> Do you think it's socially acceptable to ignore everything that doesn't affect you personally?
Yes, yes, and yes again.
> Many activists would certainly have you think otherwise. As far as I can tell, fighting that habit is a huge goal of activism.
That's their problem. As soon as you start contributing to them, you will not pursue your own goals, living your own life, but those imposed by activists or their supervisors.
It's convenient for them, you give them a political resource. But why do you need it?
Come back to this comment in a few years and think about whether something significant has changed for those people who did not sacrifice their lives for a meaningless battle.
People are more important than the state. If they are not ready to defend him, why should they be forced? You can offer money or other valuables in return, such as fame, a pension, or a position, but if a person doesn't want to, why should they do it?
> Come back to this comment in a few years and think about whether something significant has changed for those people who did not sacrifice their lives for a meaningless battle.
My family is from Eastern Europe: if people had not fought "meaningless" battles then the land would have been ruled by genocidal maniacs. As it stand my grandmother almost ended up in an oven.
My very existence is the result of the battles having meaning, that people fighting matters.
At that time, the Genplan OST implied the almost complete extermination and the enslavement of a small number of the remaining people.
And also going back to the second part of the top commentary. At that time, people had a great motivation to defend their homeland and their loved ones. The survival of the country and the survival of the people in it were inextricably linked.
The current conflict has no such connection. The existence or cessation of the existence of the state is not related to the existence of people in it. Many of whom found life in a completely different country.
There were already volunteers, mercenaries, those who fell for a good salary. Why force those who actively avoid it?
So what if it is? A Master's in Economics gets you diddly squat in the job market whereas an MBA opens doors everywhere. You could get a PhD in Economics and still only work at a university, your country's central bank or at a stretch, the IMF or the World Bank, which are hardly held up as the pinnacle of professional development. And even then they'd only take you if you studied monetary economics.
They're not criticizing someone for seeing the appeal of an MBA, they're criticizing that an MBA has those factors in the first place. It shouldn't be the degree you pick to open doors.
I totally agree with you, just yesterday I edited a document in Microsoft word and opened the second document for comparison. Suddenly, the first document froze and when I closed the program, I did not see the changes that I had made before. After complaining about my life, I started anew, and only the next time I downloaded Word offered me a recovery option.
It's not such a difficult task to set up hyprland. And niri doesn't even need to be configured, the default configuration performs all the required tasks.
From my understanding, to get something at the level of omarchy you need to setup multiple pieces of software. In the end it has to replace the whole "desktop"
Criticism is good when it comes with feasible suggestions or even a little help.
I wonder how many of HN audience does know someone, or a guy who knows a guy, which works in a data center able to manage the hardware and a simple email/message/hello there could open a new opportunity.
I tried to start using Reddit. None of my friends had ever heard of it or wanted to use it, and I soon lost interest in it.
From my little experience of using it, it seems that its main audience is the mentally retarded or just children under 11 years old.
The same questions are asked all the time. It wasn't difficult for me to find a search on the site for why they don't use it?
There is a lot of nonsense in the comments/answers, which they state with full confidence.
And there was also a feeling that there are rarely disagreements in discussions, even if there are minor differences, everyone adheres to a single line, often related to the topic/name of the subreddit.
I found several people creating content that I was interested in, but some of the posts on the page were hidden and it was easier to follow them on YouTube or blogs.
In general, searching for valuable posts or comments is like digging through manure to find gold.
And even if you find a clever idea or a good technical hint, it was often easier to find it just by reading the documentation. It's the same with interesting posts. If it's something worthwhile, then it will be on twitter, blog, YouTube, social networks or in some forums.
I'm not talking about advertising every second post, or even among the comments. Disabling ad blocking was a mistake.
> it's representative of an insular clubhouse with some small rooms in the backyard for 'normies.'
A very appropriate definition. It's not even interesting to discuss something on Reddit. If your opinion or thought coincides with the ideology of the subreddit, then you will have a lot of likes.
If it don't match, you get dislikes, insults, or worse, no response.
In general, I did not find any benefit for myself on Reddit and I am unlikely to return there, it is a waste of energy and effort.
Yes, yes, and yes again.
> Many activists would certainly have you think otherwise. As far as I can tell, fighting that habit is a huge goal of activism.
That's their problem. As soon as you start contributing to them, you will not pursue your own goals, living your own life, but those imposed by activists or their supervisors.
It's convenient for them, you give them a political resource. But why do you need it?
reply