I suppose the issue is the private ownership of the algorithm. Lemmy is a way to distribute ownership even though I think each instance is privately owned. It might be worthwhile to create a platform abstracting the data from the algorithm allowing the end user a choice of recommendation algorithm.

There is no money in it. Enclosure of the recommendation algorithm is profitable.

If there are recommendation systems, maybe an open API for requests is required. Thereby a user can choose an algorithm. I would go as far as open sourcing it all.

I agree that the current form puts too much power in the hands of a few.

We should only consume domestic media. Good thing the Bible is domestic media. \s

How is there less risk to Americans on a platform like X(itter) instead of TikTok?

Nice to see nerdcore on Lemmy. There’s so much out there, but here’s some variety from the subgenre hackercore.

https://amplitudeproblem.bandcamp.com/track/enter-my-world-ft-ytcracker

https://bashexplode.bandcamp.com/track/lfh-ft-ohm-i-2

I’ve been thinking about the self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell. The extreme form of protest rattled people that oppose the genocide. Genocide supporters used the act as a way to point at service members that don’t support genocide. The people that needed the message of his protest do not care. I contend Aaron Bushnell could have done more by continuing life.

I am not you. I do not know your story. I do know you brighten up my Lemmy feed with your posts. Your message reaches me.

I have a gallows sense of humor about the current systemic issues. I have been watching a police officer patrol the neighborhood in a SUV with a massive rack of lights on top. Welcome to the future, I suppose.

Politically, “power to” is important to me. I feel empowered knowing that I have the “power to” end my life, but have chosen not to, because we are stronger together in the fight against over-policing and the heirarchical power structures that use forms of violence to restrict our “power to” do things.

I medicate with music. Since you are already in a dark place, here is music I medicate with to feel empowered when I am reaching the end of my rope. It is not what you would get from a crisis line.

This life is fucked, this life is shit We never even asked for it So with that I’ll do what I please Spray my brains all over the trees Only thing waiting on the other side Is six feet of dirt, there’s no surprise to hide

• Give Up / Vas a Morir by Akil Godsey of End It

And if I die as a partisan, oh bella ciao, bella ciao, bella ciao, ciao, ciao and if I die as a partisan then you must bury me.

• English translation of Bella Ciao, Italian folk partisan song

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs

• Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875) by Karl Marx

I do have disdain for the phases laid out by Marx, but this slogan is wisdom.

Further, assuming intelligence is measurable by an IQ test.

I referenced a news story in which the parachute on an air dropped aid package failed to deploy crushing people underneath.

Genocide is not ethical. Voting for genocide, but less, does not change the ethics of genocide. Part of the coalition that elected Biden in 2020 will not vote for him again due to his support of genocide.

The options for such voters are:

1. Being complicite in genocide
2. Voting third party or not at all

I understand the two party system created by first-past-the-post. I understand third party candidates are unlikely to win. I understand Democrats are rightfully nervous. If Democrats are nervous enough, they should do something to change the minds of voters that will not vote for genocide.

There is a flaw in making a collective choice individualistic. Helping others is a moral thing to do and I was there in 2020 even though peanut butter sucks. Individually, I will get a sandwich, probably with peanut butter.

However, this crate landed on Palestinians. Helping the people under the crate seems important.

I understand needing to eat the sandwich. I also understand making a collective first-past-the-post choice individual is a flawed argument.

However there is an individual component to saying I really can’t eat peanut butter. The decision then becomes stand your ground (no peanut butter), compromise (just a little peanut butter) or protest (full peanut butter; see you in the ER). The claim is the compromise is best.

How do we reach a point where we no longer need to compromise on peanut butter?

Offering a sandwich with more and less peanut butter when I am allergic to peanuts still means I will be sick. I’m hungry and I want a sandwich with no peanut butter. There are third party candidates providing sandwiches with no peanut butter. I am sorry demand decreases for the sandwich with less peanut butter, but I am unable to stomach peanuts.