Lemmy is great but the majority of you guys have a, r/notlikeothergirls vibe.
Like you know something about the world and by saying, “I am not mainstream I am alternative,” you are making yourselves inclusive in some way. You don’t know anything the rest of the world doesn’t already have some idea about. Some sort of secret knowledge. I think my favorite thing I have seen on here is people thinking they are private and secure on the Fediverse. Despite the fact you are on a self hosted instance of someone’s hardware and handing your privacy and security to someone random or an entity at random.
Being inclusive is not how you educate people. It’s how you isolate your knowledge and make people think you are a jerk.
It feels like you are a 14 yo edgy person watching too much right wing echo chambers.
It’s just a big mess.
People like me are the black sheep among thousands of white sheeps, between lefties and boomers. I could only be in an eco chamber if I was literally schizophrenic. Right-wing people have to deal with woke every day it’s just impossible to ignore it.
Lemmy attracts this FOSS/linux/firefox/self-hosted or die mentality because the biggest jump in Lemmy users came from a corporation messing with a product they liked
They only* use it against you when your phone stops working.
*that I we know of.
This is what neoliberalism does. It privatizes everything, including the individual. Everyone is a product. Everyone has a “brand”.
Right liberalism is about individual rights, economic freedom and freedom in general. Left-wing countries will give big tech more power cause they’ll have advantages over other companies and groups cause they have the money to pay for unnecessary laws that the left likes and they’ll be friends with the government. In countries even more on the left the problem will be the same but added that you won’t have any economic freedom and individual rights, small groups and companies will most likely not exist or die in the minute they’re created and you won’t be able to support them cause you basically doesn’t own your own money and the money will he spent on useless taxes that you supported. Your ideas give big tech power, you’re not the resistance but the perpetrator. Big techs have grown more and more as the world has become more leftist and you insist in not noticing the base of your mentality is helping big tech.
Wow man, bet you think it’s the LGBTs fault too and that the EU is some leftist place with less freedom than the US.
Travel a bit, helps heaps for people like you, I mean if your freedom includes stuff like holidays…
Right wing countries do this. What do you think South Korea is? “Economic freedom,” is freedom commensurate with economic power, which means freedom for people with money, and “personal responsibility” for people without. The opposite of government regulation of business is corporate domination of government. You’re conflating these opposites to falsely align organized labor with “big business.” The entire right-libertarian political project is a smokescreen for the Kochs and their economic class to baffle morons into thinking the policies they want benefit the little guy.
A company can only thrive above all others without good products is if it has support from the government or is a company owned by the government, right-wings want to reduce the State as much as possible while the left often wants to give the State more power. I don’t know how you think people having control of their money instead of giving it to the government for them to do whatever they want is some conspiracy by the corporations but you must note that the last thing a big company wants is that the people have choices and control over their own money, they want people to be babysitted by the government and that they’re their own choices. We act with the principle that anyone can be bad and the power can corrupt people so we work for the power to never be concentrated in the hand of one person or group.
Why’s everything gotta be about money? Good things happen without it. Rain falls, feeds a fruit tree, makes a fruit, I eat it, poop out the seeds, new fruit tree grows. Money doesn’t fall from trees, but I can’t eat money.
The whole system is poorly prioritized to protect people’s things instead of people. Even then it does a poor job and only protects the things that belong to those with the most things. It’s not even about those people, just their wealth, because if somebody else got their wealth no one would care about them anymore.
I don’t care about communists or capitalists or any ists you can name. To hell with Mao and Thatcher and Lenin and Reagan and Trump and Biden. Fuck em. My question is why can we always find money for war, and for rich people to do stupid shit, but never enough for health care, or food for hungry children, or anything like that. Fuck anybody okay with hungry babies.
Eating and apple and pooping out the seeds might grow new trees, but none of those trees are likely to make apples like you ate.
Money is a convenient way to trade your work or skills for someone else’s. Like the guy who grafts apple tree scions together to make the apples that taste good grow in their orchard.
Now when the guy who knows how to grow hood apple trees decides he doesn’t want to compete against anybody else’s apples and squashes them, we have problems, and need rules to keep that from happening.
Pornhub taught me I’m picky af
Pornhub taught me people like incest. Maybe it’s related to game of thrones?
It is just mindless pursuit of the forbidden for algorithm cheering reasons. And then you need to have had hot sisters to lust after growing up. With so many one children families you end up with a relatively small proportion of the population that could even care.
On the other hand, adding one incest adjacent keywords to the title, if it means 3% more clicks they’ll do it
I mean, we all know all those step-siblings (or actual siblings) videos are pure bullshit, but you’re right, it seems they attract some serious clicks. Or so I’ve been told.
Someone’s underestimating the age of the internet.
I think it’s fair to say that those in their late teens now are the first generation raised online. Sure, previous generations where raised alongside the internet, but the current generation is raised with a much larger presence of the internet.
Nah, the zoomers are IMO the second generation to grow up with the internet. Sure it’s even more present for them and gen alpha, but I’d argue us millennials are the ones who first really grew up with the net. While we weren’t on the net all the time back then, we were the generation that grew up with the net as it became what it is today, for better or for worse.
Yeah but…ordinary people were not dialing into BBS forums back then. We weren’t “raised” online like kids now are, we were able to log off anytime and not ever need it to function in society. That started changing in the early 2000s. All my kid’s school assignments are now done on a laptop on a district-owned cloud system. He hasn’t needed a pencil and paper in…I forgot how long.
If you’re around my age, congratulations on being the last generation to ever know what the world was like before widespread use of the Internet.
If you’re around my age, congratulations on being the last generation to ever know what the world was like before widespread use of the Internet.
This is why I always insist that the cutoff between millenial and Gen Z is 1995. There’s a pretty obvious generational split along this topic and 1995 seems to be the birth year of the divide
Eh. But what does it mean to be raised online? I think for that you need the availability of ever present internet connections in the form of mobile devices. I think the first kids raised online would have been born in 2003, and would have been 4, preschool age, in 2007 when the iPhone came out. Those kids are 16 now. If we want to set the standard for “raised online” as being “digital native” then I think we should dial back the range to when AIM was popular. Again, setting the standard for who could have been raised with that constant interconnectedness as being someone who was 4 at time of introduction would give us the first AIM connected people reaching age 30 right now.
The reality is, I think, in the middle. The first generation we could say was raised online is basically right in between those two ages, 23. The other standard we could try to set is, who is the first generation who doesn’t remember the internet as exciting, just instead a daily part of life
I am sorry to disappoint but people born in 2003 would be either 19 or 20 years old now. I know that it is hard to accept getting old.
