I’ve been having a number of conversations on Hexchan recently trying to make sense of their politics.
No you have not. There is absolutely no pro-Trump sentiment among Hexbear users. You are full of shit.
This user is completely making shit up about Hexbear.
Imperialism does not mean "of empire". It is an economic system, the highest stage of capitalism.
In the 3 years Hexbear has been around it has been attacked A LOT because obviously far right chuds have an interest in messing with leftists but has not to my knowledge had an admin breach. At one point image embeds were completely disabled because they were handing over data they shouldn't though and risked exposing people to doxxing.
Oh wow this thread goes way back. I know what happened here it wasn't defederation but simply Beehaw doing it's ideological thing. I was banned on their instance because I am a socialist much like every other socialist that makes an account here and attempts to post or comment over there.
They alos claim they only defederate for "hate speech" but this is nonsense. They have Hexbear defederated and yet that is the only instance in the entire fediverse with visible pronouns next to usernames, and they crack down far harder on hate speech than any other instance that exists.
The reality of Beehaw is that they are an ideologically motivated neoliberal instance that repress any opposition while pretending that they do not.
EDIT: OH and the irony of their defederation with Hexbear is that it's not even federated with ANYONE as it was using a fork of Lemmy without federation until very recently.
When companies are so large they have internal secret police doing spook shit at the highest levels of the company.
I didn’t say or suggest a single thing you just said.
Of course you did. You said that the defederating thing turns you off the concept of Lemmy, and you advocated for it to be not-a-feature.
You are advocating for centralised mega platforms owned by mega dictators.
The are two options. Centralisation, or decentralisation. That's it. There is no magic alternative. This is the material reality that exists.
If it turns you off Lemmy, then what you are advocating for is centralisation. The literal polar opposite of what the entire fediverse aims to be and exists to solve. There is not an alternative and there will not be. You either get one owner of a super site or thousands of owners of minisites that federate in order to be emulate a supersite without the oversight. That's it. There is no third-way.
So you would prefer massive dictators with a profit motive instead? Because that's the alternative you are advocating for.
The entire point of federation as a tool of decentralisation is to address the issue of Spez, Musk, Zuckerberg and so on. Massive corporate dictators of the internet.
The solution is to split up the massive dictators into lots and lots of smaller ones, who can federate with who they want to in order to make a bigger space, and ultimately provide you with the choice of which approach you like better. It ultimatley allows all of these spaces to shut out corporate advertising as well because if McDonalds ever makes a fucking instance everyone will defederate that shit to get away from the advertising immediately.
If you like the mega dictators better. Reddit is over there. I assume you do not, because that's why you left it.
Holy shit they're this far along now? They're at prototypes for intercontinental hypersonics from orbital altitudes where they categorically can not be intercepted and will not be detected until minutes before impact and the west has yet to develop any working hypersonic prototype at all, let alone a deployed and functioning one.
This is 5, even 10 years ahead technologically.
OH BOY VOAT
Yeah. Free speech absolutism does not attract a good crowd, and once you attract that crowd you will not attract any other crowd because the content output they produce is repellant to any normal person.
What's your opinion of Nelson Mandela? The man wrote a book(although a revision of another book) called "How to be a good communist" and the very first line of that book is:
A Communist is a member of the Communist Party who understands and accepts the theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism as explained by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin , and who subjects himself to the discipline of the Party. (See notes 1, 2, 3 & 4)
Alright I'll bite.
As you move down the wealth ladder you eventually reach a point at which there is a culture change. There are significant differences in the culture of the average middle-income anglo with guilt about their privilege compared to the people who are really, genuinely struggling. Once you cross a certain threshold, I'll call it the poverty threshold for the sake of this reply but it's not really a strict line but more of a broadly intersecting spectrum where there are many people who can blend into both groups, you reach a behavioural change point. This behavioural change, both in speech and in attitudes, is generally driven by those of us below a certain income level genuinely not giving a single fuck about how someone speaks but rather what they are saying.
Take for example my home of Liverpool. If I go down the council flats I'll find myself hundreds of people who will speak in ways that the middle-income liberals of america would find abhorrent. They will cuss you for a minor thing that makes it seem like you just killed their dog. This is normalised culture for them, and among their peers it is perfectly fine behaviour - but to the sheltered middle income person who sees it as an overreaction? It's shocking, and they don't like it.
This trend occurs towards the lower income groups because frankly their is less and less incentive to ruin relationships with people over social policing. Far more is put up with and accepted because everyone's got it rough and nobody's interested in making someone's life harder by getting overly emotional about a few swearsies.
I fit into one of the blending people, seamlessly transitioning between the two and speaking both ways. I grew up in squats, but I also got a very fortunate break that led to me getting an education in what many would regard as the ruling class side of our education system, which is split between schools for the workers vs schools for the bourgeoisie.
Anyway. The point is that the tone policing has the effect of shutting out these people from participation. The reason you don't see the majority of these people in participation online isn't because they don't have access, it's because they've had the experience of getting banned everywhere for not speaking like a cultured middle income liberal, and they've frankly got bigger priorities in their lives than learning how to speak like the people they fucking despise.
It is classism because it explicitly shuts out this class of people from participation. Almost everywhere online the tone policing functions as a tool of class discrimination that bends internet culture towards privileged middle-income groups over the poor. It's not explicitly intended to do this, but it is the outcome of it. Much like for example having a "no hoodies" rule in a shop doesn't function to keep out middle-income people but keeps out the "chavs", if you'll forgive my use of a classist slur for effect.
You wanna get aggressive and go at it? Go ahead. Do it. How something is expressed is not important compared to what is actually being said. The issue with this form of classism is that a section of society goes completely unrepresented online because of it, people whose politics almost always align with my own socialist views once they're well educated in what their interests are.
Tone policing is classist and is the reason I stopped using this instance. It'll be popular with the liberals who will weaponise it against those saying things they dislike but it'll cause situation after situation where leftists get punished ultimately driving away the base of people that supported the site and platforming up to this point.
Also the guy who headed TSMC, [...] is now heading SMIC
This is interesting. Anything to read on this?
There is nobody reading an article from Kaspersky that does not already know the meaning.
Complaining about use of the word hacker is the tech nerd's equivalent of complaining about clips vs magazines. It doesn't matter and everyone understands it anyway, there is absolutely no reason to be bent out of shape by it except in situations where being specific and clear instead of generalising actually matters.
Gun nerds deserve being laughed at for getting upset over it and so do tech nerds.
@lisko@sopuli.xyz's comment is not visible at all on the Lemmy instance while to me my comment is not visible at all on the Beehaw instance, nothing is showing in modlog though so I assume it has not been removed.
Am I unaware of a mechanic of federation occurring here? Or is something bugged?
"Whataboutism". Bruh.
If you say something is bad you are INHERENTLY making a comparison to other things. You can not call one thing bad without benchmarking it against other things and gauging a comparison of a range of good to bad.
It is important to benchmark this because it highlights unexamined chauvinism, sinophobia and internal hypocrisy that you have. You have an extreme emotional reaction to anything Chinese and make the claim they're horrific but you don't actually compare the reality of the west with what China is. You claim they are the worst, you have done this multiple times in the thread, this is YOU making the comparison to others so OF COURSE I'm going to examine whether your comparison is remotely accurate.
I will end this interaction by pointing you to this list of US atrocities, managed by Dessalines himself.
Tell me again how China is the worst one here.
Do you spend this much time attacking America? Or the rest of the west? No you don't. Despite the fact they are objectively and measurably worse. Because you're a chauvinist that has never done one ounce of self crit or examined your own contradictions.
