OpenStars

An important - crucial - clarification is that it is not community censorship aka prohibition of a topic deemed offensive in some manner, it is rather self-censorship aka controlling one's own method of personal discourse. The latter is such an enormously different thing that most people don't even lump it together in their minds with the implications that come up when you say the word "censorship", which implies solely the former.

I do the same thing with my personal cellphone number and email address btw - I control who I answer, though I do not "censor" who is allowed to send a message to me. As do we all. The same goes with TV programs, and almost literally every website that either of us has ever been to (unless we go to... those places, though notably they lie off the beaten path for a reason...).

If you want to use solely your Subscribed feed, then I am not stopping you - why would I want to censor you or remove any capabilities from you in any way? Or anyone else for that matter?

I am talking about making All more usable, rather than virtually useless, especially as the Fediverse expands further, and community tastes become more diverse. Right now, you can log out or use an alternate account to view a version of the All feed that includes communities that you have blocked, so obtaining that level of functionality is super easy (as some might say, barely an inconvenience:-P), but the converse is not true: it takes HOURS of effort to try to curate the All feed to something that more closely resembles your interests, without being as rigidly locked-down as your Subscribed feed.

To give a personal example: I blocked the Docker communities, knowing that I can always choose to visit them at any time later whenever I want (again, while logged out, with a different account, or by removing the block), though I have subscribed to generic Linux communities, and yet I have done neither for self-hosting ones. This gives me a tripartite level of control in-between "All" vs. "None", where I can choose, if I want, to see those posts at some lower frequency than "always/100%" yet still see them.

Which reminds me, I have described in some other reply how my thoughts on an implementation strategy could involve both adding new communities to your Subscribed feed, without you having to manually add each new one that comes along, and also remove new communities from your Blocked list, in like manner; yet an alternate implementation could rather be a new sorting method or new feed, that takes your weighted suggestions into account e.g. shows highly-ranked sports posts at only 1% frequency, here too providing a new option somewhere in-between 100% and 0%.

That sounds nice to me:-). Options are good. This is Lemmy - we can git gud, if we want! And others can choose to ignore these new options, if they want.

both of which are terrible options

Which is why I am talking about a new option, which does not yet exist but I am saying that I wish that it did.

Likewise, two previous options that went from not-existing to now-existing-and-are-extremely-helpful are the ability to block an entire instance rather than each community and each user on that instance separately, and the ability to set your language preferences and have most (or at least some?) even if not all communities dedicated entirely to a different language not show up.

Likewise, if you could specifically target - either in the positive sense of subscribing to or in the negative sense of blocking - communities that match certain pre-defined keywords that communities could choose to use to identify themselves, like "hockey" or more generally "sports", or to use another example "vegetarian cooking" or more generally "cooking", then later if tens or even hundreds of additional communities were to be spun up within that same category, you could remain subscribed to or block them ALL, if you so chose, without having to make that determination for each and every single one, individually, and then repeat that process every time a new one appears. This could be modified by making a stronger choice of an individual community override the weaker choice of a mere category - e.g. if I like hockey but hate a particular team (fuck those guys in particular) or whatever.

Since these types of communities (as "sports" or "cooking" or "which app used to connect to Lemmy" etc.) rarely correlate with instance, this has nothing to do with a Local feed. Rather it is like the other two aforementioned examples in that, depending on implementation, possibly being able to affect your Subscription (adding subs to categories of communities) and All (minus categories of things you would prefer to not see) feeds. The latter is where it is most helpful b/c if you were looking for new things to subscribe to, but you will NEVER in your life ever subscribe to e.g. sports or cooking, then it saves you a great deal of time & effort from having to make those determinations on a per-post or per-community basis. Especially when they can be quite popular to other people, and thus ranked highly when sorted by Top or also Hot b/c of the interactivity with them, but when your preferences diverge from the mainstream. It helps make the whole place much more "welcoming" then, when automation more or less mindlessly takes care of such things that otherwise would require individual curation effort to achieve.

