Violence must be organized and accountable to be just. Non-violence is always preferred, and is always the initial approach.

But if there is a credible threat, defensive violence is OK as long as whoever is being violent accepts whatever accountability may come.

I’m conflicted about it, but the fact is one reason the US has been so successful in leading the world in relative peace (as compared to WWII and before, not compared to the ideal) is because we have so much capacity for violence in our back pocket.

“Talk softly and carry a big stick.”

Well “conservative” (i.e. “Republican”) has shifted to such a weird place that people who aren’t weird probably feel compelled to call themselves “liberal” (probably meaning they’ll vote for Democrats).

I’m a liberal dude who earned enough that my wife could stay at home and raise our kids until corporate greed gave me a one two punch of rapacious price increases (because they could get away with it) and stagnant wages (because they expect me to put up with it). She was doing a lot of work on the household all the time.

Luckily she went back to work after our kids became much more self sufficient and could participate in taking care of the house.

Never thought of myself as king of the house.

(She the Queen, though)

Those poor people spending time only on HB for four years, never going anywhere else, never finding 4/8chan, never even finding reddit…

Is your question why a propaganda operation focused on disrupting or presidential elections would “go live” 18-ish months before the presidential election?

And are you asking if I have specific evidence that they’re trolls? Or that the governments I’ve listed have troll farms? Or that specifically HB is specifically rife with trolls from this governments’ farms? Because I definitely don’t have specific evidence. Just the historical evidence of (attempted) general interference from those countries in our previous elections.

I think HB and some of the other groups are mostly trolls or Russian, Chinese, Iranian, North Korean, or aligned operatives trying to gas up trolls or wannabe trolls.

There are definitely some well meaning Americans and others who get suckered into the bullshit tornado that is those sites. They are definitely worth saving if we can. But it’s hard. They ban and block anyone with a dissenting voice no matter how calmly presented.

If someone calls me insane, the response that proves them wrong is a reasonable, chill response at most. The actual sane thing to do is ignore them or make a joke about the claim.

Just like if someone calls me weird, the response that proves I’m not weird is to say, “hahaha, sure, whatever” or “so what?” The response that would prove their point is along the lines of, “I’m not weird, you’re weird” or “they’re not calling me weird, they’re calling my associate weird.”

I think Cheney and most pre-Gingrich Republicans have a commitment to the preservation of the Constitution and the Republic. Once Gingrich the philanderer came in and switched the Republican Party into all partisanship mode, things changed and people who don’t put the Constitution first started seeping into the party.

Cheney was an establishment in the party long before that, so he still has those values.

But a commitment to preserve and defend the Constitution is probably the only thing I have in common with him. I welcome him insofar as that. Harris will do that. Trump will not.

For example, I don’t think it’s cool to shoot your friends in the face with a shotgun. Also I’m not a big fan of wars for oil.

I have it on pretty good authority that everyone who likes having sex with humans likes female boobs. And plump round asses. It’s some deeply ingrained evolutionary stuff.

Doesn’t mean a gay guy is gonna go straight because of some nice tits, but he can appreciate them erotically.

Thanks!

Ooooh can I sort their grades from lowest to highest to figure out where I want to work?

It would be wild if stuff like this is some proof of life after death.

Hmmm maybe we should ignore #1 and focus on #5 then

This is Zuck’s characterisation. No direct quotes. No attachments (that I’ve seen). He calls it pressure. He says they wanted to censor “satire & humor.” In fact this BS letter is what the original article quoted.

If Mastodon wins out in the long run the only reason will be persistence.

All these other “like Twitter but ______” micro blogging or whatever sites only stay viable while they’re profitable.

If Bluesky or Threads become (net) unprofitable, they’ll die. Mastodon is already unprofitable, so that can’t kill it.

I think we could compete with #1 just by word of mouth.

For #2 some person or group needs to develop a Mastodon app (FOSS obviously) that has a “just do this part for me” option, probably automatically enabled.

