elfpie

I think there was an effort in the past to make sure it's a family show and disconnect The Doctor from the more mature parts of the whoniverse. Maybe the changes in production and, maybe, the realization adults are too obsessed with it create new avenues for money making creativity.

As far back as 2010, in a piece titled “Little Brother is Watching,” author Walter Kirn wrote for the New York Times: “As the internet proves every day, it isn’t some stern and monolithic Big Brother that we have to reckon with as we go about our daily lives, it’s a vast cohort of prankish Little Brothers equipped with devices that Orwell, writing 60 years ago, never dreamed of and who are loyal to no organized authority. The invasion of privacy — of others’ privacy but also our own, as we turn our lenses on ourselves in the quest for attention by any means — has been democratized.”

The article is paywalled: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/magazine/17FOB-WWLN-t.html

Another one from 2004: https://www.wired.com/2004/07/little-brother-is-watching/

--

I had never heard the concept before, but it certainly serves to stop me from considering the state we are now as non horrifying. Bookmarked the podcast for later, but I’m sharing it right now anyway.

Something to keep in mind and that you realize after a while is that the history you know without much research or certainty is most likely the history of the ruling class, told to make they look as great as they believe to be.

I have just read Three by Kieron Gillen, the intentional Spiritual Antithesis to 300 by Frank Miller. I knew 300 is propaganda that only values the importance of a small portion of the people who fought. Spartans were the real soldiers, the superior people, the only that mattered. Then you have a class of people whose job is to do whatever they don't deem dignified, and fight their battles as well if needed. A class they rightfully feared for outnumbering their oppressors and revolting whenever the opportunity arose. A class they openly mistreated.

It's been two decades since I left school, but I'm pretty sure there was no mention of them in my history lessons. I recall the wars, but omitting the detail that most of the soldiers (in the practical sense) were not who you'd assume to be is huge.

If for nothing else, I needed this movie just for how the camera moved. It followed the characters and the action without dozens of jump cuts. I thought the long take during the opening was just a nice way of presenting the players and the incident that would affect their lives, but it became the norm throughout.

Anyway, it's a movie about a day in the lives of black people, queer people, favela people, young people that are kinda lost. It's an incomplete work with a strong first act that stumbles transitioning to the second and doesn't find its footing anymore.

It's nice to see such a positive depiction of groups that so often only fuel tragedy porn. They can show their honest lives, have fun, be flawed, be absurd, be beautiful and sexy, tell a story that reflects a culture that I myself am not all that familiar with.

The rest of the article (not translated) is an interview with Cathcart.

I guess the hopes of a mass migration to another app are not good. On the other side, Brazil's policies will have a great influence in the future development of whatsapp.

In the discussion I read elsewhere, people wondered if the way funds are granted would change and advocated for it. I don't think a system that can say they profit greatly from the status quo will ever care. I also remember how public funding were denied to researchers and then cut without all of it being used.

I don’t really want a definition of what the fediverse should be or was initially envisioned to be. I just want to understand how people actually use it. I started wondering because I felt the talks about its current state and growth stumble in invisible misunderstandings about the basic nature of what we are using or how we are using it.

I came here with the reddit exodus, but the site was mostly utilitarian for me, with my attempts to find community a failure. I saw something forum like and treated it like that, and the same can be said about my use of beehaw. Only recently I adventured in seeing a feed with All displayed, which was definitely not for me, but helped me find some communities to subscribe.

Federation, personally, is an opportunity for different communities to communicate, not necessarily get conjoined. For instance, I have an account in tech.lgbt, although it’s abandoned. In this group x.y, I focused first in the lgbt, as I have being doing since much before I saw myself as queer, because it’s a very good way to make sure the people around are the kind I wish to have around as a start. That’s my home, a place in which I expect visitors to respect the rules if they want to be let in. That’s to say I believe there’s no public / communal space in the fediverse, you are always on someone’s home and should respect that.

