I do think it's different this time, but

I'm interested in actual approaches. Not saying I want to perpetuate capitalism, but asking how you would tackle the problem, and could be from the viewpoint of any of those entities.

I'm a fan of the concept. Two notes:

While the name has noble intentions, it's a horrible choice in terms of conveying "this is a respectable institution and you should hire this person." Obtaining the knowledge should be enough, but we all know part of why we choose the educational institutions we do is to help get a job, and some schools are viewed more favorably than others. "University of the People" sounds hippy dippy and fake.

Second, if you like this model you might consider looking at Western Governor's University. It's regionally accredited (ie. the kind you want), online, and the name seems like it would be more appealing at first glance to employers.

Yeah why are there any comments taking this seriously? Not that it couldn't be true, but the linked site talks about prayer being the reason the satellites are going down, and how non human entities are attacking us.

Lol I too have read those "what's a thing the public doesn't know about your job" reddit threads

I think there's some legitimate concern about essentially giving prisoners a broadcast. You're right that they ought to have some minimum amount of guaranteed communication, but more in the sense that they can call their family or friends without having to pay fees.

Also would love to see solitary confinement outlawed.

The sustainability of a monarchy is the problem. Even if you have a great king, they're smart, they're competent, they care about the good of the people, what about their successor? And what's more, every person is fallible, susceptible to blind spots or maladjusted thinking. With a monarch there's not a true means to address that sort of problem. Democracy has all sorts of problems, it's true. But as the quote goes, it's the worst form of government after all other forms of government.

I have seen someone type "tell me how make a million dollar business" into chatgpt. Of course that's not going to work. But LLMs have immediate obvious value that crypto does not, and I think making the comparison reveals a lack of experience with those useful applications. I'm using chatgpt nearly every day as a tool to help with coding. It's not a replacement for a person, but it is like giving a person a forklift.

Seems like you might want to go broader than talking about a specific method or feature of technology. Maybe something like "right to private communication"?

I hadn't thought about air, but seems like it will become a more and more relevant right (and one everyone can claim even in a more traditional sense of a right)

Glad you're with us.

Can't say I have much of an opinion at all, but seeing this post is reminding me of that documentary where the guy was commissioning videos of young dude wrestlers tickling each other, and he played it off like it wasn't, but of course it was for sex reasons

You're right that lemmy primarily needs content, and it doesn't have to be just credentialed experts. It will grow in appeal the more there are real communities discussing whatever their subject of interest is.

Realizing we're talking about an imaginary world here, but in some cases probably appropriate not to discuss sensitive matters when you don't know who is within earshot of the communicator

The government wants to carry a debt, because everyone who is owed money by the government is incentivezed to support it.

I wondered about that too. Maybe it's stuff like "driver visits this address every Friday and Saturday night" but that hardly seems like solid data. Could just always listen to the installed mic intended for hands free calling and instead analyze for moans...

Electronic voting could use open source software, but so can a machine that scans a marked ballot. The best practice is to have voters mark a physical ballot, then have them put it in a machine (running open source software) that scans and tabulates the results. If there's a question about the integrity of the results, we can go back and count physical ballots.

Plastic bottled is garbage. I like an aluminum can ok. Glass bottled is pretty good. But you're mistaken about fountain.

Lol are you inspired by Buckminster Fuller? Dome over Manhattan

Agree it's fun to think about even if not practical. If anything reminds me of how my own memory works, where it's more like a description of what I saw than an image.

I could see a world where people are guaranteed shelter but it's a hole in the wall and they're not allowed to be other places like restaurants, businesses etc. because they don't have the money for it.

I do? And most people I know?

What would you say is missing from the mastodon user experience vs twitter?

Things I would like:

• better discovery/suggestions when people first join. I get a "selling point" is that the timeline isn't algorithmically driven, but just to help people get their feet wet start showing them some stuff
• when displaying a post there needs to be a better mechanism to fetch all the replies. Right now it's possible to respond and say something someone else already did because you you're not shown their reply. For federation reasons I guess.
• better list integration

But overall, for me the functionality I used from twitter I have on mastodon too. The real missing feature is the huge variety of people, and getting that takes time.

Was looking for this comment, thanks

I don't consume conservative media, but I'm wondering is there some current of thought that's leading to all these shootings after someone goes to the wrong door? Seems like there's been a lot recently, and makes no sense to me.

I could see at a lower flagged hotel, but any full service property is going to have a manager on duty in addition to the rest of the staff. For example extremely unlikely to happen at a full Marriott, but maybe at a Residence Inn

This is a very helpful bot.

Lol yeah. Also just because I'd like a different platform to be dominant doesn't mean I don't need to use the current one sometimes

Some of this stuff seems real, but in the one twitter thread embedded in this article, the person says, "Remember, this is fiction."

Yeah, I guess it is kind of an old phrase. Basically something a more conventional or conservative person might say about something that's impractical/naive/overly idealistic. You can imagine like a 60s American dad saying it about tie dye kids

Yeah am I missing something? I've yet to get a page at this domain to load

There's a great documentary on HBO called Telemarketers that talks about this business model and how it's essentially a fraud. And they address how if someone ever donates they're put on a list of chumps to call back forever

I like this concept. Do you have thoughts on how you would address gerrymandering? One reason I like proportional representation is it addresses that challenge, but wouldn't have the same intimacy in the concept you're describing.

I could also see challenges with too many steps meaning that officials in the upper tier of representatives don't actually know the tier below them and so may not have that sense of interpersonal obligation.

Can you share sources about the idea that some people don't desire shelter? My understanding is more that drugs or mental illness make it difficult to retain housing. Their behavior towards others and their inability to pay means they end up homeless, but seems like people universally want a roof over their heads. My understanding is that among professionals working in this area, the view is that having a place to live is the first step in addressing issues like drug abuse and mental health. I'm aware of one organization in Philadelphia, Project Home, that others view as a model.

Some others here have highlighted that "shelter services" is not the same thing as an actual shelter. People can't stay as long as they want, they don't have a secure place to store their belongings, and they can be dangerous. Here is a post with sources that outlines why permanent supportive housing is more cost effective than temporary overnight shelters

@rockslice addressed this in another comment - you use signing certificates to verify it's the correct code, which is a widely accepted method.

Other comments have mentioned ranked choice voting, proportional representation and single transferable vote - these are all voting systems which encourage having more than two parties. The reason we don't have them in the u.s. now is because people know they're throwing their vote away or even helping the candidate they don't like by voting third party.

I've been meaning to buy this! Does he have a section on how to handle no one speaking your language?

Well that's the challenge, is that in order to have a vote on what the district lines are, you've already chosen a group of voters eligible for the election, so you've drawn a district. (Unless we're having the entire country or entire state vote on districts) I also think district boundaries are exactly the sort of thing that voters aren't inclined to research or show up to vote for, even though it makes a huge difference in election outcomes. For that reason I like STV/proportional voting for legislative bodies.

I've got to say, having been involved in campaigns to end gerrymandering, there is a subset of people who can be bothered to learn/care about how it works, and many others who don't. Your process sounds even more complex and time consuming, and I don't see it being effective because the general public won't be invested in it. Like voting for traffic court judges but even more confusing.

More importantly I also think you're underestimating the complexity of reconciling hundreds of thousands of neighborhoods per state, each a ranked choice list of different variants. One person will pick a boundary, and then some other person will pick a boundary that conflicts with it, multiply that by a dozen million and then what, some algorithm will decide which lines are correct? And then the resulting districts still won't have an equal number of constituents? That violates the one person one vote principle, which is part of the issue with gerrymandering and the electoral college.