#3 is on us. We have to do what we can to make Mastodon (and Lemmy) more open and accepting without falling pretty to the paradox of tolerance.

#4 is hard… Although I think if Mastodon follows or tries to replicate the “early” Facebook user experience where most or all of the content people got was from people they follow, that could be better. The only challenge is that algorithms tickle our anger/hate/disgust impulses to drive and maintain engagement. That’s some very strong “lizard brain” stuff.

So… let’s get going y’all! :)

I love how he just uncritically and with absolute credulity accepts excerpts from a letter written by Zuck with no supporting evidence, no examples of what “pressure” looked like, etc.

I can’t believe these people are still so butt hurt about the perfectly reasonable actions taken by the US and State governments and governments worldwide in response to a once in a century global respiratory DEADLY pandemic that killed millions and millions of humans.

And as far as FB (and other social media) goes, fuck em. And fuck the users. Types of speech can be illegal. Defamation (lying about someone) and false advertising (lying about a product or service) can be illegal even though it’s definitely speech. These have “lying” in common, which to me implies there must be something about lying (specifically misrepresenting reality) that weakens typical 1st Amendment protections.

But it’s clear what this guy is most sad about is the traffic he got while his article about Woodstock going on during a lull in the comparatively mild pandemic that was “active” at the time (no meaningful H3N2 activity in the US at the time) went away when FB rightly changed the algorithm to not boost his stupid irrelevant “analysis.”

But people like the writer of this article are either too addled by conspiracy galaxy brain or too committed to lying for money to care that they could really hurt people with their bullshit.

This guy needs to go to something less harmful like selling homeopathic tinctures or lying about the moon landing or flat earth or something.

Privatizing anything will lead to higher prices.

The claim (which I think we should be comfortable calling a “lie” at this point) is that services provided by the government are almost inherently wasteful. Conservatives (it’s always conservatives) believe that civil servants (our neighbors) are overpaid and lazy. They believe that top level bureaucrats don’t have incentives for innovation and cost/waste minimization, and that top level executives in a for profit corporation do.

And the additional claim (“lie”) is that commercial profit incentives de facto lead to improved customer (citizen) outcomes.

However, I’ve never seen any long term data that supports ANY transition from public to private leading to either better innovation OR internal performance OR customer outcomes. I’ve also never seen data supporting the reverse (converse? inverse?) contention that nationalizing something corporate leads to worse innovation, performance, or outcomes.

Just for clarity I’m not looking for “data” from kleptocracies, oligarchies, military juntas, or other non free, non democratic, arguably non market based countries.

So basically only NATO, maybe EU, North America, Australia, Japan, South Korea… And I bet such data doesn’t exist (or exposes the lie).

Yeah but we’d have to redo the Senate completely - definitely a Constitutional amendment - and expand the House (I think they can just add seats) to reduce or eliminate the power of land ownership on our government’s composition.

Or change the Senate to a House Of Lords kind of model. Still an amendment.

Which means the short term solution is all anti MAGA people have to band together and stick together until MAGA dies off. Then maybe the Republican Party can be reborn to be more like it was in the 70s (but hopefully with less bigotry). This rot started with Reagan, so we have to go back at least that far.

(This would also free up religious people to find the candidate and party whose policy goals match their most important beliefs instead of the other way around.)

I bought a squirrel proof bird feeder pole thing

https://jcswildlife.com/products/squirrel-stopper-deluxe-squirrel-proof-bird-feeder-pole-system-with-baffle

It works great, now I’m happy to watch the squirrels run around not eating my birds’ seed.

Only downside so far is some wasps built a nest inside and stung me. But they’re dead now.

Well ok but you’re pointing out the authoritarian avalanche in the Republican Party, not American politics writ large.

I think people like AOC and Max Frost (and heck, Tim Walz) show that it’s possible for there to be progress. We just have to want it. Also we have to learn to ignore trump and his ilk instead of giving them equal time.