecting your own fragile worldview.

To remedy this, I suggest you open yourself more to diverging opinions - not really in order to change your mind on anything in particular, but because if you only reinforce your current beliefs you’ll miss the forest for the trees. You can actually learn more about your own ideology by studying others and contrasting them.

There, one simple paragraph explaining the problem in terms even a child could understand and another simple paragraph suggesting an actionable solution to that problem, all devoid of aggression and without fake quotations. This is how an adult deals with a misinformed opinion online. I hope this example serves you well in the future.

In the same vein, my friend frequently tells his fiancé to quit being a f*ggot when he doesn’t want to eat something unusual or complains about mild annoyances. Which always draws hilariously confused looks from nearby straights who don’t know them very well.

And your comment lacks anything of substance that could point me in the right direction if you were right.

The people who make it a problem to wear the same dress twice are at fault. #NotAllWomen #NoMenAtAll

The point is that when the phrase “male privilege” is used, it carries the implication that the patriarchy is responsible. But in this particular case, women have 100% of the power to make the problem go away and men have 0%. Calling it “male privilege” is counterproductive if you actually want to solve the problem rather than just complain about it.

Removed by mod

Termux has been a thing for years.

privacy these days is really hard to achieve

Which is exactly why claims like this should be backed with evidence.

Unsourced claims like this do absolutely no good to anyone, ever. Which means that either right before typing this comment, you though to yourself “time to be a bad person for no good reason” or you’re a shill for some surveillance agency with an interest in scaring people away from privacy enhancing solutions.

Internet censorship? Twitter was blocked for refusing to appoint a legal representative in Brazil, a legal requirement for any business that operates in the country above a certain size (and Twitter is very far from the threshold). Elmo claimed it was about censorship to make himself look good.

Why does Twitter need a legal representative? Precisely so that someone can answer for the sort of shit Elmo pulls on the regular. Or any other shit. Somebody needs to be accountable to the laws of a country if you’re doing business in that country. Otherwise you could sell Fentanyl online from overseas and the worse that would happen would be geting the product seized at the border after you’ve already been paid. This isn’t a radical concept and it has nothing to do with censorship.

I don’t think it’s extreme at all. Elmo openly mocked the Brazilian justice system and its representatives, including posting offensive AI-generated images of Judge Moraes, and has demonstrated several times through his words and actions that he believes himself to be above the law and can do whatever he wants. He is responsible for the actions of his company. “Responsible” means “one who answers for”.

It might be a different situation if this were a company whose CEO was unaware of the legal troubles in a country that isn’t home to their HQ. But he became personally involved with the case and is using technicalities to sidestep his legal obligations without even pretending that’s not what he’s doing. This is a perfect picture of the absolute worst way in which plutocrats can flaunt the law and you’re advocating for it.

Not really applicable here, since making Xitter accessible in Brazil is breaking Brazilian law in Brazil. You very much will get arrested for disrespecting the CCP in China.

Nah, my writing is sigma.

Seriously Indisputably Gross Mistyped and Absurd

Yes, you did answer my question very well especially with the part about cyclical history. I will watch the resources you linked to in both comments. Again, I am very thankful that you took the time to answer me so thoroughly.

After I’ve done some studying, would you mind if I maybe DM’d you?

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this comment, and for being so nice about it too. In this polarized political climate, it’s quite refreshing to find someone who holds “extreme” views and who is still willing to educate rather than butt heads.

Can I ask a follow-up question? Reading your comment an immediate concern that came up was with complacency. The system you described seems to rely very heavily on nobody being an idiot (in the original Greek sense of the word, someone who isn’t interested in matters of the city-state) but in reality, a lot of people are. What if a few generations into an anarcho-syndicalist utopia, a group of people decide to elect a representative in a broad sense, informally of course, because they trust him and it’s easier this way and they can focus on other things? And then another group likes the idea, and another, and these representatives end up scheming amongst themselves…

I think where I’m going is that the structure doesn’t seem rigid. That can be a very good thing for several reasons, but it can also be bad in that it seems (again, to my uninformed self) to not be very resilient against erosion.

I hope you’ll notice that I am absolutely on board with the abolishment of impositional hierarchies. Both concerns I’ve expressed have to do with how the system would stay alive rather than with what it sets out to accomplish.

Thanks again for taking time out of your Sunday to educate a total stranger.

It becomes its own thing. Like if you hear the word “truther” out of context you wouldn’t be blamed for thinking that it refers to someone who takes the truth very seriously. But in the context if a “9/11 truther” it means the opposite: someone who is completely dissociated from reality.

When a movement adopts a word as its name, it’s like the word splits in two: one with the original meaning and one which refers to the group and means whatever that group stands for. Which one becomes dominant basically depends on what version the mainstream media uses more often. It’s a zeitgeist thing.

I am not the guy you responded to but I am interested.

Because in my ignorant head, the big problem with anarchy (I use the word broadly to mean “a lack of government” mostly because I don’t know any better) is: what’s stopping an ill-intentioned mob from making itself a de facto government little by little through coercion when people can’t resort to a system that concentrates and organizes the otherwise sparse powers of society that want to uphold the state of anarchy? It’s like you’d need a government to ensure that there’s no government, which is clearly absurd.

~ resolves to your home folder only if it’s at the beginning of a path. /~ isn’t the same as ~. Go ahead and test it with something other than rm if you don’t believe me (this is the Internet, I could be lying).