Man, a lot of the links to those sites are to the sorts of rhetoric that I, as a non-straight socialist, find really heckin’ awful. The web server that restricts what is sent is a perfect example. “Have no opinions of your own to impose? Fear not! Shizaru has lovely default settings which attempt to promote a fast, safe, clean, simple, respectful web.” Does anyone doing this realize just how much this sort of language sounds like “we are going to impose all of our opinions on you for your own good no matter what you want”, how easy it is to twist it into language, and why this might make people with different opinions worried or upset? If you’re going to make a bold statement on the social order of things, can you at least try to do it in a way that doesn’t give your enemies valid complaints that undermine your own goals? Shit like that is why I quit Mastodon.
And the data science article is frankly a travesty; that’s the one that really got me riled. It’s all the same objections of studying human phenomena that people had in the 1950’s and 60’s when psychology became a big thing and the counterculture got frightened of the power it gave institutions. These are valid concerns but IMO deserve to be contrasted by the benefits, for example, having a science of mental health that treats conditions like autism, depression, schizophrenia etc. as phenomena to be understood, accommodated and helped instead of as aberrations to be marginalized and stamped out. It’s just anti-intellectualism: understanding things gives people power, power is scary, so we better not understand things.
Shit like that is why I quit Mastodon.
Shit like that is why I quit Mastodon.
Would you be able to elaborate on this?
If I wanted to I would still be on Mastodon talking about it. :-p I guess I do have some things to say.
Short answer: political extremism is dangerous and makes people accept bad things as necessary, basically regardless of what the political views being held actually are. All extremism thrives on fear, a sense of persecution and turning their opponents into caractures instead of actually figuring out why problems exist and how to solve them. The KKK uses the exact same mental tools as the burgeoning Antifa.
Lots of people use Mastodon because they’re anarchists or extreme liberals trying to escape centralized services like Twitter. Exactly the same as centralized services like Twitter, that sort of social media produces a huge and awful echo chamber effect. So people polarize and then get rather upset when you say things like “The KKK uses the exact same mental tools as the burgeoning Antifa” and I got sick of dealing with it.
Regarding Shizaru, I don’t understand how it is provocative, as it’s not a political statement. It’s just an opinion that modern websites are bad, because the web technologies include functionality that is “evil” (i.e., bad or harmful).
I would think that you, as a socialist, would agree that the web hasn’t lived up to its supposed potential to improve knowledge, encourage democracy and bring people closer together. Instead it has become a tool for corporations, and it has increased the (class-based?) divide between those who are technologically savvy, and understand how to use the internet to get their business done, and those who are not comfortable with computers, but are forced to use them because it has almost replaced all other means of communicating with governments, corporations and people.
Shizaru seems to be a reaction to this development. By limiting the functionality of the HTML document, it makes it hard for websites to be used in the way described above.
Yeah, I see the purpose and it’s reasonable. I’m mostly pissed off at the data science article and letting it overflow onto other things I guess. It just really irks me when people say “we are going to enforce our ideas of freedom and goodness on everyone no matter what they think because our ideas are right” and then get upset when one points out how much of a double-edged sword that is. Shizaru is the opposite, the user running it is enforcing those ideas only on themselves and the user can easily configure the preferences.
Okay, yeah, I get that.
The problem is why not just write content the way you prefer it? Unless you’re serving the content of others, making the server enforce some arbitrary rules seems silly.
Well, sometimes it’s good to arbitrarily restrict yourself – look at poetry or even diets, for example. I think it serves a purpose.
All I see is the headline. Am I missing something?
In FF, all I see is a blank yellow page
Some further investigation - it seems like the issue is the background image. Removing it lets the page render as expected. Perhaps set the background on the body, rather than on every element (you’re currently using the * selector)
Perhaps OP was trying to teach us a lesson on relying too much on new browsers… (although it renders ok in Chrome).
Do you not see the rest of the page? It’s a set of links, some about modern Gopher. I had considered posting the gopher links but that would be hard for some people to access.
Collections of links usually aren’t great to post, since it leads to digest spamming and is hard to discuss usefully. Maybe submit one or two of those links at a time and that would help.
I’ll do that from now on, thanks.
I imagined I was looking at a JS;DR scenario, where the title and links to more stuff rendered, but the actual meat didn’t until a script ran. In the absence of an opening paragraph that explained what the page was about, I assumed something was amiss.
There’s a gopher proxy one could use.