ChristerMLB

Not only that, but a lot of constructive thinking goes in to just formulating thoughts so they can be communicated. We’ve all had that sense of “that sounds stupid when I say it out loud”, for example.

Oh, just a ban on the targeting. The companies would still be alllowed to show as many ads, and as many different ads, as they’d want.

That’s interesting, and maybe better than what I had in mind.

If the software you need to use isn’t very demanding, you can run windows in a virtual machine (VM) inside of Linux – the exception is games that have kernel-level anti-cheat, those will probably never work on Linux in any way, and you’ll have to dual boot to run them. Most other games will run easily if you just install them with Steam, but I’ve come across a few that I use a VM for.

What software and games do you need to run? I might be able to help.

Also, the distro you should go for is called Linux Mint.

Mint has the perfect balance of stability, support and up-to-date-ness for beginners - and honestly for a lot of experienced users as well.

When I was 19 I went to a sort of social pedagogy boarding school thing that we have in the Nordics, after that I got drafted and did alternative service, after that my brother had long since moved into my room, so moving back home wasn’t really on the table – at least not as I saw it.

So you’re suggesting just outright banning social media?

It is apparently a movement, but it gets way too little attention: https://www.politico.eu/article/targeted-advertising-tech-privacy/

I dunno, they will still want people to stick around on their site, so they can see their ads.

Some of it can be accomplished by just setting universal demands for how social media works for all users:

• ban targeted advertising
• make it mandatory for companies to ensure algorithms don’t prioritize posts for making users angry, scared or depressed

Stuff like that. These kinds of regulations don’t involve ID checks, and could take care of a big chunk of the problem.

If you’re very interested, the Norwegian institute of transport economics has an article about it here: https://www.tiltak.no/b-endre-transportmiddelfordeling/b-2-tilrettelegging-kollektivtransport/b-2-6/

You web browser can probably translate it, or you can just check out the references at the bottom

The way I understand it, free buses are not a cost-effective way to get people to stop driving. You get a better effect by using the same money for more routes and higher frequencies.

As a social policy, though, it might have something to it.

If the approach is just “look for evil people and then destroy them”, or “if politicians piss the people off, and they’ll come for their head”, it’s likely to produce more evil through the fear that it creates. A good political system is predictable – politicians should know that if they do evil (clearly defined in law), it will become public, and it will have consequences (again, clearly defined in law). This should also apply to all powerful people, not just politicians.

At the end of the day, the goal is to control and counteract certain ambitions, not to create fear.

Fear leads people to do stupid evil shit

True, but you could also band together with the other rich people and lobby for the inheritance tax to be abolished for a few years so you can give your children the inheritance before the tax gets reintroduced. A wealth tax doesn’t have that problem.

Yeah, the edition I read had a preface that seemed specifically written to prevent those kinds of interpretations. I wonder if it was written by a female relative of Nabokov’s.

It’s well written, but maybe too subtle

I managed to get a few chapters into “Lolita” before I decided to put it down. It’s well written, but so very creepy. This text is like it’s written by the main character – maybe even a more honest version of him.

the plausible deniability is getting thinner and thinner - this time it was that the whole video was jungle themed, so obviously it had nothing to do with racism!

It is possible to harass and shame people by misgendering them, e.g. by conspicuously and repeatedly referring to them in the third person. I think some people do try to chase trans people off the public square using tactics like that. Beyond that, my gut feeling is that if it’s a belief that’s presented honestly and curiously, those philosophers would want it expressed.

The whole trans debate is a bit of a mess in this regard, I think. For trans people, it is very personal, and it’s been jazzed up so much by the whole culture war bs. Everyone who has an opinion on it, seem to finish presenting it with “END OF DISCUSSION”, not really in line with those enlightenment ideals.

That’s exactly the idea. The process of rational discussion and consideration is supposed to take care of the quality.

Obviously this was before the birth of the internet, and also before the birth of the think tank :l

Sloppy reading on my part as well. Seems like you want something between the standard windows/macos experience and i3, and that sounds like a good idea, but I’m not sure it exists