"Default behavior" can be an entirely separate matter, or it could be related but I am saying that it does not have to be. The way I am thinking of it, this would all be optional, just like blocking or subscribing to a community is now. Eventually some app could even offer a wizard to guide users through selecting those keywords that they might want, but that is getting too far ahead of ourselves here.

I highly notice its' absence, whenever I visit my old Kbin or discuss.online accounts, and I see all these posts for sports, gaming stuff like Switch that I don't own, individual areas like in Canada and Australia and USA and UK - even if I lived in one I definitely do not live in them all:-) - and just stuff in general that fills up my entire scroll list with things that make reading it no fun and demotivating to have to decide individually on each one to skip.

And we all - well, apparently "only" 99.98% of us - are this way:-). That's why one day I hope to see more general tools to deal with this stuff, e.g. if I specify that I don't want updates for "sports" then unless I specifically subscribe to a community, it will hide even newly created communities from me that fall into that category. One day...:-)

It "can" be, especially for those of us who want and even explicitly ask for such, but I was pointing out how the lack of tools to do otherwise removes it as a "choice". Being able to switch between modes at will would maximize our freedom and capabilities, but simply having things be this way bc nobody has yet built the tools to do otherwise does not make it the best option, only the default one.

Abso-fragging-lutely. Communication is always a two-way proposition, and it is mandatory for us each to do our part to succeed.

The very first community I blocked - let those who enjoy it do so but I do not. Unfortunately, the Fediverse shows you everything by default rather than things that you more or less want to, so blocking communities lacks the negative implications here that like blocking someone's phone or email address would elsewhere. So like if you want to block sports, you have to do so for every single team, league, and even type, plus all the new communities that continue to be made in the future. This is just the Fediverse's normal.

Thanks - I needed this! :-)

Kubernetes: "I make organizing large computer systems simpler, by getting the computers to manage themselves." (translation: something something computers, but only the "fancy" ones, so she doesn't try to get you to fix her Windows XP machine at home that she plays solitaire on:-P)

Doctors: "I make sick people well".

Neurosurgeons: "The human body is so complex, so people specialize, and my area of expertise is the brain."

Rocket scientist: "I make things go up properly, rather than boom."

There is always a way. You won't convey enough to get gran to perform any of these tasks, but you can make her feel welcomed into your world just a tiny bit.:-)

A TON of people irl have their literal jobs based on / revolving around making a show that they know stuff. Don't forget that confidence is not the same thing as capability.

An example is the crowd of people that showed up at the January 6 riot in the USA Capitol - how many of them truly knew what they were doing, or even so much as glanced at the document (the Constitution) that they claimed they were trying to protect?

At the absolute highest levels of capability, ironically you find the lowest levels of needing to engage in showing off behaviors, e.g. Jon Stewart is at the top of his game, and it shows.

I will add also: it is worth learning to explain things to people, bc in the process you also should find out that you improve your own knowledge. For one thing, it is a bit like compiling code: you may think it will work, but until you put it into practice, you can never truly be certain. And for another, there is the famous quote most often attributed to Albert Einstein (possibly it wasn't him but it doesn't even matter really):

In contrast to the others, Reddit decided to kill itself off before most Boomers have even heard of it:-).

(1) why keep apologizing? It is either true or it is not, and either way does that really help soften the blow, especially after the first time? Well, anyway, kudos for attempting to be gentle at least.

(2) this seems biased in some places - e.g. are there countries where white supremacy does NOT appear among some portion of its populace? Although I guess you mean it being institutionalized, and so widely spread. But even there, it seems not alone in that? Especially if the races involved do not have to remain fixed across the comparison.

(3) what America seems to absolutely excel at, imho, is lying to itself. Especially the Midwest - e.g. the East and West know about such stuff and try to fight it, the South knows and just doesn't allow talking about it at all, but people in the Midwest (for anyone wondering why these terms, e.g. no "North", it has to do with its history, expanding from the 13 colonies westward, and now the terms depict cultural zones rather than geographic ones) have drunk the coolaid and seem to honestly believe that e.g. racism is a thing of the past - or at least like the South they would prefer that people not talk about it. However, this too was not an "America first" issue, itself having been inherited from England when it broke away. The thing is, England - itself a monarchy at that time - grew up afterwards (somewhat, see e.g. Brexit), and the USA grew up too, but yeah still remains deeply scarred by its past, and more especially by its continued present.

