Being correct is 0% retarded

Calling it a "face diaper" is 1000% retarded

Viruses aren't magic, a virus needs to touch you in order to infect you no matter what level of lab it came out of

I think you're facing very fine-tuned targeting that you've never faced before (because of your recent work on nostr) and it can be unbelievable how fine-tuned it gets.

Like, as insane as it sounds, I think that certificate was invalid just to fuck with you.

You're incorrect. Masks help prevent the spread of viruses, especially airborne respiratory system ones like COVID

I think a lot of "wondering what he will do next" is just empathizing with him and being excited to find out where his life is going, m8. If he's just gonna chill with his kids and be a retired journalist, that's still exciting - he's finally free.

For now there's also https://w3.do (if it works)

Llama is not open source. It might be source-available, I'm not quite sure. Source-available is good too, just important to distinguish 👍

You're having cognitive dissonance or something. Get a grip.

The people who built the platforms you're using gave them to you and largely ban me from them. Nostr is an attempt to resist this.

I have time to think about building platforms AND think about who is giving who what, with what permissions. These topics matter and are worth time.

There are many people with guns stopping me from "taking control of a sovereign platform." Look up the FCC. You're sucking big tech dick for the people who use that tech to do censorship.

Without a group, you definitely cannot claim sovereignty over communication infrastructure in this day and age. I have zero faith in one individual's ability to BOTH assassinate the president AND keep a server online indefinitely. I also can't think of any other possibilities where one of the other possible ways to exert sovereignty would be compatible with keeping a server online for one person. If you're only one person, you must just be using the shared communication infrastructure that belongs to everyone, where everyone needs help overthrowing the saboteurs running it.

Tug-of-wars are a common exercise in military training.

One technique is to show a brief burst of weakness, just long enough to make the opponents think they can relax, while actually repositioning one's footing to do a harder pullback in the next moment after.

If the opponent simply keeps pulling as hard as they can, this gambit may fail. It relies on the opponent being tired and less aggressive.

This is the American military industrial complex freeing #Assange - it's an instant of slack in the line and it will make people relax before the next, more intense pullback.

Not me. I'm very reassured by the news that the American military industrial complex is struggling so badly they need to try a gambit like this. I'm not relaxed by it. I know it's a sure sign this is the time for powering on at full throttle.

I meant private server operators in particular here. A much easier approach is to just not see your communication infrastructure as sovereign property because you haven't earned it with sovereign authority since your group doesn't have anyone willing to take one for the team by assassinating the president to assert your right to sovereign communication infrastructure.

If you have an online server or pay lots of cloud server bills, you're in on the global scheme to control communication infrastructure. It's moved from TV and radio to the internet but it's still the same thing - give those who are part of the club a platform, ban enemies from the platform, give the platform extremely imbalanced impact over public discussion partly by pretending it's much more inclusive and representative of the general public than it really is (hiding the censorship and exclusion as much as possible).

Again, if people want sovereign property that's also communication infrastructure, it would be best to work in a team where one person assassinates the president and the others fund the servers, condone the assassination on the basis that people who can't afford centralized online storage are banned from storing and transmitting their own shit, and challenge any attempts to shut them down on a first amendment basis, so that the servers can operate without the operators being in on the censorship.

Nobody has done that, so server operators are basically just a textbook example of typical petrodollar transactions saying "I'm so ready for the mass deaths we're heading for, I'm not even thinking for 2 seconds about where my money goes."

Nobody is coming after private server owners, much less random cloud storage customers. Most people don't care about petty issues like that, and even to someone like me who does care, it's still a petty issue. However, I think we're right smack at the brink of a big population collapse and everyone's choices impact. Petty shit like this will cause indirect consequences, hence the obligation, not with any direct consequences attached.

We only half agree. I'm saying I'm a commie and I will look down on anyone who sees communication infrastructure as sovereign individual property in an era where it's got bullshit centralized censorship going on and everyone should be focused on solving that. Furthermore, we're going into world war 3 and all this bullshit censorship is ultimately people choosing to fight because they can't handle hearing each other's ideas to solve differences in life.

I bet there will be at least one brilliant AI movie written and carefully sculpted by a homeless person and then lost to time. Could even be you or me, you never know.

But not everyone has empathy so I focus on the brutal reality of how this shit is gonna end up.

"Ballot or bullet, you better choose one."

When Killer Mike wrote that sentence, he was mainly saying every individual must uphold their duty as a member of a democracy, and if they truly feel ballots are not a way to make any difference, then they must be ready to fight.

In the case of people who own servers or can afford to host all their content on the cloud or whatever, these are the people who control communication infrastructure. The choice between "ballot or bullet" isn't just individual when you control communication infrastructure. The holders of a centralized, censored communication infrastructure must choose between the ballot or the bullet for which type of votes they would like cast and counted in general, not only in their own case. If you'd like to decide winners by counting ballots instead of bullets, and you own a server or can afford all the cloud hosting you can think of uses for, then you must try not to let that movie be lost to time whether you care about the movie or the person or not.

And we do all have responsibility to each other as humans - that's why I hope you don't put yourself in a position to starve to death because other people's file sizes hurt your fee fees.

You fail to wrap your head around the simple premise I'm explaining.

When you control communication infrastructure, and you use that control to limit democratic discourse, you are increasing the other kind of democracy. It's an inherent reality of living in a physical world with other humans.

Web of trust wouldn't rely on an algorithm to develop a worldview. That sounds more like "web of algorithmic worldview." A web of trust would rely on an algorithm to sort content. The words you're using aren't making sense because you're trying to mask bullshit.

What about homeless people, who neither have much infrastructure, nor can afford much food? If a homeless person makes a movie, you're ok with them being at risk of their work being lost before it enters the cultural record and starts being preserved by people, because you're allowed to have sufficient infrastructure for all your own files but the homeless can only afford solid hosting for text?

If you have a lot of infrastructure and you haven't done anything to protect me from the people stopping me from doing the same, and I don't have enough food for both of us, why should I go malnourished instead of letting you die?

Do you grow food?