Doing your best to blame no one, in a way where the listener can pretend you blamed yourself.
Policed when either passive or auto get too low, punished when they get too high.
silverwizard reshared this.
Boto3's documents were written by a person who had done technical writing before?
The formatting would be better if they'd used readthedocs.io, a website designed to harm documentation
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Viv reshared this.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Coworker who might be the only person who can solve the problem "This is only in staging, right?"
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Me: "do you want blankets or sheets?" (For making a fort)
Shæ: "I want paint! And glue! And glitter!"
Like I have a plan because parenting but.... i still don't know about the sheets or blankets question
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Just me? Ah, yeah :/
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Everyone knows it stands for Not For Torso
(Nitter addon enabled: Twitter links via https://nitter.net)
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 likes this.
Also - wait until you find out what pipelines are doing to native art!
Wait until you find out what climate change is doing to galleries and museums!
like this
like this
like this
silverwizard likes this.
like this
I really should be less involved in VC culture - but my life kinda makes it impossible to be
like this
I said to Sean, "you have recently decided to call me by my full name"
Sean: "Robecca. It's now our sons name"
Me: "poor Rowan"
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Becky likes this.
"I would show you my calculator but it's reverse polish notation so it probably wont help"
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 likes this.
Away to the dollar store (in the morning)!
We tried a few like https://hextml.playest.net/ but it got pretty stressful and the exports are hard to read
An online mapmaker - Hextml
Online hexmap maker and campaign manager for DnD and other RPG.hextml.playest.net
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
reshared this
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
like this
reshared this
Slowly everyone I know except us has been hit at least once 😔
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Anyway, the mother decided to confide in me first how they had a previous babysitter who they got along with really well until she told them she had bipolar. Then they were nervous she would be dangerous when she took care of their kid, and were relieved when she quit soon after.
Needless to say, this ended up being another mark on the page of Wait To Confide for me because uh, ablism is not fun and I don’t need it directed to me.
It makes me think sometimes. I think about stigma and ablism but I also think of my power of being able to hide it all. That I have an invisible disability. Nobody ever guesses. There has been exactly 1 person who said he'd wondered: my thesis advisor in clinical psych for my undergrad thesid because of my intensity of interest in my area of research (bipolar).
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Replacement.
Social Media did not spring forth from nothing in the recent past, for some the concept has been real for their entire lifespan. The medium changes names, ownership, format protocol, speed and reach. It is replaced, updated, augmented, or taken out back and shot in the head ( ) as needed.
Is there a need for replacement?
of protocol?
of format?
of owner?
or
Can existing technology be leveraged to augment and enhance the usage of social media as a valuable service and resource for the users regardless of protocol, format, owner, admin, or walled garden digital prison choices?
I say No, maybe, No, Hell No, and Yes.
since you asked.
Legislative
Technical
Social
We need to have the tools to build things that let us escape corporate control, we must break up monopolies, and disallow groups to force us to give up rights of intercommunication, and we must socially understand that smaller communities are ok, and the ideas of Follower Counts and Viral are toxic.
Scifijunkie likes this.
Technical and Social are the areas of influence that can be effectively dealt with.
"disallow groups" is already on the wrong foot.
"Not everything is for me" needs to be a fundamental understanding of every user and seems lost in all the noise of every topic.
Treading on the various rights of anyone to setup and run their own social network their own way is kinda invalidating your whole point, isn't it?
Which means no matter how much you may disagree with their format/protocol/admin/monetization/datacollection/owner you give them that right to protect yours.
And no matter how correct your interpretation of the corporate evils and privacy molesting shenanigans, they have users you will not reach that deserve fundamental aspects of social media regardless of their ill informed choices.
2 choices, compete or change everything without changing anything.
And no - part of this is dealing with the problem of allowing corporations power
Participate when and where it suits your agenda, or inarguably agree & Dissent, protest and act in opposition where you must.
But reality dictates that the clearest solution does not contain critical mass
interested in tossing all of it out and starting over with an particular ideological stripe.
The quiet part is that the eventual result will be changes in ownership/format/protocol/value that financially is often detrimental to the owners of the network of users we wish to be of service and educate.
and it can stay quiet because the same is true without our action or agenda (see waaay above.) the solution entails offering a value add to these various networks, it need not be presented as a dagger, pointy though it may be.
Scifijunkie likes this.
This fact is unconcerned with scale, 1 human or a 3 million humans. If you tell them they cannot do a thing, they alone still get to decide to do or not do a thing.
In the "social media age" (Gyahh, I threw up in my mouth a bit, sorry) there is a constant struggle to decide what is and is not allowed, speech, video, image, joke, thought, etc.
