Would you say that you need qualifications to form opinions about a topic? That seems quite restrictive, specifically for politics. Lots of people have and share political opinions without qualifications. You yourself just shared a political opinion, do you have qualifications?

The official response is “To be better prepared for a potential crisis” Gold closer to home is easier to liquidate. The unofficial speculation is that the national bank is worried that the US could easily disrupt the NL financial traffic, hence the move.

My 2 cents: They probably don’t want to signal complete distrust like France did in 1959, so they just withdrew some.

Local article on the topic: https://nos.nl/artikel/2629369-nederland-haalt-groot-deel-van-de-goudvoorraad-weg-uit-de-vs-en-canada

welcome welcome, do you know your way around?

I don’t think that we should be wary of them. It is only natural that when the whole web is overrun by bots, these gated communities will pop up. It’s an easy way to keep a lot of bad traffic out, while a space for users to interact and be authentic.

And yes, I think the open web is truly over.

no thank you, offer is appreciated though 🙏

You have a lot say on this. Its good that someone thinks about these thing. I’m sorry that I can’t really provide you with a good discussion. I don’t know enough about markets etc and I don’t want to spend too long online.

I agree that can’t really stamp out openness and anonymity online (which is beautiful in a way) but I think that will mostly be reserved to technically capable users in the cracks and niches of the web who can navigate the restrictions. This is a massive tragedy.

This brings us to the current state of the web with age restrictions popping up everywhere, deanonimization etc. I think that we are in agreement regarding where it is going. Where you think we should be heading. I’m sure you have opinios on that

I read one of your blog posts about empathy this mornjng. It resonated with me and my recent views on the world.

Thanks for explaining your thoughts. So to paraphrase you: you are saying that the market and by proxy, nations too, Are still adapting to the concept of the internet. One way to cope with the effects is to restricted access?

The internet can mostly die as far as I’m concerned. Just roll it back to file servers again, or something like gemspace. But being able to talk with people across cultures, borders freely is really important. It’s a tragedy that all these people will be hurt by the dystopification of the web. The new web needs to have a safe way to converse socially that is safe and easy enough to use for lay people. I have so much more to say on this, but real life is calling so I’ll leave it at this.

I don’t really get your point about markets though. I’m genuinely trying to understand, so bear with me. This is what I got from your post:

Our market has coexisted with an extremely fast global communication network for decades now. Given that the market feels like a quite organic thing, on what authority is the market not meant to coexists with the internet?

I think that internet access is restricted because of technological constraints, a technological lag in rolling out higher speed infrastructure, and a the lack of demand for that access which is driven by technological and practical constraint. Some complex function of those factors haha. Still, I don’t really know what you are trying to get across.

It took me an embarrassingly long to get the joke. I forgot what the original thread was.

Everyday the internet gets a little worse. I hate it here in this technological hellscape. I have more to say, but this bullshit makes me so so tired. Goodnight.

After contemplating on this: These companies that seek to eliminate thinking, spit in the face of agency. They call themselves agentic yet seek seek to kill all agency and authenticity in the users of their products which is contemptible enough.

We should all be more like Donald Boat.

If we can’t change the material conditions that let these losers play with money and toys then we can at least hold them in cultural contempt.

A bit long, but well written. It read like a novel, quite enjoyable.

What a fucking world

A world of non-thinkers

At least Donald Boat found some wisdom.

Microslop cope-pilot

Fair enough, I meant to subtilty disagree with you on the hypothesis that pollution is the leading factor and instead suggest that it may not be the leading factor, as I have been taught that socioeconomic factors like education do most of the explaining. But that is not what I wrote of course.

But I’m no expert on the matter so you might very well be right either way. The topic appears to be well studied though, but I haven’t gotten around to reading any papers

Consider that there might not be a single unifying explaination and instead a number of compounding factors.

They would never, thats illegal!

Do you then think (considering that it is possible) that the development of a super intelligence is inevitable?

I am expecting disappointment, and maybe a few cool technologies that will stick around. Don’t think we are going to get AGI soon, but if we did, no-one asked for it anyways.

Right and we also use lemmy, but we still weigh and judge what we read here or at least we should. And we should do the same for Wikipedia, even though I would argue that Wikipedia has higher epistemic standards than Lemmy. The point being, the openness of these platforms is a quality on its own. Wikipedia isn’t perfect, but it is far from terrible.