From reading the book you gave me, I feel much more aligned with materialism. I believe that matter is the realest and the spirit world is less real - if I may put it like that.

That doesn’t mean that I think we should view everything from a materialist lense.

The materialist lense is synonymous with the scientific method. But science isn’t suitable for everything. Science is slow, rigid, unaccessible and never answers wholistically. Oftentimes science isn’t the right approach.

For deem, if he wants to befriend her, he could look up research papers on the best approach to do so, but if she responds with something he hasn’t studied, then he will have to go back to the drawing board. In this case it would be better for him to lean on meta physics such as “trusting his gut feeling” or “make her feel valued”. This approach moves away from materialism, but that doesn’t mean that he has turned into a luney coocoo head.

Or what you say?

I’m on kolektiva.social. Nothing to complain about.

I am of the opinion that technology needs a language reform. The current day technology language makes it seem highly technical and it doesn’t have to be like that. For deem, we don’t view nature as too technical even though it is more complex than our technologies. How we discuss nature is meaningful, whereas how we discuss technology is narrow minded.

I like to use more physical words. Such as town or nest. For instance I used to be on a norwegian site which translates to Freetown, but I have now moved to Hedgehognest.

I think it has a lot to do with that we are trying to copy a model that only works for the mighty. Youtube depends on surveillance automatized algorithms. The surveillance is what makes their service work. This is not a type of algorithm we should copy from youtube. But that is what peertube has done. They rely on an algorithm that plays on surveillance. This means that the peertube experience is subpar.

What we should do instead is rely on algorithms that rely on people actively pointing out to likeminded videos. To let people be the algorithm just like how people were the algorithm of the early web. Perhaps that we associate our channel with other likeminded channels. Or that we actively point people towards the videos we think are relevant to the current video.

They always do.

In other words, you say that we should just give up.

I think the way we are trying to make technology sound sophisticated and our refusal to reinvent language makes technology become much less accessible than what they should be.

I’ll not say what I’m using, because I haven’t figured it out yet.

However, what I seek are:

• Frugile / lightweight / nighsome - Using few resources so that it is easy to take ownership over. This will also increase flexibility.
• Open - Not restrictive licensing. Post-dominating mindset.
• Human Selfhostability - The approach should be as accessible as possible for anyone seeking to take ownership over it. Frugality is also important to achieve this.
• Human centric - People should not adapt to the approach, but the approach has to adapt to people.

I put this comment out to check how brainwashed people are. Just because something is open source doesn’t mean that the software in it’s totality is good. It’s a good place to start for sure, but we need to delve deeper into what we demand from our software.

deleted by creator

It’s open source, so it’s fine.

PrivacyBrowser is a really good browser in my opinion. But I cant do an analysis on its privacy.

I will add that I love how they handle bookmarks.

Ofcourse, whats your email?

I can’t get through EBADENGINE error messages spawned by npm.

By the way, could you recommend some epub reader for linux by any chance?

Thanks:) I’ll peek and see if it sparks me!

I haven’t delved into the philosophy of idealism, so I’m a seed in that. Just looked up the wikipedia article when you brought it up. Found it to be an umbrella term, so I couldn’t really determine my stead on it.

Gotcha mate.

Quick question, is a doctor an idealist?