I am clearly not asking how this differs from other platforms. I’ve been here since 2022.

This reminds me of a comic, which obviously should be taken playfully with a pinch of salt:

• Two Italian men are joined by a visitor trying to ask a question in Italian. “Ah, they’re trying to speak Italian!” and so they turn to the visitor and welcome them in Italian.
• Two German men are joined by a visitor trying to ask a question in German. “Ah, they’re trying to speak German!” and so they turn to the visitor and welcome them in English.
• Two Parisian men are joined by a visitor trying to ask a question in French. “Ah, they’re trying to speak French!” and so they turn away and ignore them.

And also the representation of that culture. An ignorant attempt at mocking a culture can be offensive even if the intent is purely comic or positive.

Ah, the real reason that East Asia is the tech hub of the world!1

While I doubt the concept is unique, the script is: a keyboard shortcut will check the clipboard for a YouTube link and then show launcher options for mpv or yt-dlp, including launch arguments for lower quality format and audio only. It launches that in a terminal for easier handling when yt-dlp doesn’t work properly (much more common if using proxies, but also if a video is age-restricted or deleted).

So when I see a yt link here, I can just copy it, keyboard shortcut and then it’s playing in my local video player.

Spice/spiced could work. But it’s still an allusion, not sure if that defeats the point.

For example, 4chan forcibly invented the use of the ok hand for “white power”, as a collective prank

Which, outside of specific contexts where you’re already confident someone is a WN, was quickly forgotten and never really took off. It’s not a great example of a social shift.

I still use Invidious and Piped for searches and looking at comments, but they are currently broken (as far as I’ve seen).

These points both make sense given ideal conditions. People and businesses should have liberty over themselves, with the government serving as a neutral foundation representing the interest of voters.

Unfortunately, these ideal conditions don’t exist. The government isn’t neutral, but that’s not because of themselves or a democratic decision, but because businesses have more power to influence politics than you and me. Look at the major shareholders of mass media and social media, look at fundraisers for political parties, look at the laws made to bias the system. The government is evidently not a neutral foundation or a representative of the common people, but a dictatorship of the owning class (I’m using the term dictatorship not to imply one person ruling, but rather, that business owners as a class dictate the actions of politicians and therefore the government). And while it’s easy to consider this a crony capitalism or corporatocracy, it’s ultimately just capitalism itself taking its logical course, as business owners generally have a common class interest and the government cannot work without the complicity of business owners. We see this consistently in capitalist states, all the way back to the first ones. It’s not a fluke, it’s the power of capital.

We also see the trend of monopolization emerge - more money makes more money, more resources makes more resources, so small businesses are generally muscled out or incorporated into larger companies unless the government can force them to stop. So while you technically don’t have to interact with a specific business at all, there are many industries where you are effectively forced to interact with a small collection of the most powerful businesses or even a duopoly, even more so if you don’t have enough money to be picky.

So, while I agree, the government is supposed to be representing voters’ best interests, and business should not have power comparable to governance, they don’t represent us and businesses do govern, and history shows this won’t be changed through the electoral system they control. It has only changed when the worker class, as opposed to the businesses, has become the class directing the government.

But that’s just it - it’s not a useful heuristic, it’s a delusional framework, even more than the geocentric model was. We were mapping the planets onto that, but that didn’t make it useful.

2. There appears to be a lack of “centrist”, non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don’t mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).

I see plenty of them. They’re just mostly on other instances to me (like your home instance).

Furthermore, while it’s tempting to see the so-called ‘left’ and ‘right’ as equivalent mirrors needing to be balanced for diversity, the reality is far from it. After seeing Wolfballs in action (that instance died before the reddit API fiasco), I can tell you we don’t need to be balanced out by ‘white genocide’ discussions and more open anti-semitism. I know that’s not what you proposed, but it’s to illustrate that sometimes there isn’t value in arbitrary balancing the ‘left’ and ‘right’ on these websites.

is it a natural result of Lemmy’s community-driven nature?

It’s also a result of Lemmy’s history and appeal. When reddit went on sprees of deleting subreddits, the right-wing hate groups made their own reddit clones, anarchists typically went to Raddle, and when GenZedong and ChapoTrapHouse went down, they went to Lemmygrad.ml (as a result, it became the largest instance) and created Hexbear respectively. So there is a long history of larger communist communities from day one which was the status quo until the reddit API fiasco.

The Fediverse also tends to attract anarchists and other socialists by the appeal of its decentralized nature, along with a few right-libertarians who see it as an anti-censorship tool. So one could say there’s a bias there.

How might we encourage more diverse political perspectives while still maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment?

