Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social cover
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

bigMouthCommie

@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social

you should know i am earnest. i'm learning how to snark. i try to say what i mean and mean what i say.

sometimes i do try to make jokes, but I am not sarcastic.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

https://disroot.org/en/services/audio

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

use the service, and tell them to use it. just like how they made you use discord. and you can whine every time they refuse.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

sounds like it's time to allow third-party clients distribute the server software, shut down free "servers" and offer paid hosting and support. that would cut costs a great deal.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

there are web clients for mumble

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

I don't trust proton and I don't know why anyone would

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

I don't trust them because they don't use established security practices and their interfaces abstract away the internals and they have complied with law enforcement and admitted they could compromise contents(not just metadata) and they don't accept anonymous payment.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

they could ship malicious js to their frontend that would give them access to the unencrypted session. you are going on faith every time you load the interface.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

>But with others already able to exploit that, why would Proton want to do that?

to comply with a warrant

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

>The Heritage Foundation has published new editions in its Mandate for Leadership series coinciding with each presidential election since 1981. Mandate for Leadership: A Conservative Promise is the ninth report in the series and was published in April 2023, earlier than any past releases. Heritage refers to the publication as a "policy bible"

they've been doing the same shit for 40 years. calling it project 2025 was just a way of staying in Vogue. many think tanks are making projects and naming them after future years.

The heritage foundation don't scare me, at least not anymore than the Democrats.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

Democrats actually have power. The heritage foundation just hopes the Republicans listen to them.

Please, for the love of God, VOTE! (pawb.social)

I don't like Biden either, but anyone with half a brain knows there are two choices in the 2020 election. If we had a sane voting system, voting third party might be worth it, but as it stands, no one but you knows your favorite candidate exists and unless you want to become their campaign manager that will still be true in...

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

only a vote for a candidate helps that candidate

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

democrats are fascist.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

this doesnt change the truth of what i said

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

its true. if no one votes for a candidate, it doesnt matter how manyvotes any other candidate gets.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

> Your original “only” indicates that you think that votes + splitting your opponents votes isn’t a strategy.

you are putting words inmy mouth. i explained what i said. i'm the authority on what i meant.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

>If splitting votes didn’t matter, there wouldn’t be so much effort put into gerrymandering.

you're falling prey here to a logical fallacy called equivocation. splitting is used in two distinct senses in electoral politics, and you are taking one of its uses and purporting that it supports the validity of the other use. it does not AND the other use is misleading at best, but i believe it's genuinely dishonest and manipulative.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

>Voting is a practical, strategic act, not an ideological one.

every act is morally good, amoral, or immoral. it's immoral to vote for bad people.

you may think ends justify the means. you may think your strategy is better or more moral. i disagree.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

on the one hand there is gerrymandering which has the effect of splitting up voting blocks.

on the other hand there is the lie that votes are owned by or owed to only two parties, and any vote outside of those two parties is stolen by the so-called third parties.

in fact, the votes belong to voters, and it is up to them to decide who they want to vote for, and it is up to the politicians to try to win those votes.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

this is an appeal to ridicule. it is not a rebuttal

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

>I assume you haven’t seen enough elections to understand that yet.

condescension and baseless attacks on my identity wont get me to vote for fascists

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

no, no... i think they're onto something

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

my identity doesn't change the truth of anything i've said. it has no bearing on this conversation, but your attempt to raise it implies you are going to be attempting to use my identity rhetorically. that's called "ad hominem", when you attack the speaker instead of what they have said.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

>think asking what you personally risk from a Trump vs Biden presidency speaks to whether your insufferable self-righteousness is gambling with other people’s lives at no cost to you.

appealing to emotion doesn't change the truth values of any of your claims, either.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

so I will make you a deal: I'll vote my conscience, and you vote yours.

and in the meantime we organize, and after, we organize

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

it seems like your going to vote for someone. I say vote for who you think you should.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

not to be a shill, but i have xfinity mobile, and they gave me unlimited tethering. there is service degradation at some point, but i haven't ever hit it or if i have i haven't noticed it.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

negotiate. i called my last carrier from my new carriers retail store front. they practically begged me to stay and said they'd give me everything i asked for.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

here's an unpopular opinion in basically every circle: supply and demand is a meaningless tautology in its only "useful" form.

it is a post-hoc explanation for price discovery, but it lacks all predictive value. as scientific theories go, it's widely debunked and discredited, and lacks all predictive value. i would go so far as to say there is no economic theory that is more than post-hoc explanation and, so economic theory is indistinguishable from storytelling.

i agree with the thrust of the position that landlords are leeches. i would never try to use an quantifying economic theory to justify that.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

The Wikipedia article on supply and demand has a great section at the bottom about objections to the theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand#Criticism

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

> I’m a utilitarian if you couldn’t tell.

oh my. how do you deal with the fact that the future is unknowable, so the morality of all actions is also unknowable?

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

to be clear, you acknowledge that you can't know which actions are moral under your system, but you still rely on it to make moral actions?

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

a deontological system places the morality in the action itself, so you know before you do it whether its the right thing to do. ontological systems change the morality of the action depending on the results in the future.

what if we need trump to be elected in order to escape earth before the sun goes nova? it's an unknowable proposition, but are you willing to risk all of humanity on voting for biden?

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

no one said they are voting for trump

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

pretty sure biden was president when roe v wade was overturned, so i don't see how giving him power again would help the women you're mentioning. also pretty sure biden has been helping oversee the oppression of the working class from dc for about 50 years, so i am not exactly convinced he's going to do anything about it if he literally can't lose any more elections.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

I think you understand the problem of the unknowableness of the effects of our actions, and subsequently how absurd it is to use that as a basis of our morality.

I'm not trying to get you to vote for trump, I'm trying to get you to choose a useful moral framework.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

I expect to have 4 names on my ballot.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

this is straight up election misinformation. a vote for any candidate may only be voted for that candidate, and it can't be discarded.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

no, but that's not what i said, either.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

the uncertainty shifts within the framework from whether my actions will have a good out come to whether i know what actions are moral. i suppose it's possible that i might not know, but the categorical imperative is pretty easy to apply, so my confidence is much higher than i imagine is possible for any action within a utilitarian frame: you are totally dependent on unknowable circumstances to determine the morality of past actions.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

the difference is that voting "whatever" is the same as not voting. by contrast, voting for a candidate is voting... for that candidate.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

it's not the same result. in one scenario, the vote total doesn't change. in the other, a candidate gets one more vote.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

of course i care who wins. i want my candidate to win. that's why i vote for them.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

it's the right thing to do. ends don't justify means.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

voting for bad people is bad. it's not that I'm letting perfect be the enemy of the good. im letting good be the enemy of bad.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

no, i didn't. biden won in 2020 and i voted for howie. am i allowed to take credit for that? it makes no sense.

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

what's wrong with simple cryptographic signatures?

why do I need a block chain?

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

do you trust the person who signed it? if not, dont fucking trust it.

what more needs to be done?

bigMouthCommie ,
@bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social avatar

this is exactly why section 230 exists. sites aren't responsible for what other people post and they are allowed to moderate however they want.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines
    •