The big issue I’d find with the fediverse is that we don’t advertise the outside communities we enjoy enough, mostly expecting something interesting to simply show up on our screens.

Lip balms here usually have a cap that you just pull to open, and that's what I had been doing with the latest one I bought. Several times in the several weeks since I first opened it, I thought it's really too hard an action. Today, maybe because I'm sick and weaker, I stopped to consider my repeated internal criticism and easily screwed the cap off.

So, I ask all of you to tell me of a moment when you realized that hammering a problem was not the best solution.

I’m not in a very good head space for discussions, but some thoughts that came to mind while watching.

• Companies know how much value and power unions have, so much that they form their own.

• Racism, as other minorities issues, affect everyone.

Have you ever stepped on someone's foot? It happens. They might get angry, it's understandable. Just an accident, not your intention, but your fault nonetheless. Keep this in mind.

I'll be using transphobia in this conversation, because I'm here and the discussion that moved me to write, but I learned the concepts from talks about racism and it applies to many similar situations.

What I am doesn't matter right now. It's not about about me, right? I'll open up the most targetable part of myself though: my inner thoughts. Particularly my musings about gender, which are relatively recent (I'm 39). Nothing specific, just the possibility that they might be transphobic.

That idea was something I feared and worried about a lot. In open discussions, I'm always careful with my words, but I had private doubts for a long time that seemed ugly, plain and simple. Was I transphobic in the past? Most likely. Am I still transphobic on some level? I don't know. I don't want to be, and that's the point.

We are all living our lives the only way we know how to. Sometimes accidents happen, people get hurt, we make things right. Sometimes the way we live our lives mean that we are stepping on people by design. It might still not be our intention, it is still our fault and the fact it's not an accident anymore will mess with our minds when we realize that.

So, again, I don't want to be transphobic. That's not what I believe or how I live my life. Again, my intentions don't matter if what I do hurt or endanger others in any way. I believe I can only say I'm not transphobic if I do the work not to be. If I accept my thoughts, words and actions can be transphobic, and that they are mistakes to be corrected. Being transphobic is about how I can negatively affect trans people, regardless of how I see myself or believe I'm doing the right thing. It's about them, not me.

I ask that you look at the other person or group when you are in an argument, or just out in the world. See how your actions affect them. See if you care enough to do something about it. And, if you find out you don't want to change, try accepting who you are, accepting any disgust you might feel without reinterpreting yours or other people's reality.

edit: It was a mistake going with figurative language here in an discussion that intended to be inclusive. I know better. Also, I wanted people to see that the subject of the action is not always the important part. When there are victims, their point of view should be the one validated first, they should the ones we make sure are all right before we decide to seek punishment. And I don't know if this will help, but the imperfect parallel with racism that came to mind was societal racism.

An article with the same themes for those who prefer to read: https://www.whatsonweibo.com/the-concept-of-involution-neijuan-on-chinese-social-media/

The video talks about the nature of competition at schools and workplaces, 996 working hours, the phenomenon of involution, and the extremes they have reached.

Transcript here, but I really recommend watching the video: https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=gsW3VsraJqo [search for "Applause" to skip add]

Brief definition here: https://www.lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Amatonormativity

Being single shouldn’t be seen as some non-conformist statement

The focus of the video is on aromantics, but it is about societal expectations regarding relationships and how the goal is to live in a life long monogamous relationship.

--

The nice thing when watching videos for the second time before posting here is realizing all the connections my brain has formed in the background after so much time. It hadn’t occurred to me that, although I feel immune to the pressures at large to be in a relationship, I have actually entered romantic relationships because of how they would have deteriorated (or so I thought) without me accepting the transitions from friendships.

Amatonormativity can ruin it for everyone. You might be monogamous and totally happy, but putting a barrier between you and others that are close because the forms of intimacy we are led to believe to exist or to be okay are limited.