Okay, then links awaits you.

It’s a client for the same broken thing.

while not relying on a host of proprietary bug ridden plugins

This is utter bullshit.

Obfuscated JS is not any less proprietary or bug-ridden than Java bytecode.

The former can be the underlying level simply.

If I’d want to rewatch Babylon V, I’d pirate it. Same for Star Wars (not even talking about despecialized editions, I just don’t want to give a dime to Disney).

It’s funny, I’ve never met anybody who’d have that kind of experience and use the word “hacker” in this meaning simultaneously.

A lot of the people who think IP jives well with the internet were the ones who looked at me weird when I said I had online friends circa 2000

This checks out.

Back when “FOSS” was “Free as in Beer” and fuck that Richard Stallman with his “free as in speech” bullshit.

I remember exactly the opposite, people being much more acutely aware of the difference, and Stallman being much more popular than now.

people like Bill Gates stealing the foundations of technology

Clarification? Movies about Steve Jobs excluded.

Which is why identities and communities on Fediverse should be cryptography-based, and an “instance” should simply be a sort of a supernode, or a caching node.

I don’t want that. WWW is not intended for that.

If you want that, there’s been Flash and Java applets at least allowing whatever you’d like.

That was the correct way to put cross-platform applications into webpages.

Don’t tell me about security problems in those, these are present in any piece of software and fixed with new versions, just like with the browser itself.

It’s so sad that Presto didn’t get FOSSed.

Technically it already depended on plenty of FOSS technologies, like gstreamer etc.

We know this from the leak which allowed to compile a working browser.

If only it was legally released, it would still be alive, I’m sure of that - there were even patches for the leaked source adding functionality and fixing bugs.

nor Microsoft and Windows.

Come on, this is ridiculous.

Apple was stalling any progress of web by stalling new features in WebKit. They wanted to push their native apps and get big cut from developers’ money.

I mean, whatever their reasons, for World Wide Web of hypertext pages the list of necessary features shouldn’t be so long.

So a good thing.

Anyway, that battle is long lost, so I’m just slowly moving my “internet reading” needs into Gemini. Friends I can’t move, though.

You know, using the word “neoliberals” just spoils your message due to this word meaning technically literally nothing. Empirically the least fuzzy description of it is “something that leftists don’t like”. It’s literally leftist slang.

I don’t think there’s anything more “actually libertarian” than Rothbard, but one can disagree with any particular thing (and I do with many). It seems you are pushing your ancoms from an unexpected orifice again.

But, of course, Chesterton’s and others’ distributism is even better, but one just can’t agree on such a thing with people without a certain cultural component.

I mean, you can just read the sources, Rothbard’s most known books, Ayn Rand’s Atlas and other stuff, and make your own opinion. The only common thing between them is disdain for state regulation and leftism. But the root of Rothbard’s ideology is simply incompatible with the root of Rand’s ideology.

The former builds on natural right and non-aggression. The latter builds on people not being equal, and some being shit under the boot of others, better and more useful. These are in direct conflict.

I mean, explaining something to a tankie is similar to trying to teach a pig fly.

Her views are 100% bog standard modern “libertarian,”

Wrong. She praises monopolies, hierarchical systems with hereditary aristocracy, money bending rights, some people being more human than others etc. She’s rather very roughly Darwinist, with the idea that the less you try to compensate for strength disparity, the better, and at the same time she’s rather centralist. Almost fascist.

Basically she’s an inverted Bolshevik, which is not surprising considering her family history. A Bolshevik from capitalists, if you like. Not even similar to libertarianism. Her ideas have simply nothing to do with liberty. She was sufficiently honest to explain these things herself.

and anarcho-capitalists/“libertarians”/racist and pedophilic liberals and fascists lying about their real goals to useful idiots.

I’m ancap (rather distributist as in Chesterton’s views, but that’s harder to explain), so this BS you can leave to yourself.

