• 6 Posts
  • 966 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle
  • Yeah, I looked into it and the backend is proprietary, so the central owner can restrict features. Like for instance independent instances can only have 10 users.

    It’s “decentralised” except only in extremely limited scope, the code is centrally controlled and the network remains largely, functionally centralised.

    They’re capitalising on the decentralised, federated buzz while doing it so poorly they’re setting up users to say “oh people tried decentralisation, it doesn’t work, look at Bluesky”.

    If it’s not open source, it’s not decentralised.



  • I probably said it too dramatically, the kinds of people that need to hear it will just knee-jerk dismiss me, but seriously think about the phrase “normal names are required for the functioning of society”. What a wild-ass thing to say. Required why? Is society really that fragile? Sounds like maybe it should be replaced by something that can handle the occasional mildly spicy letter. Mine isn’t even that spicy, it’s like whole-egg-mayo levels of spice.


  • Excrubulent@slrpnk.nettoProgrammer Humor@programming.devAsking the real questions
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    No they’re not. They’re required for us to be catalogued and managed by a state, to our detriment and the enrichment of the ruling class.

    “Normality” is a fucking scam that keeps your imagination in check, so you never look outside your assigned box and realise you don’t have to belong to anyone.

    You have no idea how much genocidal violence has been done to condition our society to accept a dystopic phrase like “normal names are required for the functioning of society”.

    Your mind has been caged.




  • As someone with a very mildly unusual name, I can tell you that it doesn’t matter whether a system could or could not meaningfully represent the name. Often the people or systems just refuse to acknowledge any deviation from what’s expected. Sometimes databases are written to enforce arbitrary grammatical rules that make my name impossible to write, or the people using the systems will just “correct” the “error” without telling me. I don’t mind that much but our normative systems just love to homogenise us.










  • Also, what does it mean to “tolerate” the existence of minorities? What exactly are we “tolerating”? Tolerance in every other context means to accept deviation from a standard or some negative outcome.

    Framing anyone’s mere existence as a thing to be “tolerated” is to imply they are deviant or negative.

    That’s where the paradox of tolerance loses me. I don’t think we should be tolerant in general. I think we should make value judgements about what is good or bad and act accordingly. Every society does this, and pretending we’re above it all and completely neutral is dishonest.

    And if the “tolerance” is of differing views, diversity of thought is also good, not a bad thing to be tolerated.

    It’s simple: we identify behaviour that is bad, like bigotry and hatred, and we say no. We’re not rejecting it because it’s merely different, and to accept that framing is to accept the cry-bullying of fascists. We reject them because they suck, and we don’t owe them shit about it.


  • Yes, the companies have a reputation to protect, but it’s also just a standard hype-cycle. If you pay attention to tech history these things always go in cycles like this.

    Whether the tech is actually useful or not doesn’t actually matter. What matters is whether you can convince investors to fork over the cash with a shiny presentation.

    The tech industry has basically habituated to surviving on selling us bullshit through hype cycles. I think it’s become dependent on them.