170
Is this true for you? (thelemmy.club)

Cross-posted from "Is this true for you?" by @LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone in !autism@lemmy.world


[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Holy shit that's amazing! 10 sec on a consumer gpu in 4g vram! I might decide to onboard this to the horde...

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's in fact what I was channeling with my comment ;)

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The fediseer can help here both with the trusted instances and with finding servers based on tags

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I (thank god) am not Stalin, and I have plenty of practical and ideological differences with Stalin and you (thank god) are not Makhno and presumably have many differences with him. I don't think it's useful to project things this way instead of looking at people's actual professed beliefs unless they demonstrate having the same attitude

Actually that's in fact the salient point: The argument anarchists like me are making is that hierarchical power (i.e. a state) is simply going to breed the next Stalin, regardless of originating good intentions. From where we stand, history bears this out.

I was furthermore very careful about my claim because I was there for when that fight happened and saw the attitude that you and the other admin took, but what I just said is very concretely and undeniably true when you look at some of the various remarks the person made at the time

I mean, so was I. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the "heinousness" or the statement and what was really meant by the author. But the fact that your interpretation is repeated and misquoted like a broken telephone is why relations can't improve. In fact it reaches the point where you have members of your instance literally call me a neo-nazi. It boggles my mind that you can't see how removing all nuance in this way breeds hostility. When you reach the point where members of you community start calling anarchists "neo-nazis" and the rest go "mhm, uh-huh, this checks out", I think all expectation of compromise are out the window.

[...]So again, yes, I am saying you made a poor choice many times, that's why I'm arguing for changing course.[...]

I mean, "poor choice" in relation to what? Poor in being conducive to Hexbears liking me? Perhaps. But it is not an imperative for me for Hexbers to like me. In fact it's Hexbears who request that I take steps to make them like me in the name of "left unity". And I think that's ass-backwards.

I think this is ultimately the sticking point. From where I stand, I am not opposed to improving relations, but I do deny the idea that it falls on is on me to make an effort to be nicer than what I get back. Rather it's the ones who actually believe in left unity who should be making such an effort.

This, however, I can say is not true. There are subcategories of anarchism that do receive direct criticism. Here's me and another user doing that, as an example.

It's a welcome sight to see this play out like this, instead of the /c/slop reaction which is usually the case. Unfortunately 90% of the time, I see the slop approach.

You are right, but this is part of why I said we (as in the communities, or at least you and HB) would need to have a discussion about if what we view as reasonable.

Honestly I don't understand what kind of discussion you expect. There's no way I would censor myself from criticising authcom ideologies from the left, in the spirit of improving relations, nevermind convincing others to do so likewise.

Look, if we can't agree on the aforementioned "heinous shit," not for the sake of litigating the ban of some silly kid or removing a year-old post, but as a baseline standard for the future, then I think you and I aren't going to personally get anywhere.

What is there to agree on? If you're seriously entertaining the idea that the person is a neo-nazi for having a spicy take, or that I'm a neo-nazi for interpreting them charitably, then yes, we're not going to get anywhere.

However, should you ever decide that you want to change things with Hexbear even if it requires some sort of compromise or re-evaluation on your part

I am still unclear on what form you expect this compromise or re-evaluation could possibly take. I'm not going to censor myself to avoid criticizing ML ideology from the left, and I'm not going to take the "high road" when being bullied in the goal of "left unity". Do you have anything else in mind that I did not understand?

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 day ago

And a 100% reason to remember the name

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They probably were in this particular instance too. They would just do it in private whenever the feds come knocking.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I edited immediately actually, it took me like 10 minutes to finish writing the reply on the phone. There might be federation delays. FFS the comment I posted originally was even clearly cut off in the middle. How can you be so uncharitable?

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 days ago

ye Monkey Island was easy to photocopy :D

I remember in my local PC shop, they had a whole binder of copy-protection mechanisms they would photocopy from when they sold you a pirated game :D

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Is he still a born-again Christian with questionable takes? If so, I doubt his boomer-opinions it will be much of a renaissance.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago

Not gonna lie, that was a hilarious pwn @Xylight@lemdro.id

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 days ago

Imagine arriving there after 150 years only for the colony to fail due to a random prion in the environment.

299
Fair point (thelemmy.club)

Cross-posted from "Fair point" by @LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone in !autism@lemmy.world


22

Hello again peeps, I come back to you with more exciting news. After last months vote passed to accept quokk.au as a member of the FAF, the vote on their end only just marginally failed for a 1-vote tiebreaker. The primary reservation people expressed back then was not wanting to follow the FAF defederations/bans as many people chose quokk.au explicitly due to their defederation list, particularly of Marxist-Leninist-friendly instances like hexbear.

Given however that there was willingness from admins on both sides to collaborate and provide mutual aid to each other due to our shared values, we went back to the drawing board to find a compromise. The main issue was that we wanted a way where we didn't want to sacrifice the tight integration of the FAF proper, but there is also an option "softer" version of the flotilla integration, which is less technical and more political.

So we came down to having two different tiers of membership in the flotilla

Consorts: These are the fully integrated members of the FAF. For all accounts and purposes, they count as a single instance, as they follow the same rules, bans and federations and their members get voting rights on all proposals. I.e. the original vision I proposed.

Companions: These are the more politically-only aligned instances.

  • They don't have to follow the FAF defederations and bans so they have no say in those either. However companion instances can optionally chose to follow defederations and/or bans, which allows them to vote on them as well.
  • They can take part in the voting for rules which don't refer to deferations or bans, and they have to follow those rules (e.g. golden rules, radical admin recalls etc). They are also allowed to propose new rule changes as well for the whole FAF.
  • They get access to FAF private matrix channels and benefit from our resident technical expertise and moderation experiences.

Naturally a Companion instance can at any time become a Consort by simply on-boarding existing FAF defeds & bans and therefore immediately get future voting rights for those as well.

After we reached internal consensus on these two tiers, we then re-approached @Quokka@quokk.au to see if that would cover their reservations and we're today happy to announce that they've officially joined the FAF.

On a personal note: It's been always my passion to grow a system that is not only technically robust, but also politically as well, and the only way we can achieve this is by reinforcing the mutual aid ties between aligned actors, while providing enough independence for self-expression. This is yet another step in that direction and I hope it can lead to more versatile fediverse structures like feeler networks and whatnot.

130
I want to believe (thelemmy.club)
833
Then & Now (thelemmy.club)
86

Cross-posted from "What's it like for you?" by @LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone in !autism@lemmy.world


407
How it started (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
1121
We beat 'em before (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
28
23

Includes a very interesting section in the middle how community organizing is very efficient at stopping violence and how they do it.

358
The ultimate centrist (thelemmy.club)

Cross-posted from "The ultimate centrist" by @corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net in !chapotraphouse@hexbear.net


These two things are the same i-love-not-thinking

445
view more: next ›

db0

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF