naevaTheRat @ naevaTheRat @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Despite all my rage I'm still a rat refreshing this page.

---

Read more

Posts

40

Comments

1,547

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Some of you haven't read the bash manual and it shows.

Blow your mind to know about bang patterns. You've used !! but do you know about !$?

The luddites were proud artisans pushed too far by capitalists refusing to negotiate in good faith and governments refusing to take measures to ensure that technology was deployed in a pro-social fashion. So, yeah I suppose we are.

That's not your fault! You aren't bad at coding, and you aren't bad at learning. Coding courses and tutorials are almost never assembled by anyone with any familiarity with pedagogy and they are famously bad at teaching. Tutorial hell is everyone's experience.

If you actually want to learn, like any craft, time with your hands on the tools trying to make things is number 1. Literacy and familarity with jargon will help a lot as nothing is ever as useful as just reading the documentation and that is always dogshit.

Find a space you want to play in, like simple robots, maths puzzles, sound synthesis, simple games (godot is great for giving immediate visual feedback if you're still trying to learn the basics), embedded systems/iot devices whatever. Then set yourself simple goals, first tweaking prior art and then building your own stuff. As you gain familarity work through a good textbook like The Art of Programming or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_Interpretation_of_Computer_Programs to get some ideas of the higher principles.

And stop doing tutorials, you will learn nothing. You need to study principles not practices, practices can only really be learned through independent practise.

I believe you can do it! and doing it yourself is really rewarding and playful. Don't de-skill yourself and become dependent on a bunch of creepy fascist billionaires. Learning is a skill all skills can be improved to basic competence if you are sufficiently motivated.

I find primitivists suspect at the best of times, and ziq is hardly the best of primitivists.

God damn it ziq. You run around planting doubt and suspicion with your highly idiosyncratic approach to anarchism. You develop your ideas on a fringe forum controlled by you with content largely posted by you.

I just don't think that's a very serious approach.

Nooo lining up toy soldiers and wasting everyone's time is good when the more effective government does it.

Don't gell-mann yourself.

If it spits out plausible looking but incorrect things you notice with high frequency, how much do you not notice?

Haha fucking idiot clankerwanker.

These machines generate plausible text. That's all.

This is a contradiction. Nobody is in command unless there is violence to back up orders.

How can you lose benefits unless someone takes them. Ok I stop listening, unless someone comes and forcibly disconnects my plumbing it sounds like I still get to use it. Unless someone forced a firefighter not to extinguish a burning house of a "non citizen" it seems like they'll probably just do it anyway.

In what way is this a state?

Concretely spell out the difference between this an people self organising horizontally.

I don't understand how you envisage things like money or a company existing without the threat of violence to back them up.

Like ok, you run an election. I think your dogshit party sucks and I don't listen to them. What happens to me?

It's not clear to me that this isn't contradictory.

In what way would that be a country assuming you mean this synonymous to state?

If it doesn't have the capacity or will for coercive violence what stops it being anarchy in practice? Who enforces borders? Who stops people redistributing wealth? who makes people work in hierarchical structures?

If everyone is constantly reaffirming their voluntary association with each other by participation in a collectively decided social structure that is in fact anarchy.

If the "community policing" is violence at the will of an elite then what stops them from reestablishing a state?

In part. States have a lot of trouble understanding anything that isn't as centralised as a state. Consequently state militaries and intelligence agencies are highly specialised towards attacking these targets and going after the infrastructure they depend on.

When confronted by more horizontally organised structures they tend to get drawn into situations that become long drawn out guerrilla wars. Or playing whackamole with insurgency cells.

I didn't think I was saying anything new, just that it's a practical problem that needs solving.

What are you talking about? The only currently extant anarchish communities are in places where states are weak. Anarchists in places with highly centralised states tend to get attacked by everyone, and that's a serious problem you can't just vibes away.

Wars, even ones you win, are a tremendous drain. States tend to suck at fighting non states, but that doesn't mean it's conducive to human flourishing for the non state people. States are also moronically optimistic about their ability to "productively" war.

This isn't some fringe concern. There's any number of proposals you can read on anarchists library about how to deal with this.

It has nothing to do with being failed. If you wanted to start a democratic collective in manorialist times then yes, figuring out how not to get invaded was very important.

Lemmy has just ruined the word tankie but if you are referring to the more militant/dogmatic MLs then I would agree that I think a search for "realistic" solutions drives some of the more concerning/ardent believers.

Finding a way to defend yourself without reinventing the machinery of the state is certainly one of the larger practical problems facing anarchism.

Old mate puggy is like the embodiment of the ?mark fischer? quote "it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism".

Then again, apparently I'm a tankie and racist who's going to move to the usa to inform on people with the wrong paperwork according to one user here.

I think the search for a perfect slave is kinda disgusting. I think llms are a bad technology made in an evil way. I think pretending computers can speak is an insult to personhood, and that creating tools to generate mediocrity at scale is anti-human.

Some technologies are just bad and we should not make them.

Why do you mod this subreddit

You should post your opinions about how anarchy is when no veggies and no bedtime. How life used to be nasty brutish and short, and how without men with guns everywhere it would be all against all.

We could really stand to learn from more people who's expertise is:

• reads 5 different news outlets sometimes
• went to highschool in the the anglosphere.