That’s tough, because you inherently limit which political perspectives you can encourage.

Why is a private entity significantly different from a government entity? If a coalition of private entities (say, facebook, twitter, youtube, … ) controls most of the commons, they have the power to dictate everything beyond the fringes. We can already see this kind of collusion in mass media to the extent that it’s labeled a propaganda model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model

I just don’t think the private/gov dichotomy is enough to decide when censorship and moderation is valid.

which does a lot of censoring, even though the creators are sort of, somehow, outwardly against censoring?

Another perspective on the Lemmy situation is that, for example, I can sincerely say I believe free speech has merits while creating a book club where political discussion isn’t allowed. Some would call that censorship, but restricting a certain community doesn’t mean I approve of unconditional societal censorship. “Censorship”, like many abstract concepts in the liberalist worldview, doesn’t make sense to think of as a universal value, but rather in contexts, like you pointed out with hate speech removal being in line with the beliefs of most people on the main Lemmy instances.

There are some concepts, for example, that I think are fine to discuss in an academic situation but should be censored in public spaces, especially when it comes to explicitly genocidal ideologies like Nazism, or bigoted hate speech.

Yeah, same when I came across it. I’d assumed it was just some recent hyperbole, but it’s a long-used term with serious theoretical backing.

I imagine the only way out of this would be a non poverty level UBI?

UBI is one of the suggestions, one in the reformist category. However, looking at the little progress made by most countries in reforming capitalism over many decades, and in light of the control that the owning class have over politics and economics, many instead propose revolutionary solutions. Obviously, the richest of the rich would prefer to avoid either, and use the mass media to promote UBI as a bandage for capitalism, while using their influence over politicians to avoid even that happening. Unless citizens can gain real power, the promise of UBI is a long road to nowhere. If we ever see it, it will probably only be used as a last compromise to avoid revolution.

The alternative to reformism, the revolutionary solutions, demand a major reorganization of society to control or replace the capitalist wage system. Now, that’s the simply summary, but the details stretch across about a century of theoretical and practical discussion and experience, from a broad range of worldviews and circumstances, from partyless direct-democracy anarchist communes to one-party states and everything in-between. I couldn’t hope to do it justice here.

Thanks for bringing up that program site (link, for convenience)

Like you said, it’s hard to know the internal situation in the prison, so it’s reasonable to want to avoid labeling this specific case as slavery or not without further evidence. The title is ultimately subjective, rather than the objective titles a news community typically encourages (by ‘subjective’, I’m referring to the fact that different worldviews have different interpretations of slavery, even up to the point where many through history consider regular work to be wage slavery based on a holistic analysis of labor in society)

These prisoners are supposedly doing this specific job voluntarily, with pay.

• Being voluntary doesn’t contradict slavery. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_slavery

• Being paid $0.50 an hour, as opposed to $0.00 an hour, is trivial. If the slave-owners of old societies gave their slaves a penny a day, they would still be slaves for all intents and purposes.

While I personally haven’t looked into this specific case, there is a very consistent and ongoing history of forced prison labor in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century#Prison_labor

Inmates who refuse to work may be indefinitely remanded into solitary confinement, or have family visitation revoked. From 2010 to 2015 and again in 2016 and in 2018, some prisoners in the US refused to work, protesting for better pay, better conditions, and for the end of forced labor. Strike leaders were punished with indefinite solitary confinement.

That is forced work on an imprisoned person upon threat of punishment, even if they can theoretically decline it. This is a form of slavery, even if they get paid a dollar an hour.

I’m glad you mentioned the open infrastructure projects. For example, I use some of the few remaining nitter/invidious/etc. servers.

As for free software projects I suggest donating your time with contributions.

Definitely. I’m already spending much of my spare time doing this.

“Which FOSS projects have enough funding that we should donate elsewhere?” is more-or-less asking “Which FOSS projects are overfunded?”, making it almost the opposite of “Which worthwhile FOSS projects are underfunded?”

Plenty of projects I rely on are underfunded or adequately funded, and there are many thousands of underfunded projects. So I’ll have no shortage of projects to consider. By instead asking for the overfunded projects, I can simply cross them off my list of projects to donate to.

That’s a different question.

I don’t have one. It’s just a tiny single board computer and an HDD running reasonably stable scripts every few hours and a couple of small server programs. Nothing it’s doing is critical, so in the rare case when something breaks, it stays broken until I fix it.

I wish there was some more detail in the article. My two initial impressions are ‘how does the power get to Earth?’ and ‘Mr. Burns blocks out the sun’. (Obviously it won’t be that big)