Lives in the Netherlands

XMPP: peter1986c@xmpp.social

Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7LBOingRoiteBAMOPBifww

  • 1 Post
  • 37 Comments
Joined 10M ago
cake
Cake day: Mar 20, 2021

help-circle
rss

I have had that as well in the past, probably because your/my report would be a duplicate if others reported before.



I did not see them here yet (although I am only really visiting this instance), but maybe I am not seeing that well. :P


deleted by creator


I do not see what neo-liberalism has to do with this tbh.


Perhaps you make a point there. However, the discussion was more on traffic safety (and slightly about drivers with small members). So I do not know why you brought that up.


That GMC vehicle probably would be classified a truck outside USA/Canada/Australia. Thus requiring a license of a type mostly only pro drivers would have. Not that that fixes everything but would reduce risk (statistically).


Is the term “Social fabric” not already used by the Humanities (e.g. sociology)? I would recommend we do not use names that are already academic jargon (unless they would mean the same thing).



Let me start my reply with a small apology. The way I phrased my question (“where is that the case?”) I might have come across as inconsiderate. I may also have initially misread what you wrote, taking the comment on empty homes a tad too literal. That is, if we count for e.g. unused office space than you are certainly on point.

I believe exactly the opposite. In France and USA we have been giving billions of euros to decades to the construction mafia to build more housing, yet prices keep rising as fast as the number of homeless people. I mean considering that the laws of supply and demand apply to some extent, it makes sense: if millions of landowners voluntarily withdraw their property from the market, you create a speculative bubble where prices cannot go down despite new constructions. If you add to this the fact that any social policies our respective governments had after WWII are actively being dismantled, and social housing in France is now managed like a mafia (where in many places you either pay up under the desk, or wait ~5y on a list) and prioritizing luxury “social” housing in new construction for middle classes, we’re in deep shit. Who profits from “build more”? Big companies and corrupt officials, as always. It will just damage the environment and keep making more people homeless, if those constructions are not tied to an actual social policy.

First of all, when I wrote “build more” I meant to include initiatives such as transforming office space into residential buildings. Sorry if this was not sufficiently implied in my comment. Secondly, I can agree to the notion that the construction mafia needs to be dealt with somehow (i.e. curbing corruption etc.). On your supply and demand remark: many nations in Europe that have housing issues have countrysides that are massively aging and depopulating. Cities in same countries often are growing, but formerly used homes from the smaller places aren’t exactly going to transplant themselves into areas where they would be more needed. So, unless jobs etc. are at least partly going back to the smaller towns (to curb urbanization and “spread the load” more evenly across the country), retrofitting existing (office/industrial/retail) buildings and constructing new ones will be the only workable solution. Obviously in conjunction with good social policies. BTW, the building of “social” housing for (lower) middle classes is sometimes done because actual social housing is something they are obviously to rich for. Yet they cannot afford private (either bought or rented) housing and obviously the demand would drive those prices up. So while an imperfect solution, I can see why some regions/cities have chosen to expand the “social” part of social housing (as long as they don’t replace actual social housing with it). Especially if at least some of the demand for housing in larger (>200.000) cities is coming from people with a middle income. Not everybody who has difficulties keeping a roof over their head is destitute.

How would it work without police? If we didn’t have a police, we could just find justice without obstacles.

Even when nobody (organised enough to do so) is going to stop thieves, rapists and murderers?

Without an armed militia of psychopaths to enforce injustice, private property would be a pipe dream.

Sorry for asking an ignorant question, but do you mean “property” as in buildings or property in a more literal, broader sense?

We would only have to defend ourselves against owners, and we’re up to that. The issue we face today is if we defend ourselves against an owner attacking us, they will claim we attacked them and we will be condemned by the class justice to prison sentences or fines, despite being the victims (just like victims of police abuse are condemned for “violence” and “insults” against the cops despite being the only ones suffering physical injuries). The police having a monopoly on “legitimate” violence is the reason why the elites and their police get to decide the fate of everyone without suffering any kind of consequences.

I still believe that with good rewrites of the laws and good social policy, many of such issues can be mitigated. I mean, at least half the demonstrations/riots in Europe are organised because of the lack of the former. I think “we” have to start somewhere, but how to reduce police violence further I do not know.


