@indi @Lobst Generally speaking, I understand "like" to be "non-specific noise of support of you as a person to have produced this thing." In a social media landscape as dominated by gamified systems as we've all come to expect, and with as limited a set of tools as we have to express ourselves in that space, it's about the best I'm going to get, and I've learned to stop worrying and love the Like. I can still dream of better interfaces, but I'll take what I can get in the interim. :)
@Lobst All communication carries the risk of miscommunication. The scale of miscommunication is relative to the connotative gap between parties, and generally inverse with the simplicity of the medium. Your likes don't mean what my likes mean. My likes today won't mean what my likes tomorrow mean. Functionally, "likes" are meaningless because of their deliberate ambiguity, but we're implicitly encouraged to assume they carry a consistent communicable value. I don't like them.
If you are into the Cyber.
If you are into the dystopia.
If you are into the Cyber-Occult Dystopia/Utopia we were all promised....
Why Not Neon Moon?
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pixeloccult/neon-moon-tarot
Really awesome art, and crosses that inner Shadowrunner/Cyberpunk in all of us.
I'm buying in.
@aldersprig@tootplanet.space @balrogboogie @cassolotl@dev.glitch.social It's more than just unpleasant; it's counterproductive. If we want "cis" to be a common part of speech, we have to be very careful about when and how we use it pejoratively. When one of the most common uses of the word is part of an expletive, it undercuts the argument that we're just looking for linguistic parity. It puts our text and subtext in conflict.
Social Stuff
@KawaSeadrake Personally; Telegram, Mastodon, and meat space. Discord has always made me itchy as a social space but I know it exists. Slack is still there but I sweep half a dozen channels every so often and call it a day.
@starkatt @Oneironott @packetcharmer@witches.town I can think of a few people that need in on that.
Ethics
@Azure Weird. I'll have to go back through that bit. I thought they were making more of a case for it than that, but then, this whole article is a take-down of somebody else's work, so I don't know that I think it's well-suited for positive construction of any particular argument. It feels muddy. "We didn't like what this guy said and here's a whole lot about why." Not really a good platform on which to build a constructive argument.
Ethics
@Azure The point, I suspect, is that they're trying to advocate for a position that rights are inherent to the person, rather than as a consequence of anything else. They're seeking an argument for inalienability from one's own rights that doesn't depend on either a creator or a relationship to an external force. Most ethicists start with the idea that rights "come from" somewhere, not that they're simply present as part of the innate state of embodied self-awareness.
Organised crime (in the form of health insurance).
Ah, good, we'll hear back from Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield about the appeals process in thirty days. And then, "if" we need to move to the next level of appeals, that'll take another sixty days.
I think I found the mental health crisis in this country. It's in all the people who think this is a reasonable state of affairs.
@jk *beeps unhappily because too many keys have been pressed; push F1 to continue*
@frameacloud Pooptoot.
Help us resist white nationalism in Seattle!
Help us resist white nationalists, fascists, racists and bigots in Seattle!
Date: Saturday, February 10th, 2018
Time: (early) 11am to protest event ostensibly starting at 1pm
Location: Red Square at the UW campus
@irisjaycomics Chocolate malt.
@ElectricKeet ... shenanigans.
Account inactive -- moved to weirder.earth