Thank you! I know you previously did not block any instances, but I believe this is the right choice.

Great news! I can confirm it is on the blocked instances list at Tchncs. Thanks for the update. I’ve removed it from the list.

Fuck yeah!

The stuff you’ve put up so far looks great! This is a wonderful initiative.

I’m glad you’re exploring uploading your videos to places besides Google’s walled garden. What do you think of Peertube?

Even taking the Chinese government at its word, they’re getting ~60% of their energy from Coal, and are opening new coal-fired power plants at a pace not matched by any other industrialized country. Framing their solar adventures as anything other than supplementary power for their growing fossil fuel economy is wildly irresponsible. China is #1 producing 3x the CO2 as the next largest producer (United States) and they’re not resting on their laurels.

People in the pro-Xi camp might claim China is planning to transition to renewables based on the rate of growth of their alternative energy sector, but that’s not a claim the Party has ever made or is likely to make. Their top priority is growing their economy, preventing global warming isn’t even on the list. They over-produced solar because it seemed like the west was signalling they were going in that direction, but now that demand is depressed, they’re likely to cut back production. Based on the Chinese government numbers on installed capacity vs. actual solar energy power use, they’re sending surplus panels to the Tibetan desert to rot.

The reporters at NPR are pining for more competent authoritarians. They don’t care about global warming either, or they’d do actual journalism on the subject.

I realized you are hex, are you also Kairos? That’s exciting, and I’m happy to be a part of it. “A sufficiently advanced disaster preparedness and response program is indistinguishable from a revolutionary counter-power” is a great quote that obviously pays homage to Clarke’s third law, and is delightfully pithy and original.

I agree and I’m aware it has negative connotations – it is inseparable from modern methods of administering power. Without records, how can you demonstrate you’re distributing resources equitably? I recognize that my role as admin is basically an anarchist bureaucrat – approving applications, responding to reports, writing reports on progress for the community each month; it’s done digitally now, but it’s the stuff that would otherwise be the paperwork for which bureaucracy was made famous.

Bureaucracy was invented in France during the reign of kings, in hopes that it might quell the frequent revolutionary uprisings. It used to be that the only way you could get a license to do anything was through an audience with the king, or access via one of his courtiers – a role similar to modern lobbyists. This exclusivity of access meant the richest and most well connected were granted corporate charters, business licenses, or land titles, creating extremely stark class division between the bourgeoisie and even the petit bourgeoisie.

The role of bureaucracy (named after the drawers where they kept the mountains of paper this activity generated) was to ‘democratize’ distribution of licensing and grants to everyone based on meeting the same requirements and paying the same fees. It was popular enough to get grafted into the organs of the new republic once one of the uprisings hit the mark.

It was ‘democratic’ in the same sense that electoral ‘democracy’ is democratic - that is, it is closer to the ideal of freedom than autocratic rule. But citizens are still vulnerable to the whims of tyrannical bureaucrats. Even at the local level and at small scale, a bureaucrat can do a lot of damage if there isn’t popular power prepared to resist him.

For example in Chennai, the Zero Rupee was invented to build popular power against a culture of compulsive bribery that is endemic to all levels of the state bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is a burden that’s accepted because the alternative is clearly worse, like the French kings of old. But all bureaucracies are not the same, and merely making them smaller or ‘distributed’ does not solve the problems that can arise when they are not open to public challenge.

The primary purpose of distribution centers is to serve capital, and there are plenty of private libraries. In the case of a library or dispensary, a bureaucracy can definitely increase the equanimity of the distribution of wealth in a society, but that relies on both the bureaucrats and the public they are supposed to serve to be willing to fight for that ideal.

I think wider discussion of micro-bureaucracies would be valuable. During the November meta, a member requested some kind of vote on our descision to defederate nazi instances, which I think was adequately discussed and concluded. It stood out to me that the member objected to my description of voting in this manner as ‘bureaucratic’ – a word I felt I was using descriptively, but was interpreted as pejorative. I think it’s interesting that different people have different definitions of bureaucracy.

What is bureaucracy?

Yikes.

That’s awesome! Thanks @[email protected] for stepping up :)

I think you’re categorizing cycling as cardio because that’s what happens on a stationary bike at the gym. When you’re riding a bike in the wild, you frequently come to a complete stop and then have to bring it up to speed again. Even at a high gearing ratio, this is not a slow-twitch muscle activity. With increased load like additional cargo, the resistance is even more significant.

No more math!

LOL

I really like this quote, but it is not anywhere else online outside of this video:

After chiding activists who warned years ago of the Republican Party’s descent into outright fascism, mainstream Democrats have now fully embraced the accusation. It’s become difficult to find a single Democrat campaign appeal that doesn’t lean hard on the warning that the Trump wing of the GOP – which is now the only viable wing of the GOP – represents an existential threat to democracy, the United States itself. Fight it, then propose something to meet the nature of the movement.

It can’t be the case that both the Supreme Court is an unaccountable neoconservative body intent on rendering the whole country unrecognizable and that there’s simply no way to do anything about it. It can’t be that climate change is the single most important issue facing the world, with our entire species at risk, and drilling licenses need to continue.

It can’t be that innocent Palestinians have faced unbearable suffering and we care very deeply about their plight and absolutely nothing will stop the arming of the nation responsible. It can’t be both rhetorical urgency and policymaking impotence.

What the mainstream Democrat seems incapabale of accepting is that, for an even remotely functioning conscience, there exists a point beyond which relative harm can no longer offset absolute evil. For a lot of people, genocide is that point. Suddenly, another very persuasive argument takes on a different meaning: ‘Vote the liberals though he harms you because the conservative will harm you more’ starts to sound a lot like ‘Vote for the liberal though he harms you because the conservative might harm me, too.’

In reality, not a single Western politician or party, not a single government anywhere in the world, can be expected to change when constantly rewarded this way. The argument in favor of voting for the lesser evil is frequently made in good faith, by people who have plenty to lose should the greater evil win. But it also establishes the lowest of benchmarks: Want my vote? Be less monstrous than the monster.

One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This by Omar El Akkad

This is a long video that’s worth watching all the way through. But the section you’re referencing hopefully can stand on its own without the context of the rest of the video.

I think that would be a good idea too. Would you like to play a role in developing SLRPNK’s style guidelines?

Boosted: https://slrpnk.net/post/30070139

I’m glad you said something. I don’t mind so much when pieces that are critical of solarpunk or a corruption of the aesthetic are occasionally posted here because it gives the community an opportunity to define itself against those representations. I tend to skip over them myself though. I think introspection and criticism are core to the Solarpunk ideal, and I’m glad this essay was a fresh carafe of that tea.

Thank you for your efforts to make reading news more accessible to the Fediverse, including frequently sharing gift articles from paywalled publications.