The police are the armed psychopaths making sure homeless people stay homeless when there’s millions of empty apartments

Where is that the case? Here in the Netherlands there is an actual shortage of living accommodation. The shortage is even more severe in places like Hong Kong (look up cage and coffin homes, please). Abolishing police won’t do jack sh*t to fix that issue, but building more homes where they are most severely needed will. Yes, I get that police officers are often thinking they are better than other people (esp. in nations like the USA or Nigeria) but that does not mean that your comment was keeping it real.


In case of that French activist, it was not for the political position made (on ecology) but because of having squatted in private property (as far as I remember reading). So there is some need for nuance here.


Does this Wikipedia article provide a starting point? I do realise there are a lot of links to pages on terminology you do not know (yet), but I would not know a better way to start than that WP article does.


“Shopping for an SBC? Is their logo on the “Project Friends” section of our page? Choose someone else and tell them why” That part does make little sense to me. Would they not prefer that people stick with partnering HW vendors?


Returning artefacts to their homelands is the right thing to do.


I do not think this vid had much to do with LGBTQ, other than a (reactionary?) USonian trying to make “fun” of the aforementioned group. Or something like that, I am not sure because I could stand the video just enough to last about a minute into it.


Please note that my comments were mostly reactions to @Brattea@lemmy.ml, not to the woman in the blog post. They (Brattea, not the blogger) were complaining about downvotes, and that stuff is so non-constructive and childish I had to react. I know now, I fell for it again. I responded to online bait.

On your point:

However, if you respond with “don’t complain that much, it surely isn’t hurting that much.”

Oh for Jack’s sake! That is absolutely not what anybody you (and Brattea) are arguing with were actually writing! Fallacies are fun I guess. :(

women are underrepresented in FOSS and tech in general. so when they experience bad stuff, it leaves a bad impression seeing that nothing has structurally changed.

As said before, in many places in the world this is all woven into far more complex problems, whereof the solution is probably also far more complex.

As PoVoq already stated, some of us are getting tired of the “oh those FOSS nerds have no social skills and treat women badly” stories. They are marginalising folk and are no actual solution to anything.


the FOSS scene in india is quite big. i think it usually doesn’t make much sense to differentiate experiences on country: you wouldn’t do that when the country would be netherland or germany, i guesss. Only in india, it matters.

Because we know that India is considered quite patriarchal. And if you followed the news in more recent years they have quite a reputation. So when the medium post lined by OP (you) is mostly about men from patriarchal societies misbehaving, it is quite disingenuous (is that a word, I am not sure) to say it is the fault of FOSS. The Netherlands, Germany etc. do not have the reputation India does, nor have I heard their FOSS communities are hostile to women. So once more, it is silly to blame FOSS (communities) globally for something of which:

  1. the severity (or even existance) greatly varies across the world.
  2. where it exists, is probably influenced heavily by other factors than (wo)men in a computer club

different exmaple: when some male person from india publishes for instance an article about tech things in FOSS (for instance a new feature they have been working on) it wouldn’t make much sense to highlight the country, it would be only natural to think this person as part of the FOSS scene. why is this case different?

You are shifting the goal post mate.



Well every experience is different. She’s in India.

And our point was that maybe if the title had said “FOSS communities in India” (for example) no one would have taken issue with her blog post.

It’s her story

And? What is it that you try to tell with that statement?

I see no need to put representation in quotes.

I did use quotes because I was not sure it was the right term (I am a fluent, but not a native speaker of English).

You can bring a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

What is the relevancy of that proverb?

I can point out how shitty it is that this gets downvoted for the wrong reasons

The only thing you did was complain about downvotes, state the downvotes were lousy (without providing an argument to that opinion) and state (more or less) that we are bad people (I am paraphrasing).

but I cant force people to see it that way […] And the worst part is even well meaning people can fail to see the point.

No, but you could make a more mature and serious effort to convince us by having properly formed statements (of opinion), forming logically valid (and preferably true) arguments to back those opinions up. Without phallacies, whining, shifting the goal post or acting we are all bad/stupid/uncaring.

TLDR, you are losing credibility hand over fist in this discussion.