Just another commie computer nerd.

If I offend you please PM me and we can discuss it, I’m young and things come out wrong so I probably didn’t mean to offend you.

todon.nl/@jwinnie

  • 21 Posts
  • 39 Comments
Joined 2Y ago
cake
Cake day: Jul 19, 2020

help-circle
rss

Would I be able to join the IRC channel with Element/Riot? How would I do that?


Haskell a good choice for backend REST API with PostgreSQL database?
I've been looking into Haskell and it seems really good. But does it have mature and productive frameworks that handle database access, HTTP, etc., or am I better off just going with Elixir/Phoenix?

Haskell a good choice for backend REST API with PostgreSQL database?
I've been looking into Haskell and it seems really good. But does it have mature and productive frameworks that handle database access, HTTP, etc., or am I better off just going with Elixir/Phoenix?

Well, not all hackers are anarchists (in fact I don’t think the majority of hackers are). So I didn’t want to put it there.

For example, ESR is a classical liberal, many of the hackers who post are Marxist-Leninists, and there are even some hackers who are conservative.




Manjaro has done some shady things. I think Mobian is more promising.

https://lemmy.ml/post/38078


Earthlings United, a utopian community over the internet
I'm trying to start this thing. Let me know what you think, and please join if you agree!


Accelerationism is not a good political philosophy
Making things worse in the short term in the hope of bringing about a utopian society in the long term through social tension and misery... that sounds like a pretty evil philosophy to me. Ordinary people (non-communists) don't care about some theoretical utopia, they want improvements to their quality of life now. Am I missing something?

If anarchy means no laws or anything,

Wait wait wait. Anarchy means lack of hierarchy, not lack of laws. Put very simply, anarchism is a philosophy that combines revolutionary socialism with egalitarian direct democracy and a libertarian commitment to individual freedom.

what if people naturally form their own governments? Is that not allowed?

The hope is that once people experience anarchy they won’t want to go back. Forming your own government is allowed as long as you get the consent of the governed (which is not likely in a successful anarchist society because people would be perfectly happy not to be governed)

won’t the people with the most physical power rule the world?

No, the people with the most numbers rule the world. Because one man/woman with lots of physical power is no match for a mob. Dictators don’t rise by strong-arming the populace, they rise by gaining the support of the populace.


Surprised that Scala and Haskell are so low on that list, given all the hype for functional programming. And Elixir/Erlang aren’t even on the list


Nobody was getting rich off the workers in USSR. There was no generational wealth, and top pay was capped at 8x lowest pay. Politicians and administrators also weren’t the highest paid professions in USSR. Labour was predominantly directed towards socially useful work and the benefit of the state.

Do you have any unbiased, well-researched sources for this (not USSR propaganda)?

I’m open to suggestion as to how a better system could be formed, but I have not seen any working alternatives so far. The reality is that the world is ruled by capitalist empires that will actively work to tear down any socialist nations as soon as they form. Any more liberal alternative to Marxism-Leninism has to be able to defend against that.

The whole idea of “socialist nations” is very antiquated and impractical; instead of building “socialist nations” through violent revolution, we should aim for socialist spaces within the framework of a pluralistic society. If people can experience multiple systems of social organization for themselves, they will be able to decide for themselves which one is superior. For example, we should build free software (like Mastodon), we should build co-operatives and communes, we should establish info-shops and bookstores, etc. Eventually, when people realize that socialist societies can succeed at small scale, they will be more willing to support us, and our spaces will grow in power. Only at the point where the majority agrees with socialism can we begin talking about breaking away from the state, i.e. revolution.


Why do they write system monitors in Python? Do people realize that when I’m checking a system monitor that means my computer is running slowly, and I don’t need a super heavy Python script to make it run even slower?


When people think of socialism they think of pictures of gray buildings and limited variety in clothes and consumer goods.

Are you sure? Because I think of something like this:

New Urbanism with public transportation


I’d argue that we have clear evidence that the communist model works quite well in the physical world. Consider what USSR managed to accomplish in an incredibly short period of time. Russia went from a backwards agrarian society under Tsarism, through the devastation of WW2, to being the first nation in space. USSR was a world leader in technology, and it was doing it on a far smaller budget than capitalist US.

I would argue that the USSR was not truly communist or socialist since it also exploited workers - it was just the government exploiting workers, instead of private corporations. Russia’s rapid industrialization was due to the fact that Stalin was literally willing to mass murder peasants who didn’t give up all their grain to the government so the government could give it to factories and industrial projects - a policy that was incredibly brutal, but worked.

A pattern I’ve noticed in history is that the speed of industrialization is dependent mostly on how much state power is aligned with the bourgeoisie (in “communist” countries they may not call themselves the bourgeoisie but they certainly act like it, pursuing “development” and “progress” over all else). In Britain, the enclosure movement used massive state power to force peasants to give their land to large landowners to be farmed more efficiently and forced peasants into the city to take up miserable factory jobs. In the Soviet Union, Stalin’s forced collectivization and grain confiscation did the same. And today in China, the same is being done.

