The issue with newly emerging and poorly defined professions is that I could apply to any arbitrary position of that title, pretend like I’ve got expertise in a universal structure for it (managers love structure) and sound vaguely knowledgeable (hiring managers often don’t know the subject matter).

By the time they’ve figured out that I’m not actually contributing anything of value, I’m taking off to other pastures that aren’t about to wilt, my experience serving as selling point for the next sucker to hire me.

Of course, the people I just fucked over have no way of telling whether that’s me being a fraud or whether it’s the entire profession that’s actually worthless and overhyped. Some, like you, err on the side of “I assume that person was a cunt”, while others default to “UX is completely useless”.

ADHD does track with thriving in chaos. I know that my own attention span sometimes doesn’t stick long enough to read a book.

I tend to consider it a detriment to myself, because it’s at odds with what I wish I could do. I know that others have come to better terms with it. To Tate, however, anything and everything about him has to be another indicator of his supremacy. The logic goes like this:

1: I’m unable to keep my attention on books.
2: Everything that I am is great.
Ergo: My inability to stick with books is a good thing.
Inverse: Reading books is a bad thing.
Ergo: Books are stupid and I’m just too smart.

The error lies in the second premise being universal. Whether he might have some great things or none at all is irrelevant here, but I’m sure we all agree that not everything is great. If you turned that premise into a particular “Some things that I am are great” (again, veracity is irrelevant to my point), the syllogism would no longer work and the conclusion would be invalid.

So all in all, he might have ADHD, but that doesn’t make him less of an arrogant waste of space.

Of course you can, you just have to be careful with the execution

They should be smarter and use Mastodon!

“Smart” depends on the purpose. If you want miniblogging without corporate control, sure.

If you wanna reach many people, Mastodon isn’t smarter than any of the large platforms with way more people. It sucks, but Twitter and TikTok and Instagram all have a wider audience.

That’s a low bar to clear

Which is cumbersome and sounds too clinical to convey the same gravity

That’s their point: Rape being an explicit crime makes the whole thing a legal minefield.

Accusing someone of something opens you up to being sued for defamation. Truth is a defense against defamation. If I slander my neighbour for taking photos of my bedroom windows and they sue me, I can produce the photos where they are visible in the reflection as evidence that what I said is true.

However, an accusation of committing a specific crime is considered true if and only if the defendant has been judged guilty in a court of law. Until then, they are considered innocent in the eyes of the law. Proving the truth of your accusation would first require the accused being criminally charged, tried and found guilty. By then, you might have lost the suit for defamation or poured a lot of money into legal defense.

So a major news outlet accusing a sitting, immune and known to be vindictive president of a crime that he can’t be tried for for the next three years and might never be convicted for by the justice system he rigged would be gambling with much to lose, little to win and awful odds.

Saying he had sex with children is essentially the same content, but a different packaging that doesn’t paint as much of a target on your forehead.

Is it fucked? For sure. Is it possible they’re just trying to sanewash the crime? Absolutely. At the very least, it’s spineless. This isn’t me defending their choice of wording, just elaborating on the reasoning behind it potentially being a CYA.

“If I just lick hard enough, maybe they’ll take the boot off me”

It’ll have been an important question to Epstein, for very wrong reasons

Yeah I’m sure Palestinians are stoked to know that Americans are now dealing with a state-sponsored terror force, but it doesn’t help their situation either way

Just put the entire human rights charter on there

I can’t do much about the Roman Empire, crusades, Conquistadors, Putin or Winnie Pooh. I can criticise them, just as well as Israel’s crimes and the US’. The US is what I have the most contact with and what you’ll hear me complaining about most, but not the only thing.

Make your own, coward. No distro so niche as one that has half a user because it’s hardly usable.

FUCK YES to oat milk. I love oat milk. I also love cheese and haven’t really found a good substitute yet, but oat milk is the GOAT milk.

Yeah, this smells a lot like Texas Sharpshooting. Figure out what people use, stuff Copilot in there then proudly present the target that you drew after hitting something.

