The problem is their behavior and rhetoric towards Palestine resembles a sentiment shared by the OG Nazis

If i could take a moment to cite the opening to the lords prayer:

Our Father who art in heaven,

hallowed be thy name.

Thy kingdom come.

Thy will be done

on earth as it is in heaven.

The ability to make one being a christian not by default be a socialist as well is a continuous theological labor for the capitalist

The world is cheering that the world pedo protecting org is not using its political influence to spread further political disarray. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good

Every church has the potential to become the a mutual aide community. It’s what Jesus would have wanted

In an attempt to be more moderate: i think it is impolite to regurgitate the words of an LLM in a forum where we are expecting the dialogue to be between humans.

But if the child is well bonded, how will he grow up to be an insecure, dependable consumer?

Maybe he is insinuating that women are demons

Maybe, just maybe, we should stop the known arsonist - who has declared they are going to burn all our houses down and is now gleefully walking to our neighborhood with a can of gasoline and a blow torch - before they get to the first house

I mean, we’re talking about taking the wealth and distributing it for more constructive purposes, if it doesn’t demolish a handful of fortune 500s in the process we’ve made a mistake. Those fortunes would then be able to be used to take all the workers pointlessly generating wealth for the billionaire class and start working on socially useful ventures

You have a product that needs to be sold just as much as google needed to sell gmail. This is where the technical rubber meets the social road. It is a given that not everyone will want to host their services, so to get the network effect people need to use your instance.

With that in mind, first and foremost you should treat your services you host almost like a product: you do need to sell it, it needs to be maintained it, and if other people get onboard you can’t just get bored of it and put it down. Your product is niche and competes with the largest corporate entities out there, but you have the advantage that you can genuinely personally know your customers and your customers can personally and genuinely know you.

I spend considerable thought on this, unless you are talking about household members or other people who trust you borderline absolutely, there is just no way to get a stranger or acquaintance to meaningfully use your hosted services.

For the stuff i host that i can share from my hosted services i make it apparent to the users that the data is subject to my whims. think this helps a little as it puts the otherwise unstated in the open, it would be awkward for a friend to have to ask me how safe their data is, i can acknowledge their data is as safe as their relationship with me is, and honestly that’s the best that can be done without structuring.

Now structuring: if you genuinely want members of your communities to be able to buy in, become consistent and stable with your services operations, a d make a legal entity. Use the entity to provide what you have as a service to have the legal structures in place to protect you and your users. If you think this is bullshit, i don’t recommend because i think the structures will protect anything, i recommend because the structures indicate trustworthiness to the type of people who don’t make themselves concerned with matters they are instructed to not bother with. You would be able to make an appeal to a more personal business relationship.

Now that highlights the effort, as the privacy advocate i functionally have to operate a business to maintain my digital infrastructure; if i want others to join my network i should commit and run a privacy-centric business. There is opportunity here for standard operational models to be documented so that power users can quickly bootstrap and present an adoptable platform to their communities; however, i am not there yet myself.

I mean, the whole “startups are doing x” is really code for “venture dollars have been made available for entrepreneurs to explore x”. Startups these days are chasing fields which have investment dollars, so this means the rich are starting to invest in the tech a little more earnestly

I mean, who else was gonna do it?

Way to dehumanize the homeless, buddy

I would like to subscribe to this level of rational social design

The Onion has never been much of one to boot-lick. The only way to believe this is a justifiable military response to terrorism to ignore historical context or believe one of the groups is inherently less valuable than the other; Both perspectives are anti-human.

I beg to differ on the abject lack of aesthetic consideration. I’ve skimmed through old construction manuals and from even the surface it seems old masters of the building craft were obsessed with the blending of aesthetics and function

I’m torn on how to approach this, i’m left with a couple of options:

A) so Trump would somehow be even less self defeating?

B) are you suggesting we should all spontaneously rise up and overthrow the military industrial complex?

C) if you think this world view is self defeating then:

C.1) you owe some clarifying thoughts as to how you see a measured response to the existing democratic systems as self defeating

C.2) you appear to be making yourself out as someone who idealizes violence and oppression

C.3) you appear to be using contrarian language with the explicit purpose of dragging down the mood of the conversation. Quit that shit

This is why i refuse to use self check out. If they wont trust me to do the job my way i wont do it for free.

I think you need to work on expanding your political theory into more dimensions

I can’t imagine any would, that is an abstraction developed by not-conservatives trying to wrap head around conservative actions. To have a conservative in power say so overtly would fuel the people being oppressed into coordinated resistance and disgust fence sitters into voting against conservatism