ageedizzle

The way you’re discussing ‘models’ seems to assume two points: (1) that all useful models will be physical models, and (2) that we have models that work in this context. Neither of these assumptions are correct.

For the first point, arguably the most popular model of consciousness we have at the moment is Integrated Information Theory (IIT). IIT is explicitly a panpsychist theory (all matter has some non-zero quantity of consciousness). This lends itself very well to non-physicalist interpretations (where consciousness is a fundamental constituent of the universe, irreducible to matter).

For the second point, all this discussion of models is largely besides the point. Because there is currently no model of conscious experience that works. No theory is widely accepted. And the theories that were once popular (global workspace theory and even IIT) seem to not the supported by evidence (proponents of these theories have tried to modify them to fit the data, but you can only do that so many times before things start to looks sketchy). So whether we use a model or not, it’s not really relevant to this discussion, because we currently have no scientific models of consciousness that work.

But there’s no reason to think it isn’t.

That’s not the case. This is a very active area in academic philosophy and there are, objectively speaking, several reasons to think that consciousness is not solely a material process (whether or not you think these are good reasons is for you to decide). For an accessible introduction to this topic I recommend Facing up to the problem of consciousness by David Chalmers. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on the Knowledge Argument is also a good intro if you are looking to dive right into something a bit more technical.

Okay thanks for the heads up

Thank you!

It does sound interesting. Where do I start?

Hi there. Can you talk to the astronauts for us lol?

Plus a lot of people with revoked licenses just continue to drive anyway with a vehicle insured under someone else’s name.

Do we have amateur radio guys on the fediverse?

went to see bluesky when people started boycotting social medias and it seemed to be full of bot posts instantly

We don’t have bots yet because we’re still small. But if we continue to grow (which would be a good thing imo, less people on big tech) then we will eventually have to deal with bots too. What’s the fediverse solution to that? Is it just manually reviewing account creation requests by server mods? That doesn’t seem like a solution that scales well.

deleted by creator

I was being hyperbolic but the point is the article didn’t point any real negativity towards the users of big tech, just the corporations or CEOs or whoever behind big tech

That was literally my point. Some people bought electric cars because the could, not because they wanted to effect any social change.

Okay. Then don’t really see the relevance here. OPs point was clearly about trying to effect social change.

Is activity pub only used on Linux desktop apps? Can’t a Mac or windows user participate in mastodon?

I wasn’t trying to suggest that they couldn’t.

Fediverse use and Linux are separate issues.

Literally speaking they are different projects, but they are also similar in that they are both open source projects, often both FOSS, so the underlying philosophy behind their development is the same

product of Facebook. Google has poured Fons of money into FOSS development. Should we shun these tools?

Shunning doomscrolling is not the same thing as categorically shunning everything that Google or Meta has ever output. I think its great they contribute to open source projects, I hope they do continue to do so

Op posted create a completely false us v them narrative that just isn’t there.

Personally speaking I didn’t find OPs post to be especially divisive, it I didn’t make me feel compelled to go harm some Windows users or anything like that, but your mileage may vary

Interesting article! Linux seems very techy to me so I never thought of it as being similar to Luddism but it makes perfect sense when you spell it out like that. Thanks for sharing!

Look, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you are treading into virtue signalling territory and your article has the superior tone of those who bought electric cars in the late 2010s

Except electric cars are hella expensive and linux is free. It is true that OP is making a moral judgement but I don’t think thats the same as ‘virtue signalling’. Open software is a morally charged topic. Some the main reasons why people like open software are moral reasons (the goods of collaboration without profit incentive, the harms of big tech, etc.). So bringing morality into the discussion seems appropriate.

Using Linux is not going to stop your doom-scrolling,

Linux itself might not prevent doomscrolling (though it can help a bit, since default Windows and MacOS settings are always trying to push news and other articles onto the user to plug their respective news aggregation services). But other FOSS software (like the ActivityPub protocol) can for sure make a very sizeable dent in the amount of doomscrolling in one’s life. I agree that OP could have done more to distinguish the Linux project from other FOSS projects, but I think the point still got across.

nor is using Linux by itself telling the big corpos anything at all.

Microsoft is a big corpo. If one of its biggest competitors were free and open source linux distributions with libreoffice suite installed would that not be telling it something? Same goes for Apple as well

Edit for typos

Well until very recently I had a shared laundry set-up, where I was sharing two laundry machines with everyone in my apartment building. That might explain why it’s all black. I don’t think its actually burning theres probably just a lot of gunk in the system

Okay this is a satisfying response, thank you. I’ll have to test that out with the white towels. I’ve never noticed that before but it makes perfect sense.

i see. But why?

Serious question. I know this may sound silly, but why does the lint change colour then? Like, if I dry a load of white clothing then why does the lint still come out black?

Something to consider: damage from drying machines is apparently one way we inadvertently injest microplastics (the synthetic materials in the clothing gets broken up and then is ingesting through the skin). Might be something worth avoiding for your baby (though the convenience of a dryer is still hard to argue with).

I know this question is intended as a joke but it has me thinking. What is lint, actually? If its from our clothing then why is it always the same colour? Like, why can I put in a load of white clothing but the lint is still black? Is the lint burnt? Or is lint a byproduct of laundry soap? Or is it both from our clothing and our laundry soap? I genuinely don’t know. I’ve never thought about it before