I’d generalize this as anarchist ideologies attracting people who’d like to get rid of certain limitations most others would consider sane. Like fucking children, stealing, killing etc. This is, sadly, a real tendency, but I’ve met such leftist anarchists too.

Rothbard, famous racist, slave desiring, apartheid supporting, pedophile ideological founder of anarcho-capitalism, who has quite a lot of suspiciously pro-fascism quotes, technically started the process in the 40’s, but it didn’t gain steam or co-opt the term libertarian until the populatization of “libertarianism” thanks to Rand’s works.

You forgot to say that he also kinda liked USSR, at least in his book, “For a new liberty” or something, a very interesting person surely.

Also Rothbard’s and Rand’s followers were always very different people. I’ve never met a person who’d like both. It’s a bit like tankies think that “liberal” and “fascist” are synonyms, completely removed from the reality. If you want to have some idea about libertarians, you should talk to them and not your leftist friends.

So yes, everything you just said is technically correct, but is still deliberately misleading in modern context.

It’s especially important in modern context. Ayn Rand is basically a spoiler for libertarianism, a strawman which every leftist uses against people whose ideology has nothing in common with her. And in reality she was just, like I said earlier, for capitalism what Bolsheviks were for leftist ideologies. Rather economically misguided and too impractical.

Guys, you can keep jerking off each other all you want, but pseudo-scientific arguments are simply not sufficient to prove your point.

Science persists over millennia, builds compasses and then ships and then rockets and now computers. Science makes whole societies vanish or survive. Over the course of too many years.

Now let’s look at communism. It’s not science, it’s a socioreligious sect, of the kind that Lucian of Samosata was ironic about, as those were plentiful in his time.

It’s not that you are completely wrong in anything, but:

at the end of WW1 in order to preserve German bourgeois rule

I’ll just inform you here that German aristocracy and “bourgeoisie” are usually used as antonyms, not synonyms.

Also Germany was starving, the logic was that they can’t afford more chaos, even if it means conservatives.

Soviets did the similar thing with GDR and Hungary and what not in the Eastern block. Though of course they preferred their existing communist buddies who somehow survived the 30s and 40s.

USA wouldn’t have such still already existent friendly factions, so they tried to grow some new ones, initially from people who’d be moderates in former regimes.

I’d still prefer Pinochet to Khmer Rouge.

The author of that book didn’t consider herself libertarian, and educated ancaps usually do not consider herself one of their own.

That is, apparently you’ve never met one yet write such pretentious phrases.

What’s wrong with you calling ancaps fascist? I mean, they are not more or less fascist than anyone in this pic except for the tankie getting pummeled, and the tankie always has this coming.

You give as little as you can give for as much as you can get. I’d rather say distribution of negotiating power. And the way to fix this is making it easier to do business in your sphere as much as possible at all costs. And I don’t mean making it more profitable for existing businesses, I mean there being as many businesses as possible and them being easy to start, so that the negotiating power would even out.

Which moves us to the IP, patent, copyright laws, which make it hard starting a business in many areas, and any kind of regulation and certification that makes it seriously hard to start a business really. Which is, BTW, the reason regulatory laws directed at fighting Apple, Meta etc are also killing many other things we don’t even see cause it happens in conceptual stage.

That suit is incompetent. He compares real metrics with imagined metrics, of course the latter are going to be better.

Can’t speak about other people, but for me such things really improve efficiency. You should be able to relax when doing intellectual work.

Cause 40hrs a week is a schedule for workers on a production line with machine tools doing monotonous work. It’s hard, but it doesn’t require you to think much. Thinking, changing contexts is hard.

Ah, also you really are a resource, only your employer is a resource for you too, to get money which you then use for your own purposes. You are mutually resources for each other, that’s the point.

Well, also it seems that in the olden days, when we didn’t have internet etc, it was a bit more normal to do your own hobbies etc at work, unofficial tea breaks, and in general many things other than work. Though I’m from Russia, and the Soviet joke says “they imitate pay, we imitate work”.