This account is being kept for the posterity, but it won’t see further activity past February.

If you want to contact me, I’m at /u/lvxferre@mander.xyz

  • 2 Posts
  • 359 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: April 9th, 2021

help-circle








  • Persuasion itself goes from neutral to negative, depending on your moral standards. (They’re partially individual, partially cultural.) Because at the end of the day it boils down to “I want you to believe in this, because I benefit from your belief.”

    And you definitively see some backslash against this aspect of advertisement; same deal with personal communication, a person being excessively rhetoric for their own benefit is immediately labelled distrustful.

    Then over that propaganda adds further layers of nastiness, like:

    • Often, the one doing propaganda is supposed to defend your interests. Not their/its own.
    • You’ll usually need to omit and lie far more for propaganda than for other things. Because it’s usually a complex matter that involves society as a whole, not just your personal decision.
    • Since the political landscape changes, the discourse being propagated may flip 180°.

  • Let’s go simpler: what if your instance was allowed to copy the fed/defed lists from other instances, and use them (alongside simple Boolean logic plus if/then statements) to automatically decide who you’re going to federate/defederate with? That would enable caracoles and fedifams for admins who so desire, but also enable other organically grown relations.

    For example. Let’s say that you just joined the federation. And there are three instances that you somewhat trust:

    • Alice - it defederates only really problematic instances.
    • Bob and Charlie - both are a bit prone to defederate other instances on a whim, but when both defed the same instance it’s usually problematic.

    Then you could set up your defederation rules like this:

    • if Alice defed it, then defed it too.
    • else, if (Bob defed it) and (Charlie defed it), then defed it too.
    • else, federate with it.

    Of course, that would require distinguishing between manual and automatic fed/defed. You’d be able to use the manual fed/defed from other instances to create your automatic rules, to avoid deadlocks like “Alice is blocking it because Bob is blocking it, and Bob is blocking it because Alice is doing it”.




  • At the very least, I’d recommend you:

    • gloves - because you’ll get really close to that gross shit. You don’t want to touch it.
    • a sponge - it doesn’t need to be new; your old kitchen sponge is enough, just don’t use it again in the kitchen. Use the yellow side to spread the cleaning agent, and the green side to remove obnoxious grime stuck to something. (Do it gently, and only with a really old sponge, to avoid scratching the surface.)
    • a bucket - mostly to mix some soap and water.
    • a dry rag - mostly for finishing/drying. A cringey old shirt that you won’t be using again is usually enough.
    • toilet brush - don’t use the sponge to clean inside the toilet bowl; you’ll be spreading the bacteria from your shit and piss to the rest of the restroom.

    Everyone has the cleaning agents that they swear upon, so look for something that works for you. For me it’s

    • alcohol vinegar - to get rid of that brown crust in the sink (water in my city is hard as a brick) and around the shower drain. I usually apply it, wait a few minutes, then use the sponge to scrub it a bit. Then I remove the vinegar with the rag.
    • bleach - exclusively used inside the toilet bowl. I squish some bleach there, then scrub it with the toilet brush, then flush it off, making sure that there’s no bleach behind.
    • disinfecting agent - I squish a bit of that inside the toilet bowl and just leave it there. It smells good, and it gets rid of the bacteria.
    • an ammonium-based cleaning agent - I squish it on obvious grime on the walls (except the above), then scrub it with the sponge.
    • soap and water - to “wash” the walls with the sponge.
    • plain water with some disinfecting agent - to rinse it. Then I just remove the excess water with the rag and let the restroom to dry naturally (with closed doors otherwise my cats will step on the bathroom, step outside, and now I got to clean the bathroom again plus the corridor and furniture).

    Important detail: do not mix any two of the cleaning agents that I’ve mentioned. Specially not ammonium and bleach.

    For reference, the disinfecting agent that I use is called “pinho sol”, but I have no idea if it’s sold outside Brazil. You probably have some similar product wherever you live.


  • [Note: this is my personal take, not Chomsky’s]

    We can recognise colours and things even without properly labelling them. (Colour example: I have no clue on how to call the colour of my cat’s fur, but I’m fairly certain to remember thus recognise it.) However, it’s hard to handle them logically this way.

    • if you are outside and it is raining, then you get wet
    • if you get wet, you might get sick
    • so if you are outside and it is raining, you might get sick

    And at least for me this is the main role of the internal monologue. It isn’t just about repeating the state of the things, it’s about connecting pieces of info together, as if I was explaining the link to another person.

    Perhaps those without verbal internal monologue/dialogue have a more persistent innate language, that is not overwritten by common external language?

    Possible; I don’t know, really. It’s also possible that the “innate language” doesn’t really exist, only the innate ability to learn a language; but that ability is already enough to structure simple reasoning.


  • Chomsky’s concept of UG (universal grammar) is able to handle this. Since there would be a chunk of language that is innate (universal), that feral child would share it. So, as a conclusion from that, even if the feral child isn’t expressing it through vocalisation, since they lack an “application” of the UG (like Nahuatl, Mandarin, Quechua, English, Kikongo etc.), they’d still have some rather simple internal monologue.

    …that said I think that Chomsky’s UG is full of shit. I do agree with him that the faculty of language might have developed first to structure thought; but my reasoning resembles a bit more yours, the role of language would be to formalise thought. Thinking without language is possible in the same way as moving across a village without roads - it’s doable but clunky, and you’ll likely take far more effort than with proper roads/ a language.

    Not to challenge Chomsky on his own turf

    Don’t worry. Everyone and their dog challenges him. Including himself, he’s often contradicting his own earlier statements.




  • It depends a lot on what you consider “toxic”.

    If it’s just about intrusive off-topic political discussion, then I fully agree with you: it’s far more common in Lemmy than in Reddit, and sometimes it reaches a point that even people who’d otherwise enjoy discussing politics roll their eyes and say “not this shit again”.

    However, if “toxic” includes other forms of undesirable behaviour, then Lemmy is probably less toxic than Reddit. For example: while sometimes you do see here disingenuous and deliberate stupidity, “waah TL;DR!!”, the “I don’t understand” conveying disagreement, or passive aggressiveness, in Reddit they pop up all the time.

    So, what do you consider toxic? Depending on that, the other users’ experiences might be really similar or really different from yours.



  • I like it better. Sometimes you do see users being irrational, entitled/whiny or disingenuous, but it’s still way less than you’d see in Twitter or Reddit. And I’ve seen users chewing others for engaging in those three things, frankly that’s fucking great.

    However I do think that there’s lots of room to improve. I’ll mention some sore points:

    • On disagreement, some users immediately assuming that the others are stupid (lacking reasoning) or ignorant (lacking a piece of info), instead of asking themselves “am I missing something?”.
    • While witch hunters are not as bad here as in Reddit, they’re still bad. If you want to denounce people, basic reading comprehension is obligatory.
    • Excessive focus on the words being used to convey something instead of what is being conveyed.
    • “WAAAHHH TL;DR!@!@!1” is becoming more and more frequent. If it’s too long to read, it’s also too long to whine about its length.