What do you mean by “run”? A gouvernment should fund universities and research institutes who conduct such experiments. I am not opposed to the government having a say in which lines of research to fund in priority depending on what their political project. For example some grant dedicated to energy sources more carbon friendly. But the government should not be more specific topic-wise or method-wise, and should instead rely on panels of experts for questions such as which line of research looks promising enough to put in more gov money.

You know what that means :D

I see thanks !

Bakchodi.org […] will never federate with leftist instances.

Can you link any such statement?

They often won’t defederate from you and get butthurt when you defederate from them.

This behaviour is well explained by their desire to fight for “absolute free speech”, so it does not require the extra assumption that their intention is to gather attention.

On mastodon they’ll even do campaigns where they send suicide promoting dms with gore in them to lgbt people.

Even this one can be seen as overcompensating for the “pro-LGBT censure”. While the ideology itself does not justify making these campaigns, it depicts censoring them as even worse.

Not saying they are right in any way, just that the core of the problem you describe is their ideology of absolute free speech, rather than it being misrepresented by attention-seeking individuals.

So while a communist could go to wolfballs and make posts, they won’t be moderated by staff but they will of course be in a sea of unpopularity due to the strong community bias shaped by both the site’s administration and community.

I am not sure I understand the difference with lemmy.ml. Do you have examples of people banned (edit : or post removed) because of their political alignment ? (I mean beyond the “no bigotry” rule)

Nice analysis !

From what I understand about the “lib right” instances, I would not say they don’t have a politically biased administration. Individual freedom is fundamentally a liberal/libertarian value. In the case of wolfballs, their sidebar is very explicit about the admin’s political opinions :

• the capitol riot picture
• refer to an explicitly liberal definition of tolerance
• opinions on gender

How do you define a women A women is defined as x chromosomes and no tallywhacker i.e probably not you

wolfballs maintains that God made all man kind equal in his eyes. Man and women. There is nothing in between either.

• antivax links

In addition to the biases that set instances apart, it is probably useful to mention that users of decentralised media will have a tendency to be more anti-corporate and/or privacy enthousiast, which is also probably why socialists and libertarians are more present here than soc-dems and liberals. Plus, as you said, being less mainstream platforms, they often have to face the arrival of banned users from other sites.

I think it is interesting to compare the recurrent migrations of banned Reddit users to Lemmy with last month’s massive influx to Mastodon following the latest Elongate. I wonder how things will play out when a zillionaire offers to buy Reddit.

About stats, what happened in early 2021?

Only relevant sources and no insults, thanks I guess?

US played a direct role in both funding and orchestrating the coup

It did play a role, we agree on that; my point is that it is very speculative to assume that it single-handedly had the whole decisive power. Whether they truly led the revolution is a disputed fact, even among your sources. Same for choosing the new government, the phone call shows they had a say in that, but to my knowledge nothing shows that they single-handedly picked the whole government, as there were other parties involved, including Ukrainian pro-EU and Ukrainian nazis.

That they were going to join NATO is a pure speculation based on the opinions that

• US held all the decisive power over that government
• US’s only goal is military expansion

About the latter, do you think an economic weakening of Russia through the EU-deal would not already be a favorable turn for the US? I recall that the official position of the Maidan government was that it was not planning to become a NATO member, at least until the annexation of Crimea.

the answer lies somewhere in the middle. Copyleft is that correct middle, in my opinion.

Depends what one’s goal is. Is fighting big tech is the most important thing to you, then yes. If you want to share with as many people as possible, no matter their ideology, then no.

Wouldn’t “an evil company could use your product to make money” be an argument to never release anything for free?

Indeed, copyleft is not enough to guarantee that corporations won’t make money with your code. Without modifying the code, an evil company could increase its profit just by using your software. So maybe the software should not be free but contain some clause that restricts to non-commercial use only? Maybe throw in some antifascist clause so that fascists groups cannot use your program to increase their efficiency in recruiting more members? Since evil people don’t care about the law, maybe you should only distribute your software to people that you have personnally vetted? Add-in some cryptology so that they cannot distribute it to evil people themselves?

This never stops, it’s the usual question of freedom vs security. Permissive licences are the ones who lie at the freedom-most part of the spectrum.

But mostly, this discussion about copyleft has nothing to do with the post.

MIT license is a great way of making sure corporations will take this and run away with it

Copying is not theft :) That they “run away with it” by using it for their own projects doesn’t change anything to your use and development

I notice these things a lot. Where roads and junctions are expensively over-engineered. They add granite road insets, or fancy paving, or traffic lights where they’re not needed, etc.

Ok but we’re talking about the public transportation. This is actuallly consistent with the idea that public transportation be underbudgeted in favour of more projects who are directed towards car drivers.

If poor transport planning is the reason, then it means that there are times where too much transport offer is set at places where it is not needed, and they would be better set somewhere else instead. I don’t tend to observe that (but of course, this is a single person’s experience!), which makes me think that they lack financial means to improve their service.

Are you claiming the point is that there are people whose job is to plan the public transportation, who have enough money to have more of it working but who purposefully decide not to? Why would they do that?

How does the Lemmy post interact with the toot?

How do cross-posts work for these options?

I was about to say that the (re)post in question might be a boost by the community profile to which the comments are replies. Then I remember that Mastodon is explicitly designed to forbid that (Don’t know about other microblogging platforms though). Option 2 is probably close enough !

We blame drivers for driving, when we should be blaming transport planners for not providing enough public transport.

That’s a vicious circle, people need cars because the transport offer is insufficient, taxpayers don’t want to give more money for transport because most people don’t use them as they already have cars.