In many ways Marx was very right. Nobody but the bourgeoisie (or a “communist” party that acts like the bourgeoisie) can successfully pursue industrialization, because a (democratic) socialist government would never have the brutality and coercion required to successfully force a drastic and unprecedented change of lifestyle for the majority of the population.

While it’s true that mass scale exploitation under capitalism can increase the amount labour that’s generated, a lot of that labor ends up being applied towards things that have questionable value to society. As with your example of clothing production. Capitalist model creates a huge amount of waste because companies need to continue selling new clothing. A socialist model would simply produce less clothing that lasts longer, which is far more efficient.

Touché. Agree on that one.


Geoffrey Knauth elected Free Software Foundation president
From the looks of it this man is not nearly as legendary as Stallman. This is very unfortunate indeed.

Guess it’s time to whip out EMACS like a real hacker…

Sadly I can’t figure out how to configure any editor but VSCode to have decently ergonomic IDE like features, so it’s VSCode for now :(


  • Google with Chrome OS (Gentoo, Wayland, GNU/Linux and a ton of other open-source apps and libraries) and Android (Linux)
  • Most web servers run open source operating systems (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, GNU/Linux)
  • Widely used languages in proprietary software development: C/C++ (GNU Compiler Collection, clang/LLVM, GNU libc, Boost, and a ton of major math/graphics/etc libraries), Python (cpython, Django, numpy), Ruby (Rails), and PHP
  • WebKit (Safari) is a fork of KHTML, and Blink (Chromium) is a fork of WebKit, so both Chrome and Safari are based on KHTML, which was a (now discontinued) open-source browser engine developed by the KDE project
  • Darwin (foundation for macOS, iOS) is derived from BSD

These are just a few examples off the top of my head. There are many more.


Capitalist efficiency and tech
People say capitalism is efficient, yet Twitter has around 5,OOO employees while Mastodon was built pretty much single handedly by Eugene Rochko. Today, Mastodon provides a strictly superior user experience with only a handful of contributors. Majority of effort at Twitter is directed towards things like ads and tracking that are actively harmful from user perspective. Meanwhile, the core functionality of the platform that benefits the users can be implemented with a small fraction of the effort. Seems to me that capitalism is actually far more inefficient than open source development in practice.

Many people (e.g. Eric S Raymond) would argue that this type of efficiency gain from switching to a communist economic model is only experienced in the software industry. The reasoning behind that would be that software (and other digital contentworks) has special traits: it is cheap to produce and infinitely reproducible (the economics of free software are essentially post-scarcity economics).

On the other hand, certain industries, like the mass production of clothing and mining for precious metals, would massively lose out as a result of a communist economic model because they can no longer extract maximum value from laborers by underpaying them and must provide quality working conditions, which would result in a decrease in productivity. Additionally, there would be an allocational problem: if a resource is scarce, where should it be sent, and for what purpose should it be used?

It should be noted that I’m not intending to criticize socialism in any way - it’s just that socialists should gain a better understanding of economics so that socialism can be presented as a highly sophisticated alternative economic system rather than some knee-jerk ramblings.

EDIT: Crossposted your post to /c/debatepolitics in a shameless effort to promote my community :)



It’s a replacement for UNIX users. Basically, instead of adding yourself to /etc/passwd, you create a file called /home/<username>.home. This file is an encrypted archive containing your home folder and a file called .identity that contains your group memberships and other user attributes.

The idea is that you can pick up your “home file” and plop it on any system with systemd-homed and it should work without further intervention. It also makes it incredibly easy to encrypt your home directory.


Oh goodness, I write TypeScript in VSCode, use Github at times, and package with NPM. Microsoft has got me!


I license all my open source server code with the AGPL, and all the better if Google can’t steal my work :smiling face with sunglasses:


Kate and KDevelop aren’t half bad and they’re pretty lightweight, although I personally use VSCode because of intellisense support for a variety of languages.








TL;DR jonathon (treasurer) was removed from the OpenCollective after they had a big argument with philm (project lead) over whether or not to authorize the purchase of a $2,000 laptop. After that jonathon posted his grievances on the Manjaro forum, to which philm responded by delisting the thread and removing jonathan as moderator of the forum.

digiKam 7.0.0 released
Major features include facial recognition with machine learning and increased support for different image formats.





