Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Destry wrote #326958:
I’m still sucking up to Apple so far, but my late 2011 mbp can only take Sierra now, and I’m seriously thinking of making it an ubuntu machine. And old is new, after all, so having one of each can be part of the tech portfolio plan, clients or no.
This is not far off my own situation my daily driver is holding up just fine, I can pick up a used-but-tidy Mac mini from 2012 for under £200 / €250 typically, strip it down, fit a dual SATA adaptor, 16GB RAM, a couple of SSDs and – boom – perfectly serviceable. Catalina is…not for me UI-wise, Mojave is as far as I dare go, and I’m not touching anything newer until I absolutely must (or a dump truck of money arrives for a work gig, hehe).
I have a background task to see if I can set up a Linux workstation and see how I fare with that for daily use. There’s also another avenue that I could perhaps investigate that makes Not A Mac into Thinks It’s A Mac but can’t go into more detail lest Apple Legal is monitoring this thread. Drop me a line if you’re curious, anyone. You must declare if you’re Apple Legal, otherwise it’s entrapment. I’ve said too much. Ahem.
This is the longest-lasting community / forum that I’ve been involved with. My interest in Textpattern and its processes would be near zero were it not for the people that I’ve met and got to know over the years. I think I owe Stef about thirty beers now, and he owes me…what…4 lime and sodas?
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Destry wrote #326958:
I post such notions in here, hoping they’re not too out of scope, because I value the collective hive mind of this community that I’ve been a part of for 16 years and like to see how some of these things bounce with y’all against my own position. We certainly don’t always agree in this community, which is part of the value. One thing this community is not is an echo chamber.
Heavy +1 to this, for what it’s worth.
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
…. texted postive
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
“In the fall of 2018, we noticed that there was something that set Google apart from other big tech companies. Everybody was talking about how to regulate these tech companies, and everybody had pretty good plans for how to do it — for every company besides Google. In our opinion, it was because nobody really seemed to understand what Google does, or how they do it.”
Anyone want to join the The Knuckleheads’ Club
…. texted postive
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
It’s not the casual Web surfers who are complaining. But as Google expands beyond mere search services, it sometimes alienates tech-smart users who were once devotees of the company. – As Google grows, critics emerge
That reminded me of the first Anti-Google article I ever read – from November 2003.
Offline
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
I love reading about the FarceBook getting hammered.
Just because there is now a multi-billion-dollar industry based on the abject betrayal of our privacy doesn’t mean the sociopaths who built it have any right whatsoever to continue getting away with it.
via Gruber
…. texted postive
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Wow. This gets better as it goes.
Facebook Is a Doomsday Machine
Vivre LaFrance !
I’ve got to get my token I quit socmed piece finished/published before it sounds like I’m hopping the bandwagon instead of having been long gone over the grassy knoll.
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Destry wrote #327581:
I’ve got to get my token I quit socmed piece finished/published before it sounds like I’m hopping the bandwagon instead of having been long gone over the grassy knoll.
stay the course lad
…. texted postive
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Destry wrote #327581:
Wow. This gets better as it goes.
Facebook Is a Doomsday Machine
Vivre LaFrance !
I read that piece yesterday. I found it very entertaining.
Summary: Facebook is an Authoritarian State that refuses to ban the users and content that we demand they ban.
I found it sort of contradictory, though.
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
michaelkpate wrote #327583:
Summary: Facebook is an Authoritarian State that refuses to ban the users and content that we demand they ban.
I almost didn’t read it because of the doomsday machine opening and analogy. It only got interesting for me at the anthropology stuff, about the max number of people we, as humans, can maintain a social connection with (about 148, apparently, which seems way high to me); likewise 20 to 20,000 is the ideal range for a good community before it becomes noise and chaos.
I think that speaks to our community here, its longevity and the quality of what comes out of it; not despite being small, but because of it.
Bodes well for the fediverse, too, I think, and it’s interesting ecology of decentralized instances of different software, each a community of its own within a bigger community. It doesn’t need to compete with big tech. It’s not the same thing. Small and local is good. Hook up to the cyber Silk Road or don’t.
The new Gemini explorers. Same thing. And other interesting and more conscientious endeavors spinning out of the foul period of Silicon Valley, surveillance capitalism, and growth economics.
LaFrance seems to get to that by the end, as something to aim for, which is the real point, as I took it.
The fourth to last graph is the best one, I think, which begins:
Anyone who is serious about mitigating the damage done to humankind by the social web should, of course, consider quitting Facebook and Instagram and Twitter and any other algorithmically distorted informational environments that manipulate people.
She cops out, though, as so many journos do when rightly critiquing those platforms, with the wishy-washy passive use of consider quitting. Change that to a simple and strong use of quit and it’s a solid message.
The para goes on to get to the point that matters, though: rethinking humanity’s relationship with the internet.
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Destry wrote #327585:
Bodes well for the fediverse, too, I think, and it’s interesting ecology of decentralized instances of different software, each a community of its own within a bigger community. It doesn’t need to compete with big tech. It’s not the same thing. Small and local is good. Hook up to the cyber Silk Road or don’t.
I think so as well. I think we would all be better off if we went back to blogging on our own platforms.
She cops out, though, as so many journos do when rightly critiquing those platforms, with the wishy-washy passive use of consider quitting. Change that to a simple and strong use of quit and it’s a solid message. The para goes on to get to the point that matters, though: rethinking humanity’s relationship with the internet.
As a Journalist, she wants two things: 1) For all of us to leave Facebook and 2) Pay for her content rather than producing their own. Personally, I’d be happy to see The Atlantic go back to being a New England Literary Magazine the way it was for most of the last 163 years.
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Facebook publicly complains that Apple’s new IOS privacy settings will prevent them from helping small businesses, as it will no longer be able to collect/commodify the users’ data without their consent.
www.theverge.com/2020/12/16/22178068/facebook-apple-newspaper-ads-ios-privacy-changes
Yiannis
——————————
NeMe | hblack.art | EMAP | A Sea change | Toolkit of Care
I do my best editing after I click on the submit button.
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
michaelkpate wrote #327589:
. . . 2) Pay for her content rather than producing their own.
I guess you mean our own.
Yeah, for sure, but then she she’s an editor of a magazine.
I’d be happy to see The Atlantic go back to being a New England Literary Magazine the way it was for most of the last 163 years.
Me too. And many others. That’s one of the fallouts and change-ups I hope happen when the big tech companies are broken apart. Though perhaps something a bit new and interesting in the materials, distribution, and business sides of things. Could a magazine be a commons or cooperative? We need more varieties of both in the future anyway.
Another good move for the future is blow up all the stock markets. As long as money is the driver of everything, not much will change. So I guess not much will change. ;)
Offline
Re: Fookin' GAFM, again
Destry wrote #327591:
I guess you mean our own.
I phrased it that way deliberately because she doesn’t consider herself one of us – she is one of the enlightened gatekeepers who is empowered to bring Truth to the huddled masses. Our job is not to create but to consume.
Offline