I think the main argument against that is that if someone is going to follow through with it either way I'd much rather them do so in a painless way with a medical professional and that allows family and friends time to process. Obviously there should be requirements like therapy and stuff first, it shouldn't be the first option presented, but if a person wants assisted death due to a mental illness that will cause them to suffer the rest of their life I don't think that should be treated much differently than a person wanting assisted death due to a physical illness that will cause them to suffer the rest of their life.

Yeah I avoid chocolate as well for that reason (at least the non fair trade/rainforest alliance, those certifications still have issues but at least they're an improvement). Coconut products made in Thailand are also typically pretty bad. Unfortunately at the end of the day it's basically impossible to not consume anything that exploits people or non-human animals at some point down the chain but I do try and avoid the most egregious ones I know about at least.

I know the show is very old at this point, but anyone thinking about watching it who hasn't already been spoiled definitely should without being so, it's 100% worth it.

It does work with Firefox plugins, there just isn't a button to open the extension "store" in the extensions settings page like stock Firefox has. You can add them by manually going to the url though, it's just recommended that you don't since that increases your risk of adding a malicious plugin or being fingerprinted, etc. I still added a few plugins that I really dislike not having though, like a password manager and darkreader, just because I valued the convenience slightly more than the added security.

Yeah, I think personally LLMs are fine for like writing a single function, or to rubber duck with for debugging or thinking through some details of your implementation, but I'd never use one to write a whole file or project. They have their uses, and I do occasionally use something like ollama to talk through a problem and get some code snippets as a starting point for something. Trying to do too much more than that is asking for problems though. It makes it way harder to debug because it becomes reading code you haven't written, it can make the code style inconsistent, and a non-insignifigant amount of the time even in short code segments it will hallucinate a non existent function or implement something incorrectly, so using it to write massive amounts of code makes that way more likely.

Worse in general or just in regard to Palestine? Obviously he's so much worse in general, which is why I did vote for Harris. But specifically on the issue of Palestine no matter what the genocide wasn't stopping, the Biden admin made it pretty clear there wasn't actually a red line Israel could cross that would end the supply of weapons, considering every one they did make was blown past with no consequences. And Harris repeatedly signified that wouldn't have changed.

But it's also not productive to try and assign blame to people who didn't vote, or voted 3rd party, though. The problem isn't that people didn't want to vote for the conservative party instead of the fascist party, its that we only had those 2 options to pick from. Obviously one of them was less harmful overall, but that doesn't make them meaningfully better for Palestine, or even a good/appealing choice. Our entire political system was built to represent slaveowners and rich white men, and that's so deeply ingrained into every aspect of its design that there's no way to move away from those roots from within the system. Even if Trump lost this time, what's stopping him from running again? Or the next version of him? Or what about the continued corporate capture of the government and both parties? None of those can just be voted away, and placing responsibility for fixing things entirely on voting just wastes time that would be better spent organizing while they continue to fester and grow.

I mean in that sort of case then the group would defer to the person more knowledgeable in that specialty, same as what happens when after brainstorming people split into small groups or volunteer for individual responsibilities. Crowdsourced decision making is meant to be for the bigger aspects, stuff like what the end goal of a project should be. Smaller, extremely specialized aspects should get handled by those best equipped for it, that's not a hierarchy. Listening to an expert is just respecting someone's knowledge, and as long as they don't have actual authority over you, then there's much less risk of corruption taking place. There's a quote from I think ~~Proudhon~~ Bakunin that I can't remember off the top of my head, I'll come back and edit this when I find it. But effectively, it boils down to the difference between authority as in power over people, and authority as in knowledge.

And people who help organize and manage jobs also don't necessarily need to be part of a hierarchy either. If the group agrees that someone is extremely effective at helping resolve conflicts or suggesting the best path to take and that sort of role is desirable for the project then that's what they should do. The difference is that they aren't in a position of power over anyone. They don't have the unilateral ability to fire someone (nor does any individual), or take away their income/ability to live. And since they don't have that power, they aren't in a hierarchical position over anyone. If they start trying to force their way without taking feedback then the group will stop listening to them and appoint someone else if they still feel that it'd be useful. Without a position of authority over people no hierarchy exists in the definition used in anarchist theory.

Edit: Thanks @[email protected]! Knew I read it somewhere on here recently.