Your boot on another’s face does not remove the boot from your own.

It just makes the boot vendor very happy, and he sincerely hope the poor sod you’re stomping on also buys a boot.

I bet they’re gonna need money to stem that influx, and I’m worried where they’ll find it.

Half the marketing seems to be “Did you know the founder is a Palestinian?”

Yeah, cool, hope his background helps bring some light on the atrocities being done 5o his kin. But when it comes to the app, he could be the first child to be born in Antarctica for all I care. Is the product any use?

Hey nonprofiter, why do I still require your permission to address my anime website on my Japanese connection?

If you want Domain Names to be unique, you need some organ to coordinate that. Doesn’t have to be about permission, but if I use the same name as someone else, the URI is no longer U and loses all value.

That doesn’t have to be about permission. Ideally, any unclaimed domain could be claimed by anyone (with a possible exception for things like important government domains). You’d just need some organisation to keep a registry and mediate disputes when someone tries to claim that your domain is theirs and they’d like to have it redirect to their site.

What is the “public interest” in his view of “like-minded activists”

I can’t read their minds and haven’tread his book, but I’d say the rest makes it sound like they want to democratise it and harden it against corporate control. Why, do you have any indication to the contrary or are you just throwing accusations?

he didn’t design the web with the blindl in mind.

Isn’t that basically an implementation issue? Like, sure, text isn’t ideal for people who can’t read, but that hardly precludes using it to encode information that some other tools could turn into non-visual formats, nor does it prevent the development of other protocols designed for different content forms than text, as I’m sure you’re aware.

I know I had to learn a whole course about web content accessibility guidelines to make it as easy as possible for people with cognitive, visual or motoric impairments to navigate and use websites, including accommodation for tools like screen readers, making sure table columns and headers are unambiguously associated (even with things like floating headers when you scroll).

It’s not like the medium is actively hostile to blind people. It’s just that a discrete data storage and transmission formats lend themselves well to discrete information like symbols. I don’t know what more you would have expected of him.

I know he didn’t design the web with the silenced in mind.

Again, I’m not sure that’s an issue on part of the Web. Yes, HTTP by itself has no encryption (which HTTPS added later) or obfuscation of sender and recipient (which is a routing issue, not a content one), and DNS isn’t immune to censorship by providers selectively refusing to resolve certain domains they want to see blocked. At some level, there will always be the human factor.

But you’re just sounding like “He didn’t perfectly account for everything, so he’s an elitist fuck who hates freedom”. By that metric, literally every human is a piece of shit, because none of us are perfect, which makes it a useless metric.

I know he didn’t he design the web with kilobytes in mind.

Okay now you’re taking the piss.

where is Tim’s OpenNic TLD?

Idk, how should I know? But also, why would he need one? Is using one particular service a requirement for championing its cause? Should he have one just to show it off?

Or should he, you know, spend his time and energy trying to raise awareness and devising a way to unfuck things, however and whyever it got fucked up?

Or is he nor pure enough?

TBL:

When Sir Tim Berners-Lee invented the world wide web in 1989, his vision was clear: it would used by everyone, filled with everything and, crucially, it would be free.

You:

you didn’t create the network for the poor, the disabled, and the oppressed

TBL:

Berners-Lee is reflecting on what his invention has become

You:

You succeeded

TBL:

“We can fix the internet … It’s not too late,” he writes, describing his mission as a “battle for the soul of the web”.

You:

Enjoy your elitist network

TBL:

Berners-Lee traces the first corruption of the web to the commercialisation of the domain name system, which he believes would have served web users better had it been managed by a nonprofit in the public interest.

You:

classist fuck

What the fuck are you on about? How do you get from “I wanted it to be free and accessible. I hate that it was seized by corrupt capitalists. I want to take it back and make it for everyone again.” to “You wanted to enrich the corrupt capitalists. You succeeded in that. Enjoy it”?

He’s literally saying “this is shit, let’s change it”. That’s the opposite of enjoying it. That’s trying to get rid of ot.