From: oldernow@dev.null
On 2024-04-08, D wrote:
> Interesting! I did have an idea once to write my own usenet
> based on scp transfers.
Best intentions are theoretically a wonderful thing.
> Haha, did you ever check out the abomination called
> Matrix? It's a modern chat protocol that supports regular
> chat, audio _and_ video and many many other things. I
> cannot think of a better example of "boil protocol oceans"
> than that.
Never heard of Matrix. Or *that* Matrix. You know.
> I always wonder what's wrong with IRC for chatting? And
> I am very much opposed to pulling in all functionality in
> one and the same software. I think that's a great recipe
> to make sure your software will be full of exploits and
> security holes. ;)
There's nothing wrong with IRC. There's something wrong with people:
in this case both the "not remaining happy with a good thing" part,
and the "that we need to waste time / energy / effort guarding
against exploits and filling security holes" part.
Whenever I overhear someone bellyaching about us/our needing to
change socio-political systems, I pull out the keys in my front
right pocket and go, "fix our needing *this* first, *then* we'll
see if we need all *that*"....
More fundamentally, there's no meta fix - aka bandage - for
untrustworthiness. It must be fixed at the source.
There are subtle types of untrustworthiness that might not seem as
such, but "add up".
For example, I find a Gemini post I like, then go deeper into the
capsule, rejoice at finding email contact information, take the
time to write, and then *never* hear back.
Sum/integrate that effect over the entire space, and to me it appears
that Geminauts are mostly people I can't take at their word, because
per experience - which is all I have in the evidence department -
they give the appearance of being available for correspondence when
they aren't.
But, see... I'm not talking about people "trying harder". I'm talking
about people fixing that which makes untrustworthiness the default
behavior, because then - in this example - we don't have to think
twice or a dozen times about whether spending time replying will
be in vain, leading to a growing sense of trying-to-community not
being worth the effort.
> Ahh, got it! Yes, the philosophers of alt.philosophy do
> seems to be soundly asleep most of the time. =(
From one point of view, it's just an arbitrary label. From another,
posting outside its implied limits is admittedly just more of the
disingenuity I just got done hypocritically railing against....
So much complication, so little time.
But, hey, it led to interaction, so I'm suddenly pretty high on
ends justifying means....
> Did you ever read Nietzsche? I just finished reading the
> Joyful sciences and 50% is madness and among the other
> 50% I have to say that he is pretty much spot on on some
> things. If I put on my existentialist glasses, I'd say he
> does a much better job than Sartre for instance, where I
> don't understand a word of what the man is saying.
The only European I recall getting with in a more than a little way
was Schopenhauer. But I don't remember any of it except the look
of his face on my copy of "The World As Will and Representation" (?).
(Or was it "copies"? Was that a two volume thingie? I'm suddenly
remembering one paperback cover being red, the other blue....)
My vague recollection with abandoning European-ish philosophies
was their always feeling intensely "tl;dr".
But I guess that's actually more a reflection of my impatience....
--
oldernow
xyz001 at nym.hush.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