Does it follow that I reject all authority? Far from me such a thought. In the matter of boots, I refer to the authority of the bootmaker; concerning houses, canals, or railroads, I consult that of the architect or engineer. For such or such special knowledge I apply to such or such a savant. But I allow neither the bootmaker nor the architect nor the savant to impose his authority upon me. I listen to them freely and with all the respect merited by their intelligence, their character, their knowledge, reserving always my incontestable right of criticism censure. I do not content myself with consulting authority in any special branch; I consult several; I compare their opinions, and choose that which seems to me the soundest. But I recognize no infallible authority, even in special questions; consequently, whatever respect I may have for the honesty and the sincerity of such or such an individual, I have no absolute faith in any person. Such a faith would be fatal to my reason, to my liberty, and even to the success of my undertakings; it would immediately transform me into a stupid slave, an instrument of the will and interests of others.

— Mikhail Bakunin, God and the state, Chapter 2

But yeah, respecting peoples expertise in topics, splitting up work, or appointing people to give managerial suggestions aren't hierarchical. A lack of hierarchy is not a lack of structure, it's just a lack of power and violence being used to oppress or control people. Efficient structures like these tend to naturally fall out of self-organization once the monopolies on violence used to prop up hierarchies are removed.

Yeah but that's kinda the point. Liberalism is also right-wing compared to leftists, and even on it's own is pretty firmly center to slighly right of center. Left of center only really happens at social democracies, and they're still not super far left. Obviously someone in the middle of the Democrats and Republicans will also be right-wing, since neither party is actually left of center and the Republicans are currently so far right.

Polygender!

I had to look it up the first time I saw this meme too lol. Prideflags.org is super useful to try and reverse search for a prideflag. It doesn't have this one but it tends to be the first place I go to if I don't recognize a flag.

I'll also say I'm in support of removing the "no tankie" rule. I'm all for anti-authoritarianism, but with how often tankie gets misued on Lemmy at large having the rules specifically use it always kinda felt like just a potential avenue for removing general left-wing stuff. Not that it has been used for that on 196 necessarily, or that it will be in this community, but it still feels like tankie is a loaded enough term that just having more specific rules is better.

Like you said sectarianism sucks, and right now in the US at least it I'd say solidarity is more important than ideological differences. I'm super anarchist, but if a ML is also attending protests, building mutual aid, and fighting for immigrants and trans people then who am I to exclude them when currently the more support the better. (There are arguments for why this viewpoint is wrong or right, and whether solidarity with authoritarianism in fighting existing power structures is counter-intuitive or not, but it also doesn't feel like those arguments apply as much in something like 196 imo.)

(Also 100℅ agree on adding misogyny. Obviously the list of prejudices isn't exhaustive or anything but misogyny is a big one and it feels like it should definitely be there.)

I've been thinking recently about chain of trust algorithms and decentralized moderation and am considering making a bot that functions a bit like fediseer but designed more for individual users where people can be vouched for by other users. Ideally you end up with a network where trust is generated pseudo automatically based on interactions between users and could have reports be used to gauge whether a post should be removed based on the trust level of the people making the reports vs the person getting reported. It wouldn't necessarily be a perfect system but I feel like there would be a lot of upsides to it, and could hopefully lead to mods/admins only needing to remove the most egregious stuff but anything more borderline could be handled via community consensus. (The main issue is lurkers would get ignored with this, but idk if there's a great way to avoid something like that happening tbh)

My main issue atm is how to do vouching without it being too annoying for people to keep up with. Not every instance enables downvotes, plus upvote/downvote totals in general aren't necessarily reflective of someone's trustworthiness. I'm thinking maybe it can be based on interactions, where replies to posts/comments can be ranked by a sentiment analysis model and then that positive/negative number can be used? I still don't think that's a perfect solution or anything but it would probably be a decent starting point.

If trust decays over time as well then it rewards more active members somewhat, and means that it's a lot harder to build up a bot swarm. If you wanted any significant number of accounts you'd have to have them all posting at around the same time which would be a lot more obvious an activity spike.

Idk, this was a wall of text lol, but it's something I've been considering for a while and whenever this sort of drama pops up it makes me want to work on implementing something.

This is awesome, I love random little trinkets like this. Are you planning on mounting it (idk if that's the right term lol) to some kind of jewlery or just keeping it as a figurine?