a lumpen creature trying their best between constant crises
neuroqueer | total liberationist
🎵 Seasons seem to see me sliding out of view.
80's through the 50's, breezes make me think of you. 🎵
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
but you are technically coercing them into compliance if they’re going to be removed from a project, relationship, etc.
this is an ongoing discussion within anarchism.
ideally, removing someone who wants to remain should be the last resort of a group. ideally, someone would not get to this point unless everyone else in the group (at some point) wanted them there.
this is where relationship anarchy and restorative and transformative justice come into play:
- avoiding situations where people feel trapped in a social situation, and
- promoting confrontation, dialogue and active listening when people are uncomfortable.
for disclosure: i'm not for relationship anarchy, but i'm not against it, either.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
where you defer to someone else for their expertise because maybe they’re the only doctor available who can treat your illness, so you need to do as they say to get better.
you have the right word for it: expertise (see my other comment).
it becomes a hierarchy if the doctor involuntarily hospitalises you or uses the courts to force you to undergo the treatment; the power (force) to do that is authority. so long as you still have the power to challenge or otherwise discuss the prognosis, it is not a hierarchy, especially if the treatment is gratis and libre.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Expertise merely refers to one’s knowledge or skill in a particular field, but my understanding of CPR or ability to bake shortbread cookies does not make me an authority over you. Other than the conflation of force and authority, this is one of the most common confusions people have about anarchism, made worse by the fact that there are some anarchists who still use authority to refer to both command and expertise just because Bakunin did. Personally, I find that creates needless confusion. If you’re using the word authority to describe everything from slavery to knowing how to build a bridge, then why use the word at all? Just use the word expertise when you’re talking about expertise. Listening to medical advice isn’t a hierarchy. Having expertise doesn’t give me the right to command you unless I hold a position in a hierarchical power structure that grants me that authority. As Bakunin himself said:
…we ask nothing better than to see men endowed with great knowledge, great experience, great minds, and, above all, great hearts, exert over us a natural and legitimate influence, freely accepted and never imposed in the name of any official authority whatsoever, celestial or terrestrial.
— Andrewism, How Anarchy Works » Dissecting Authority (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrTzjaXskUU)
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
a hierarchy (from Greek, for 'rule of priests') is a structure which creatures superiors and subordinates.
Like if I invite a bunch of friends over to help me move into a new apartment, is there a hierarchy because I’m telling everyone where to put the boxes?
if your friends want to help you, then they're helping you. they of course needs to defer to you for instructions, because you're the one who knows what you need help with. if they're doing so without the guarantee/demand of anything in return (because they care about you), then this is mutual aid.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Just when will my human rights, which are grounded in the constitution
the US constitution is an ideological rag and a liberal holy text written by and for wealthy protocapitalists seeking independence from mercantilism. it wasn't written for you, just as it wasn't written for women or BIPOC. the police and courts serve the state, not persons.
a digital wallet with ZKP could resolve 'are you old enough?' without the query ever needing to leave your device.
without a digital wallet, it could be done with fully homomorphic encryption.
both of these would be innovations which i feel require guided development. innovation counter to the goal of the legislation, which is surveillance. innovation driven by the self-proclaimed purpose of 'protecting children'; innovation driven by the impetus to make it harder for people to masturbate.
since the general attitude right now has been 'require agegates and just leave it up to The Market™', then the solution in practise will probably be a private third party that brokers this information, probably with a natural monopoly, that will charge exorbitantly for their API, have Google Analytics running on every page, leaks like a sieve, leaves logs everywhere, and will probably get caught selling data, which will incur a one-time fee equal to 80% the size of the company's rainy day fund, and maybe the CEO will be asked to step down, shielding the rest of the C-suite from consequences (and allowing them to just do it again). they'll work closely with law enforcement, they'll be breached in the first year, and probably have a huge leak 4 years later.
in that time, due to real changes in the law or jurisprudence, or companies just 'playing it safe', age verification will come to encompass queer identity, sexual education and health, war coverage, counterculture and even history. more online regulation just means more barriers to entry which means a larger monopoly for multinational corporations.
i think there are better uses for this technology than controlling pornography.