And we all get it, "Have some decency damn", but some, in some areas of interest, will always have differing opinions of what is and is not acceptably decent.
Social outrage ensues to varying degrees.
Scifijunkie likes this.
Social virality ensues to varying degrees.
These are useful and valuable though sometimes abhorrent pieces of data that are being monetized and manipulated to what many call disastrous consequence.
And there is where we can agree, the inarguable.
Scifijunkie likes this.
Scifijunkie likes this.
Yet any statistical increase in the good from those that choose to participate is "better" than without.
The question is how small do you want that stat to be?
You can increase it without perverting the good, Without painting with a brush that is colored arguably incorrectly bad by some who you are trying to welcome and encourage to participate for the increased common good.
You just have to focus on the attractive good. The inevitable side effects to you may be that good, to others their personal benefit or flexibility or utility are the attractive "good"
Not advocating hiding the motivations. Just been around open source longer than its been called that and witnessed perfectly reasonable intelligent folks throw lifetime's of work out the window over ideological disagreements unrelated to the solution being crafted to the detriment and death of said solution.
It is an important fact to face up front, its on a list...
Scifijunkie likes this.
No solution is perfect, everyone is flawed, you can learn something new, you can refine and even discard your beliefs, you are often wrong, mistaken, ignorant, and stubborn. Facts are integral. Your head full of jelly is completely unique, just like everybody else's, So don't get too attached to it's representation of what should be, as to what actually do be, and what can be.
Scifijunkie likes this.
Obviously as an anarchist I would rather invidivual communities make those decisions, but at an inter-communal level you need some standards. People who build walled gardens should be left to starve in them, not allowed to push more people into them. That's just common sense. And so we must use the most pro-social sanctions to discourage them. Right now that's law.
Banning walled gardens *is* an intermediate step, and the frustrating part is that any reasonable read of antitrust laws show it's an enforcement issue, not even a legislative one!
Trying to convince the folks inside it that they need to pour this gasoline on it and light it up, well it is an uphill battle.
I'm not arguing against any particular legislative action, I'm saying that actually enacting a common rule on a global scale is impossible at current global economy, geopolitical environment.
I am arguing that the cost benefit analysis says that convincing your legislative representative to cripple his donors is hard enough when he and many of his constituents and colleagues don't have an iPhone in his pocket and is Tweeting on his iPad.
Scifijunkie likes this.
Your progress will always be marked as not there yet or all done in a day and be completely dependent on other's action.
That is a way to go, but it sounds like a difficult recruitment speech.
What does the landscape look like along the way? What does it look like at the end? How did you help?
I don't know, I've been working on this problem for more than a decade, and I'm pretty dug in on my approach, which again, not the correct forum to get into (we'd be here for days), but I support everyone's attempts at more just and equitable world, even if I could use a few extra hands.
What other options exist?
Globally, you cannot disallow people to spend their resources however they like. (Locally you may be able to enact laws)
These corporations DO exist. They are funded and can spend.
What you want is for them to spend it in ways you agree with.
and now we near going beyond what I am willing to publicly expound on at this stage.
But in a word, USERS.👥
Scifijunkie likes this.
It exists.
In the future, something else will, what is important is to enshrine the necessary civic education as part of the experience no matter the medium.
Move them to where? A site deemed "better"?
I'm all for better, but even here, a noticeably better place, is a lot of the same minus some problematic bits removed (this not a criticism). So starting from an agnostic point of view would seem the sensible approach, rather than anything but what we have approach. I prefer the what we could have viewpoint
In that way, migration is not the goal or the ginormous obstacle it appears to be.
Informed choice is the goal. Not losing your workflow while navigating an ever changing digital social space is the goal. Achieving positive social change is the goal.
I don't really care how much cash Jeff and Elon have cuz it wouldn't matter if I did.
I care about their users. Not new prohibitions. Education & empowerment.
Facilitate their users but let users learn through usage that the money, content, data and power always belonged to the user.
My grandmother's funeral was supposed to be tomorrow. I foumd out 2 weeks ago from my sister. Now it's been posponed, I found out today by asking specifically the person in the know (aka my uncle)
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
(I'll fight you if you tell me it's already over)
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Becky likes this.
The Functionally Classified Barn is what they put over Warehouse 23 to make sure no prying eyes
(Nitter addon enabled: Twitter links via https://nitter.net)
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Nor did I try to explain to them what went wrong
I am that kind of tired
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Fuck.
like this
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
silverwizard likes this.
But I just normally don't let the kids hold it, but put videos on it while on long drives
But he found it and tossed it down the stairs - so I guess it's cover time >.<
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
like this
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
The Doctor
•silverwizard likes this.