ChristerMLB

My experience is that Linux Mint is the closest we have to a "it just works"-distro that is also decently up to date. Try that first.

It is possible to harass and shame people by misgendering them, e.g. by conspicuously and repeatedly referring to them in the third person. I think some people do try to chase trans people off the public square using tactics like that. Beyond that, my gut feeling is that if it's a belief that's presented honestly and curiously, those philosophers would want it expressed.

The whole trans debate is a bit of a mess in this regard, I think. For trans people, it is very personal, and it's been jazzed up so much by the whole culture war bs. Everyone who has an opinion on it, seem to finish presenting it with "END OF DISCUSSION", not really in line with those enlightenment ideals.

That's exactly the idea. The process of rational discussion and consideration is supposed to take care of the quality.

Obviously this was before the birth of the internet, and also before the birth of the think tank :l

Maybe before recording and communication technologies allowed us to see and hear the best stuff all the time? Or before American Idol hammered the point home?

I dunno, I think it's pointing at something real, although it's more a change in degree

Child filters isn't nearly enough. It's the addictive nature of the apps, created by algorithms that are cooked up by psychiatrists, behavioral scientists, and experimentally and iteratively "improved" by AI - algorithms that could potentially be used for other things than just making an app "sticky"

You're right about the privacy concerns, but the conclusion should be to have rules so strict that it is practically banning X, Meta, TikTok, et.c.

If you read the classical texts defending freedom of speech (Mill, Spinoza, Kant, et.c.), you'll see that the point was supposed to be to get as many ideas as possible up on the table, so they can be rationally discussed and considered.

They were quite clear that harassment, shaming and other ways of shutting people up, goes against this purpose - and while they might not want the government to get involved, I don't think they'd have a big problem with platforms doing content moderation to prevent those sorts of things.

De finnes nok, men jeg tror også det er mange som ikke har som mål å bli store en gang, men som er gründere fordi de vil være sin egen sjef og ha litt mer eierskap til det de driver med. Blant de som vil bli store, tipper jeg de fleste er greie folk også – folk er nå stort sett ålreite.

Men mtp formueskatten så har det blitt pisket opp en skikkelig fakkel-og-høygaffel-stemning i enkelte kroker på LinkedIn og X

I think it would be better for privacy to just ban certain kinds of social media for everyone. Maybe introduce such strong limitations on targeted advertising and behaviorist addiction techniques that it is practically a ban on the worst offenders.

Det er viktig å synliggjøre for gründere at venstresiden kjemper for de også, både med sånne tilskudd og ved at vi holder bånd på de store bedriftene som ellers fort kan finne på å bølle de av banen.