stardust_witch

2

stardust_witch wrote

Have any of you ever tried to use a very basic search function, like a library catalog or something, and just have it give you hundreds of results listed alphabetically? Imagine if search engines didn't use algorithms to try and find which of the million webpages with the word "dragon" in them you're actually looking for.

Yeah, you can read nefariousness into this quote, but what's being described here is a fairly reasonable expectation of a solution to the problem of sorting massive amounts of data. It's not about constructing some kind of monolithic authoritarian world view, it's about understanding what someone actually wants when they search for something. Likewise, if what you want are multiple results and you only get one, that's also a "bug" in this paradigm.

4

stardust_witch wrote

I'm not an expert, but the impression I get is that, despite the flowery name, most young people in Japan to whom the term applies reject both the label and the picture it paints of them. Like Millennials in America (and probably other countries dealing with the same issues), they're just finding ways to cope with being economically screwed.

If I had to guess, I'd say if there's anything praiseworthy intended about it, it's that their response embodies the Japanese cultural ethos of "gaman," which depending on how you look at it means something like "perseverance" or "taking other people's shit" (like satori, it's also a term that originates in Buddhism, ironically enough).

2

stardust_witch wrote

I really don't understand how you can try to claim FnB as a "lifestylist" project when it's probably the most well-known example of mutual aid in action. I basically consider any form of gift economy (the free software movement, really really free markets, anarchist disaster relief, etc...) to be an anarcho-communist project, regardless of how the people who participate in them identify politically.

2

stardust_witch wrote

Anarchists who participate in direct action tend to be the exact opposite of what I think most ancoms would consider "lifestylist."

As someone who's constantly decrying lifestylism, I don't think there's anything wrong with squatting, dumpster diving, illegalism, etc... I love all those things. But simply changing the way you alone live is not some kind of revolutionary praxis. Lifestylists are people whose response to oppressive systems is only to remove themselves from them, rather than attempt to alter or destroy those systems.

6

stardust_witch wrote

Nothing fucks over the "free" market narrative more than all these sad takes about how millennials aren't participating in them the way that capitalists want us to.

The funniest part is that it's not some kind of arbitrary conscious choice by an entire generation of people to simply not engage, that the same people complaining about it systematically impoverished us to the point that we can't and yet they still fight tooth and nail against the mere suggestion of any kind of economic reform that would make that possible.

4

stardust_witch wrote

I have very little experience using VMs. Are they notably resource intensive? For the most part I tend to use older hardware (because I am poor) and every little bit of processing power I can muster counts.

I sort of understand what the point of Qubes is and I think that, for the most part, what it offers is not something that I really need to concern myself with, but I've still been really intrigued by it since I first heard of it.

2

stardust_witch wrote

The same way you would (ostensibly) vote on any other proposal: X should become a moderator, y/n? Unless there's a reason I'm not seeing why you think the number of moderator positions need to be limited, I can't think of why it's the kind of thing where people should have to compete with each other. If two people want to be a moderator, then have a separate vote for each person. No biggie, right?

5

stardust_witch wrote

Then, at the end, whoever received the plurality should be elected.

I don't see any good reason why votes on moderators should be competitive. Moderators as individuals shouldn't be stand-ins for ideological positions about moderating; the norms surrounding the job should probably be something determined separately (as much as is possible, anyway; even the best norms will likely still leave some aspects of the job open to interpretation) from the people who do it.