I see how they didn’t answer the question. However, maybe they’re not answering your question but commenting on “Brave is a great product”.
This. My partner’s office is stuck with “it has to be inkjet and not toner", and on January their printer got clogged…
I’m really glad this exists! Thanks for sharing it!
This sounds terrifying! Could you point me to sources that touch upon this?
Huh. I see the idea of divide and conquer. But I got a bit lost with “killing bazillions of people as some kind of a ‘market reset’ to drive up shareholder value”. I’m thinking of the black plague, which killed millions, but that increased worker power because survivors had less competition and therefore could demand higher wages.
Sure. Please note that I am quite ignorant and unskilled when it comes to Linux. I will seem like someone who’s got shoes on but doesn’t know how to tie them. I’m sorry. I wish I was more skilled and knowledgeable.
ProtonVPN installed via YAST worked on OpenSuse Tumbleweed but didn’t work in OpenSuse Leap.
RStudio in NixOS was hard to update. For example, during the switch to Quarto instead of only Knittr, there was a period where I spent months without updates. I was using an old, old version.
With NixOS, Fedora, or OpenSuse, installing Signal from a program packaged by Signal itself was not possible. There was a Flatpack version run by a contributor, but nothing by an organization.
I totally recognize that I could learn more and become a better user. It’s just a bit frustrating that these weren’t problems for me over at the land of Surveillance Capitalism OSes. I hope these problems are solved with time.
I’ve had loads of problems installing software and making it work.
I bet soon you’ll see massive consequential protests.
I assume you are American and are referring to the American government.
What I will say will be unpopular. I understand if you think I’m naive. I understand if you get frustrated. I suspect the frustration comes from having clear images of how fascism has been born out of suffrage and supposedly democratic institutions. I suspect the frustration comes from assuming that my suggestion is to ‘vote your way out of this situation’. I probably seem like a naive liberal, hugging trees and holding hands with Trump-supporters while watching the sunset. I can’t change your beliefs, but I can at least ask whether you’re really sure I’m that.
Here’s what I believe: the future is democratic.
How can I possibly say that when Trump is in power, destroying democratic institutions, covering with his hand the mouths of Americans?
It is evident that Trump is an authoritarian populist. <details> <summary> Here’s what I mean by that. </summary> Authoritarian because he disregards democratic processes. His supporters don’t care that he may shackle them and put his hand on their mouths to never speak again. They are fine with that, as long as he builds The Swamp of America, a land where people are obsessed with their own bellybuttons, where everyone works like robots that never question the dogma shoved into their throats, and where corporations can bulldoze and burn the planet and still receive a pat in the back from The Orange Swamp Man because ape see number go up.
And populist because he systematically disregards and discredits people who know what they’re talking about (experts), and instead do things out of fear that their fragile ego will be hurt. It’s ironic: populists claim to represent their citizens but they don’t listen to the citizens who actually know what they’re talking about. If the truth is inconvenient for the populists’ ego, it’s a good idea to cover the sun with their thumb. Nobody will notice how ridiculous it looks, right? </details>
It is evident that America is currently experiencing a democratic backlash.
The story of this democratic backlash started a while ago. Over the past decades and even centuries, Americans have slowly come to not only value freedom but also be able to transform their political institutions to be more democratic. Women owning property. Black people gaining the right to drink from the same water-fountain as white people, the right to vote, the right to own property… An educational system that’s incredibly flawed and ridiculously overpriced for what it actually delivers, but one that’s envied by many nations on Earth that do not score nearly as high in tests of basic science, math, and reading comprehension. Americans were able to not only look at the goal, but also take steps towards it. These changes aimed to make every American more capable and therefore more free.
However, democratic institutions mean elites lose their capacity to extract privileges from their underlings. To elites, there is such a thing as too much freedom for people, too much freedom to choose who to be and what to do with their lives. Elites noticed people were questioning why elites extracted so many privileges and didn’t contribute to people or invest in people. People were questioning why they have to slave away their lives paying college debt, medical debt, and mortgages while the ultra-rich are buying their third yacht or jet. The people who most extracted wealth from American people did not want to pay back or invest in its people.
