Right? I wish we had the Great Firewall ffs.

If it weren't in a US jurisdiction this would matter to me, but since it is it's irrelevant. US law basically makes privacy on any server within the US an illusion. Because they can issue a gag and log order to the server operator and you'd never know as they'd be legally barred from speaking on it.

Well kind of. But it's more like touch DIFFERENT grass. Like whereever you live I bet there's a river or creak or lake or whatever within a 30 minute drive. Go there. Check it out. Sit next to it for a minute. Let yourself be an ape for a minute. It's what we are. Just follow your whims. See a cool rock? Go check that shit out.

Agreed if you read through the forum posts of the founder a lot of it is him bending over backwards to justify this very thing. But I figured most people wouldn't be as convinced by the technical aspect, and I'm not qualified enough on it to like fully break it down myself either so just didn't speak on it.

I do think that it seems a bit worse than just an extra layer tho. It is literally moving your actual Identifying data (payment info and IP) into the hands of a US based company and out of the hands of Mullvad. It is protecting you from Mullvad, and exposing you to the massive fucking Five Eyes surveillance state, and US jurisdiction which is one of the most draconian in the world in regards to digital privacy.

Is this just a money grab? Maybe. Does the founder believe in what he's doing? Maybe. But does this also look exactly like what I would expect a US Government backed Honey Pot service to look like? Yes.

Also, if you don't trust Mullvad, use TOR.

Step outside of your routine. Drive 20 minutes down the road on a whim and go to the park. Go for a walk. Break the monotony of life in small ways all throughout the day/week. Less screen time too.

Say's who? The community is supposed to just organically resist this? There's no organizational structure? Because that would be a government.

Specify how what I described is different than what you'd do then. What mechanisms or institutions would you put in place to prevent step 3?

Honestly I wish I didn't. I don't have a google account. Don't have any Meta accounts. Don't have accounts for basically anything I'm not functionally REQUIRED to have (banking for example). But Amazon is hard to avoid. I do a lot of buying in person, but in person shopping is just horrible these days. You need to find something specific and you are screwed. I do try to find other places online to get something when I can but a lot of times I just have to fall back to amazon. Maybe part of it is just the area I'm in though. Tons of the more specialty stores here have closed down. We don't even have an electronics store anymore after Best Buy closed.

The term authoritarianism is utterly meaningless because all governments rely on coercion to maintain their authority. The state is fundamentally an instrument that’s used by the ruling class to maintain its dominance. The whole notion that political systems can be neatly categorized into authoritarian or democratic binaries is deeply infantile.

The reality is that every government derives its authority from its monopoly on legal violence. The ability to enforce laws, suppress dissent, and maintain order is derived from control over police, military, and judicial systems. Whether a government is labelled authoritarian or democratic, the fundamental basis of its power lies here. Therefore, the only meaningful questions to ask are which class interests it represents, and to what extent can it be held accountable to them.

I honestly think we should have a bot where anytime someone says the word authoritarian it just spits this out at them.

Step 1: Abolish Government

Step 2: Establish absolutely no institutional infrastucture to ensure nobody else makes a new government. Because that would be authoritatian.

Step 3: Someone makes another government by establishing a monopoly on violence.

Step 4: Abolish Government... wait what?

What do you actually know about soviet housing? I've done significant academic research on the topic. It's not just a simple "they built a certain type of building". The reason they all look so similar is that their construction method was pre-fab concrete panels. It was a revolutionary technology at the time, and allowed them to solve their housing crisis. They were called "Khrushchyovka" after whom you can guess. He made it his mission to solve the Soviet Housing crisis when he took over and was largely successful.

You have to keep in mind the historical context. The people moving into these buildings were coming from a pre-industrial society where they commonly had so electricity, dirt floors, and no insulation. These were a significant upgrade from the pre-USSR constructions. They started construction in the 1940s, and really took off in the 50s.

I think the main takeaways from them shouldn't be "We should build these exact things". and I don't think that's what people who support them are advocating for. I think what they are trying to point out is that if you standardize production, and use economies of scale, it is entirely possible to build tons of housing quickly and cheaply. And considering the way housing prices look these days I'd expect that to be an idea anyone can get behind.

If you are interested here is an article about how modern China is using similar practices: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/17/10695

Finally! I can download more RAM!