Definitions
pin
Hello! There are a lot of misconceptions around what different political terms mean, so, in the interest of clear and cogent debate, I thought I'd make a post to clear them up. Please comment if you find any of the explanations insufficient or inaccurate. ## Economic Systems - **Capitalism** is an economic system where investors pool their resources to fund corporations, which generate profits to give back to the investors. In a capitalist economic system, corporations are incentivized to maximize profits. Capitalism is currently the hegemonic economic system in the world. - **Socialism** (also known as "economic democracy") is a proposed economic system similar to capitalism but with public investments taking the place of private investments. In a socialist economic system, corporations are incentivized to improve society. A variety of socialist economic models exist; some propose a market system with competing democratically-managed corporations, whereas others propose a command economy with central planning. Socialist and semi-socialist economic models have been attempted with various degrees of success throughout history. - **Communism** is a proposed economic system with all property held in common, following the principle "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Communism has been attempted with various degrees of success throughout history. Someone who wishes to implement a communist economic system is a **communist.** ## Political Philosophies - **Leftists** want to improve society to get closer to a theoretical utopia. - **Rightists** want to keep the current system and are skeptical of utopian thinking. - **Radicals** want to quickly and fundamentally change society, typically through revolutionary action. - **Moderates** want to change society gradually and incrementally and work for change within the existing system. - **Fascism** (radical rightist) is a political philosophy that holds that modern liberal individualism has undermined societal strength. Fascists wish to "revitalize" their country and return it to an idealized past by establishing a "totalitarian" one-party state, achieving autarky by nationalizing industry, and pursuing an imperialist foreign policy. **National Socialism** (also known as Nazism) is a variant of Fascism that holds that some races are superior to others and that inferior races must be eliminated through eugenics. - **Conservatism** (moderate rightist) is a political philosophy that holds that the current political and economic system cannot be significantly improved, and any attempts at change will inevitably lead back to the current system due to the inflexibility of human nature. **Classical conservatives** oppose democracy due to the belief that people are too stupid to make decisions for themselves, and oppose capitalism due to its excessive individualism and consumerism. Instead, classical conservatives support some form of monarchism, theocracy, and/or oligarchy. On the other hand, **neoconservatives** (also known as liberal conservatives) have a more open attitude towards liberal concepts like representative democracy and capitalism, considering them to be proven mechanisms to organize a stable society. Historically, most societies have been classically conservative, but neoconservatism has eclipsed classical conservatism's role in modern society and is now very popular in the United States and much of Europe. - **Liberalism** (historically moderate leftist; now considered centrist) is a political philosophy that holds that all humans have fundamental rights and governments only have legitimacy when they respect these rights. Liberalism is generally said to have three historical phases: classical liberalism, social liberalism, and neoliberalism. **Classical liberals** (also known as right-libertarians or libertarian capitalists) want an unregulated free-market economy with minimal government intervention. **Social liberals** want the government to intervene in the economy to promote social justice and reduce economic inequality. **Neoliberals** want the government to intervene in the economy to promote capitalism and economic development. - **Social democracy** (moderate leftist) is a political philosophy derived from Marxism. Rather than overthrow and eliminate the bourgeoisie, Social Democrats seek to improve the welfare of the working class in the short term by building a robust welfare state and regulating predatory businesses, and improve the bargaining power of the working class by strengthening trade unions. Social Democracy is the dominant political philosophy in many European and Latin American countries, and is gaining popularity in the United States. - **Marxism** (radical leftist) is a political philosophy based on the writings of Karl Marx. Marxists claim that liberal democracy is actually a "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie," in which the wealthy control the government and use it as a tool to oppress the poor. They believe that the working class (the "proletariat") needs to overthrow all governments and establish a global "dictatorship of the proletariat" instead, which will oversee the transition to a socialist economic system. **Orthodox Marxists** (also known as "council communists" or "democratic socialists") believe that the dictatorship of the proletariat is by nature democratic and should by governed by workers' councils with free elections, whereas **Marxist-Leninists** interpret the dictatorship of the proletariat as a highly organized literal dictatorship led by a Communist Party that suppresses dissent but allows internal debate. Most "communist" states of the 20th century were Marxist-Leninist. Democratic socialism has never been implemented in practice. - **Anarchism** (radical leftist) is a political philosophy that attempts to eliminate all hierarchy, domination, and inequality. To that end, anarchists are "anti-state and anti-capitalist," that is, anarchists want to find out ways to replace the government as well as hierarchical corporations with institutions that value every single person equally and don't allow anyone to have power over another. Anarchism has been attempted at various times at small scales but has never seen great success. ## Additional Notes - Libertarianism can mean both a more radical variant of classical liberalism or a more moderate variant of anarchism. As such, the term "libertarian" should be avoided when discussing politics with a diverse group of people. - Not all socialists/leftists are alike, and similarly not all capitalists/rightists are alike. So please don't say something like "socialists are really just ultra-authoritarian Soviet apologists" or "classical liberals are really just fascists"; that would make you not only wrong, but also fallacious since it's a strawman argument.
5

/c/debatepolitics, for friendly debates about political theory
There are a lot of political debate subs on Reddit (r/debateanarchism, r/debatecommunism, r/CapitalismVSocialism, etc.) but none on Lemmy. So I made one!