American elites saw this as a great opportunity to finance swindlers. The current swindler, The Orange Swamp Man, sold Americans a beautiful knife. The knife itself wasn’t the problem; it was quite capable in destroying capabilities and freedoms. The problem was that the instructions were hard to follow. Americans have found it difficult to hold the smile on their face while stabbing themselves and twisting. The Orange Swamp Man says Americans will have to suffer through tariffs, but that it’s definitely not going to make them suffer more in the long term. The Orange Swamp Man correctly believes that destroying democratic institutions such as healthcare, education, and the basic guarantee of rights is necessary for American elites to extract as much money and power from American people.
It’s important to note that not everyone bought the knife and stabbed themselves. Trump won by a slim margin and Trump is highly unpopular. Those of you who are still alive and well can do something about it. In fact, I’m willing to bet you will, because undemocratic governments do not survive massive organic protests.
How so? Imagine this scenario: Give a man a book and he may never pick it up. Teach a man to read and he’ll silently look around, noticing a lack of development and freedom. Teach men, women, children—everyone to read and you’ll have a bustling conversation: “Really? Is that fair?” “Why does the richest man on Earth not want to invest in the roads that his products use? Why does he not want to invest in the people that made him rich?” “My wife and I had bad accidents and we can’t work. Is our society so selfish that it doesn’t care about us?” This may seem cartoonish, but this is how people realize there’s a mismatch between (1) the elite’s way of extracting and hoarding privileges and (2) how everyday people see the situation.
Each critical thought, each enlightening conversation makes the pressure grow, like a balloon getting pregnant with air, ready to burst at any moment.
All of this language may seem allegorical, metaphorical, out of touch, and absurd. But it is based on decades of research on how democracies are formed and sustained. Check out this article and its cited literature if you’re interested: https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/why-the-future-is-democratic/ Also, my story about how American elites relate to their people is essentialized, compressed, and probably missing details that authors like Acemoglu, Robinson, Welzel, Piketty, Shaikh, and Mazzucato can fill in.
As to what you can do, I’d recommend learning how to frame discussions. Not that I’m good at it, but people who know how to use can change how the world works. Social movements die or thrive depending on whether people can internalize what you’re saying.
What do you think? Are you willing to keep on stepping forward in tried and true paths? https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.12501 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337861541_Moral_reframing_A_technique_for_effective_and_persuasive_communication_across_political_divides (sorry for the paywal; you can usually email academics and they’ll send you the text, or you can find alternative texts or sources).
Does it feel as if they clarify the kind of life you want to live or that they’re forcing you to avoid them?
It sounds like you’d enjoy and find useful George Lakoff’s Don’t Think of an Elephant.
Edit: His most recent edition of the book not only talks about frames, but also institutional incentives, as well as the history of Republicans and why they have succeeded in framing and Democrats haven’t.
That’s it!
There’s a Know How or How To (I don’t remember the name of the YouTube channel; EDIT: @executivechimp@discuss.tchncs.de found it. The video is linked in their comment) that explains why we used to believe moderate alcohol consumption is healthy.
Turns out, those surveys only ask “How many drinks do you have a week?” Notice they tacitly ask about the present, how many drinks now and not in the past. If you were a very heavy drinker in the past and got sick from it, you likely stopped drinking altogether.
Not only that, but people with chronic illness many times choose to not drink at all.
These two populations (sick ex-drinkers and chronically sick non-drinkers) make it seem as if not drinking is not that healthy. But remove those groups from the data analysis or control for past alcohol usage and pre-existing conditions and you end up with a clear pattern: drinking alcohol in any quantity is unhealthy. The more, the worse.
Sorry for the lack of sources; I’m on mobile. I think there’s a WHO report titled “There’s no safe amount of alcohol” or something like that.
Indeed, he could. It sounds like it’s an expectation from you, and that if he doesn’t then he is entirely a Trump or Republican supporter.
I’m so sorry. You’ll think I’m annoying and stupid, but would it be absurd to ask for clarification regarding what you mean? I couldn’t really understand your point and it sounds like you have a passion for this topic and a clear point of view.