One example is how America sent a man to the moon first. While a significant accomplishment, the USA was not the first in space, nor has it showed much interest in the moon since then, especially lately when all the "firsts" there are being made by China and India, and the USA has actively given up rights to moon territories in exchange for deep-sea oil drilling rights. So... a half-point then towards its credit, or more like a full one but historical rather than modern?

Another example is nuclear fission technology, which is widely known to have been developed in the USA, ofc, but by German scientists who were fleeing the fascists at the time. This one actually deserves far more than just half a point though, imho, b/c while America did not put in the investment to develop the educational infrastructure that would have led to this discovery on its own, it did capitalize (a good choice of wording?:-D) on it, and also the USA is where those scientists chose to go (okay so... the latter may have had large geographic reasons behind it as well, as in the USA was not being actively bombed by Germany like the UK was, at the time). Similarly, one school of thought is that this is how the USA originally got its start in its industrial revolution, by the theft of many architectural plans taken from England. In contrast to those kinds of starts though - and here my knowledge is shaky so take this next part with a much more heavy grain of salt - the USA seems to not be keeping up with most other other nuclear-related technology developments since then, involving fusion (except perhaps that recent discovery that might have single-handedly reversed that whole course? so I dunno).

Computers, on the other hand, represent a full, solid, and MAJOR point towards the credit of the USA, right? As well as, for better or worse, the development of the internet (officially at least, it started in Universities within the USA, though that may have just been the modern form using packets, with some signal-passing having happened elsewhere first, and yet even then the first telegraph signals were passed in the USA, so at any rate this seems a solid point rather than a stretch).

So anyway, it is not all lies and smoke and mirrors - lately it seems that way, and ngl if Trump wins the USA may legitimately join with Russia or at least stop opposing the ongoing invasion of Ukraine, which would free Russia up to start building itself back up in order to continue its expansionist agenda. So the USA at the very best can be said to be "unstable", and an "unreliable ally", but with a MAJOR caveat that corporate interests are starting to become more powerful than actual nations, in recent years. So BUSINESS arrangements are likely to remain solid, even if government ones can be reversed at the drop of a hat. This too is something inherited from England/UK, and the rest of the World, but the USA definitely has drunk the coolaid on that, to the point where like if Apple or Google were to pick one political party, the other would not have much chance and may quickly die out.

But don't miss out on the flowers or the forest for the sake of examining the trees: the white supremacy angle is only one small piece of this much larger puzzle, that has tentacles EVERYWHERE, world-wide even, and it is not only racists that support the authoritarian regime - there are other parts of that too.

Btw I want to give a shout-out to a tremendously awesome resource: Crash Course US History, and also many issues are discussed at a deeper level in the Crash Course World History, e.g. an episode on Capitalism and Socialism, and 19th-century Imperialism, multiple episodes on Globalization, etc.

As people are saying, a true psychopath might not even question themselves. That said, it is probably a spectrum and we all may have such tendencies - and I mean like 100% of the population, as a shared human condition, to lie somewhere on that spectrum. It seems a good thing to me to examine myself in that manner and maybe dial down, or perhaps even dial up, those things. Especially when others misuse the words, twisting them to suit their own perspectives - e.g. calling someone "unstable" if they want to escape them, the abuser.

Also there are generational differences, and even generational (and other) traps - e.g. a lot of older MAGA parents in the midwestern USA have been abandoned by their children, who want to do things like "take the vaccine" (which I chose to highlight the discussion since it is a decision involving fully literal life-and-death consequences, plus also likelihood of permanent brain damage, which is what we now know long-covid to be), so in such cases is it truly the children who are being "unstable" and "aggressive" to leave, or rather the fault of the parents who attempt to force their christofacist belief structures onto their children, leaving no room in the latter to have their own thoughts or desires?

These are complex, weighty matters, and won't be resolved quickly, but are good to think about regardless.