• 11 Posts
  • 305 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 28th, 2023

help-circle




  • What you are saying is only applicable for North America/ Europe. Liberalism is already the status quo there, which is why liberals defend it. However what is liberalism in the first place?

    Liberalism: “Regulated capitalism is the least bad economic system. Also, the state shouldn’t encroach upon the personal matters of an individual.”

    Leftists: “Capitalism is the cause of all problems. Fuck capitalism. The eventual goal should be to have a stateless, classless society. However, we disagree quite a lot on how to achieve this goal. This goal is called communism. Some of us say that we should do a violent revolution. Some of us believe that we can abolish capitalism using democratic processes. Some of us believe that to achieve communism, we need a temporary powerful state led by smart people, intellectuals, etc. to achieve material conditions necessary for communism. Some of us believe that the previous idea is absolute dog shit, and instead, we can achieve communism slowly, using non state actors like cooperatives, unions, syndicates and so on.”

    Conservatives: “Capitalism is good. The morals and traditions of our ancestors were better than the ones coming up now, and deviating from them would cause a lot of harm. We need to take steps to conserve these ideas.”

    Fascists: “All problems in society are because of group X. We need to get rid of group X by either converting them to our ways (if possible), deporting them from our borders, or cleansing our country of them entirely by killing them. Democracy is a slow and inefficient process. We should give power to a strong, smart leader who can get things done a lot more efficiently.”



  • Ronald Reagan was a neo liberal. Would you consider him a leftist?

    Also, leftists are not democracy haters. Different groups of leftists have different stances on democracy. Anarchists for example, hate the idea of a state altogether (doesn’t matter if it’s democratic or not). Market socialists want to expand democracy in the economic sphere as well, with the help of cooperatives (be it worker, consumer, hybrid and so on).

    Marxist Leninists are a group of leftists that you could say are anti democracy (in the context that you are referring to). MLs believe that a revolution must be led by a vanguard party, i.e., a group of intellectuals, and smart people who truly understand Marxist theory. This vanguard party would form a state, create material conditions for democracy (educate the uneducated, or people brainwashed by capitalists). After the material conditions are created, you can achieve democracy and all associated nice things. Remember, this is in the context of violent revolutions, like the ones that took place in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba and so on.

    NOW, I am NOT a Marxist Leninist. I do not condone their ideas. I will not expand upon my own ideas, as that goes beyond the scope of this discussion. The point is, not all leftists are anti-democracy. Most leftists active politically at least in the west are incredibly pro-democracy, want to expand democracy or are anti state altogether (democratic or otherwise).


  • Leftists HATE capitalism. They want to replace it altogether with some alternative economic system (market socialism, planned economy or a combination of the two) depending upon the type of leftist. Differences in leftists also exist based on the HOW of replacing capitalism (violent revolution, democratic reformation and so on).

    Liberals ARE NOT leftists. Liberals believe that capitalism, with all its flaws is still the least bad economic system. They recognise some flaws of the free market and think that capitalism must be regulated to a certain extent by the government.

    So again, all leftists HATE capitalism. Liberals dislike a free market, but think that regulated capitalism is the least bad form of governance.

    Note: I know you didn’t ask this, but just wanted to clarify - capitalism ≠ market. There’s a large group of leftists called “market socialists” who want a market without the means of production owned privately.





  • Ok, good luck on your project. We’ll talk when any given peertube project (based on the donation based funding model alone) reaches break even.

    I swear I’ve reviewed the finances about this a million times over. Funding models in their current form just don’t work. Content creators getting free hosting from YouTube with huge audiences are struggling to keep themselves afloat. But whatever, good luck on your project I suppose. We really need YouTube’s monopoly to end, so ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯


  • Sure! Remember though, that you are funding this project using your own money. How much does your server cost? How much does the electricity to run your server cost? You would need Gbps speed internet. How much does that cost?

    You would be funding this out of your own pocket. Thank you for doing that! Would there be a thousand more people willing to do this? What happens if you lose your job? What happens to the server?

    As you can see, this is not a technological issue, but a funding one. If you can generate funding for this somehow, you have a very viable model! IF you can find the funding.

    I am saying that funding this would be difficult. I see people just yapping about FOSS, but not funding it when the time comes.



  • Naah I thought about this before and came to the conclusion that this isn’t that bright of an idea. Here’s why.

    Why’s video hosting so expensive in the first place? Because it needs a lot of computational power, storage and bandwidth. All three things that a mobile phone does not have. If you make your client’s mobile phone do this stuff, then you’re going to slow down their phone, make it heat up more, make it degrade faster (because it would be drawing power from the battery) and take up a huge chunk of their bandwidth.

    Think of how video calls drain battery really fast. It’s just shifting the costs of hosting from the hosting side to the consumer side while making the entire operation a lot more complicated and a lot more inefficient.



  • Depends on how you look at it. These models weren’t trained in a vacuum. They were trained on data generated by humans. They are the amalgamation of all human art throughout human history. They are a reflection of us, the way a child is a reflection of their parents.

    That being said, I am very excited for art generated by collaboration between humans and these models. I for one would love Castle Swimmer (a webcomic) to be turned into an animation. Currently, no one will fund any such project. With video gen models however, I’m very positive we would get to see this.

    The original author’s story is still there. Her characters are there, her dialogues are there. They’re just brought to life visually. I still find a lot of humanity in this.