That’s one take: that Andrew Yang is a Trump supporter. However, another take is that he made a massive mistake by making it seem as if he supported Trump, even though he was talking about something specific and narrow.
https://insights.priva.cat/p/a-follow-up-on-does-proton-still
I understand the fear of the bridge being burned down. I also see how that would make Proton like WhatsApp, which has its own protocol and locks its users in. Would it be inaccurate to say that your fear is that Proton pulls an “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” move?
In any case, it’s worthwhile looking at your claims. You mention that Proton is “actively trying to turn open protocols into more closed stuff”.
You could argue that it’s simply a matter of time until they pull the rug and close their protocols. Let’s elide the whole discussion regarding the probability of the rug pull happening and instead focus on the present reality: as of December 2024, I could download an archive of everything I have on Proton without a hitch. They do not have the whole Meta thing of “Please give us four working days for us to create an archive of your data”. At least that wasn’t my experience. I could download an archive quickly.
This is a great point! Humans can put names on things that aren’t there, such as holes!
This ‘naming of hole-like concepts’ may sound trivial, but there have been entire cultures that didn’t have ‘hole-like’ concepts and this stunted their ability to make certain discoveries. For example, the ancient Greeks could not have developed calculus; they did not have a concept of zero that they could use for mathematical manipulation. This shows an unfortunate reality: you can’t mentally manipulate ideas that you don’t have.
However, once you do have those ideas, they may seem obvious. This is a well documented human bias: the curse of knowledge. Once you understand something, it is very difficult to imagine not knowing that. For us, knowers of pupils, holes, zeros, and chasms, it may seem absurd to not have names for pupils, holes, zeros, and chasms. We take them for granted, when in reality it was not an easy road to arrive at them.
You care about love. You wrote this post. You mentioned someone who loved you as “wholesome”. You say you want to stop avoiding intimacy.
I’d dare to say you care about love, belonging, kindness, safety, and independence. I may be wrong with some or all of those, and I’m sorry if I misread you or made assumptions. However, feel free to write your own list of things that you care about. We humans care where we hurt and we hurt where we care. Think about your experience with love, intimacy, and relationships. Notice when something that hurts pops up. What would you not have to care about for this not to hurt?
It’s also important to notice that brain is trying to protect you. It’s trying to avoid the pain it has perceived in the past, the pain it (rightly or wrongly) predicts will appear in your future. It’s important to recognize its suggestions, its predictions, its interpretations. In case you don’t already do mindfulness practices in any way, you may consider taking it up. It’s important to be careful with what kind of mindfulness you do, because unfortunately there’s a lot of bad mindfulness out there, misinformation, incorrect takes, etc. Mindfulness as presented in programs like Healthy Minds are science-based and really helpful.
Once again, the reason I’m recommending mindfulness is because when you notice your brain’s advice, it’s easier to choose what kind of person you want to be. Once you know where you’re standing, it’s easier to take steps to where you want to go.
Just to comment on relationships. You mentioned that in a relationship it’s possible or likely that there’s “a whole-ass human depending on you or giving herself to you in every way”. Yes, some people think this is how relationships work, but it’s not the only way. You could read Sue Johnson’s Hold Me Tight to see how relationships can be different. The book might also be helpful to you because it explains how humans try to protect themselves even though they want to be close to each other.
Yes, love can be intoxicating “like a drug”. Seeing love through the lens of drugs suggests that we lose control with love. However, if you’re mindful about how it feels, you can both feel its beautiful sensations and also soberly choose what kind of person you want to be. Mindfulness, connection, and personal fulfillment can all coincide with a romantic relationship. Of course, it’s possible to be mindful, connected, and fulfilled without a romantic relationship, but it seems like you think the path towards a healthy romantic relationship is something you predict could make your life meaningful. You’re not alone; plenty of humans seek love in that way.
Others have suggested getting professional help. If so, you could consider looking for an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy therapist or a Coherence Therapy therapist.
To readers of this text who have seen my responses to other people, you may think that I see every situation as a nail that I hammer with my EFT, mindfulness, and ACT hammers. On the one hand, I ask whether you truly believe these situations would not benefit from those approaches. After all, they are evidence-based, trans-diagnostic, and have helped millions of people. On the other hand, it’s not necessary to follow the resources that I suggest; it’s possible to gain connection, awareness, and psychological flexibility in many ways. It’s a matter of finding what works for you.
I hope this helps.