the provider knows who's asking because of the IP address and API key of the requester. if it uses a form with a redirect, they even know your IP and what page you were on, tied to your legal identity. if the provider makes any API requests to a government registry, now that knows the when, the how, and (categorically) the what. short of a statement of 'no logs' and an audit to confirm as such, there is definitely logs. hackers love this information. data brokers love this information.
the problem is not the service knowing. it's anyone knowing. the provider deänonymised you the moment you gave your id. the precise implementation details are important here.
the problem is that people are being verifiably linked to their 'adult' preferences. this is data that is being generated, in bad faith, and handled by multiple parties. your legal identity should not need to be tied to this information. this information can be used against you both now and in the future.
we've already seen in the US where there is a push for information about gender and basic sexual education being labelled as 'adult'. when i was in school, information about countries like Cuba, Afghanistan or China was considered 'too mature' (or marked as 'terrorism-related' by the school firewall) for children; i could see this thus extending to require age verification before you can access 'subversive' information, on the basis of 'protecting children' from 'political extremism'.
… because it was flagged by Lightspeed? or is Discord doing something of their own now too?
seems adversarial to [dbzer0] values
this is an anarchist/GLOSS/pirate instance; freedom of information is tied closely with anarchism and the hacker ethic.
for me: it's less about whether this type of information should exist (it shouldn't) and more that i reject privileged information conceptually. i don't think this type of information should just be available to admins and people with the technical resources and expertise.
i would prefer (in my uneducated opinion) that this information only be visible to the user (on their own posts), community moderators (in their own communities) and admins (on the voter's home instance), and anonymised elsewhere (for example, only showing a source instance).
but since that is not how it works, then i would rather have access to the same level of information that anyone else has over me. i also feel more in control of my own data when i have access to my own voting history. thus, i think that's why there's a sentiment that there is a different approach to this problem, and it won't end with just blocking one tool.
i wouldn't find out till after her death that my grandmother had a PhD in computer science. she became a housewife and pretended her whole life to be tech illiterate because she was ashamed of being a technical woman, apparently because of the hatred she got during her studies.
they have, but they assume:
- 'for-profit' means 'good' because 'they have a lot of money'.
- 'proprietary' means 'good' because 'the code/infrastructure is obfuscated'.
- 'widely used' means 'good' because 'more people with the skills to manage it' and 'it's widely supported'.
- 'open source' means 'bad' because 'anyone can analyse the code for exploits without reporting them'.
- 'self-sufficiency' means 'bad' because 'that's anticompetitive'.
they hear the phrases 'supply chain attacks' and '24/7 premium support' and they're sold. the more responsibility they can foist onto third-parties for when something goes wrong, the less liability they have.
in a lot of 'developed' countries: government at all levels are structurally forbidden from managing their own infrastructure. to 'maintain the free market' and avoid 'anticompetition' lawsuits, they procure development contracts via bids. Microsoft has the money and dominance to not only lobby governments to adopt their software, but can also outbid most other companies, and pays a lot of money to ensure there's an army of Microsoft Certified™ office workers and technicians everywhere.
every time the government tries to do something by itself, or to exclude one company or another from the bidding process, the industry lobbies crawl out to screech about 'competition' and 'free market principles'.
when i was in school we were taught to use the CIA World Factbook as a single primary source for our social science papers.
when the fantasy racism goes too far and you start elfjacketing your roommates
my feed's pretty barren after blocking most libshit (for the sake of my mental health), so i'd welcome more (multilingual) leftist posts. i've seen insightful Lemmygraders under Hexbear posts but can't see them from dbzer0.
the little roads connecting german homonationalism → NATO → Palestine is certainly uuuhhh… something.
last year there was a NATO flag flanked by EU and pride flags with little hearts connecting them (LGBT ♥ NATO ♥ EU), as if being queer has anything to do with NATO, or as if the terrorist entity gives a shit about queer people.
this was fever-inducing to read. in a frighteningly familiar way, but i couldn't remember what for.
then i realised: another n+1 article from a year ago about a techbro conference: An Age of Hyperabundance.
i am happy that you exist and i envy your clients 💙