proprietary systems cannot be innovative, long-ish
There are lots of *practical* reasons why proprietary and commercial environments aren't really capable of producing innovation, but those are not the ones I want to focus on here.
The bigger reason why proprietary systems cannot be innovative is more philosophical. "Innovation", to me, is a very specific thing: it is the collective process of discovering and iterating on new techniques and technologies, to make society a little better for everyone every time.
The "iterating on" is important there; innovation is about *collective knowledge building*, about improving humanity's collective understanding of the world in a durable and sustainable way, and ensuring that those who come after us can build on our work to improve a little further.
Proprietary systems, by their very nature, cannot do this. "Innovations" in proprietary systems will live and die with the organizations in which they are built; the knowledge of their workings is secret and deliberately obscured, practically guaranteeing a loss of knowledge when the organization eventually folds - as every organization does sooner or later.
Proprietary organizations simply do not participate in the process of innovation at all; they *emulate* it, as a cheap party trick to impress investors and accumulate more power, economic or otherwise.
For something to be truly innovative, it *must* happen in the open, no exceptions. If others outside of your control cannot iterate on it, it is not truly innovation, no matter how clever it sounds.
#DuckDuckFedi: what would be a good, concise term for "grassroots initiatives to build alternative social structures founded on radical principles, focusing on the 'building up' and mutual social support part rather than the 'tearing down' part?"
I'm looking for something less specific than 'mutual aid', also encompassing the somewhat more abstract and semi-centralized movements, but not including institutional efforts.
(If they give you some evasive non-answer about how it 'depends' and they've never talked about mutual aid before, the answer is most likely "zero", by the way)
happy fucking disability pride month; more on the breathing issue we have
needing to leave a place—typically very abruptly; we often have only a few seconds to reach clean air before needing to breathe again—because someone decided they just had to smoke there right now is something that happens to us regularly, and whenever this happens when we're expected to stay around we get to explain (usually to abled neurotypicals) that if we did stay there would have been a medical emergency
I've been asked a few times by older inlaws how AI is changing the video-games industry, and I'm very pleased with how I've handled gently dashing their hopes :3 "We've evaluated it, but the output is well below our quality bar for most things." That's usually a good pivot point for talking about how the AI stuff is waaay over hyped.
Are there good participatory budgeting processes that allow stakeholders with different amounts of money to allocate among several budget categories of fixed but different sizes, reflecting different priorities? Like in a ranked-choice kind of way? @ntnsndr
proprietary systems cannot be innovative, long-ish
There are lots of *practical* reasons why proprietary and commercial environments aren't really capable of producing innovation, but those are not the ones I want to focus on here.
The bigger reason why proprietary systems cannot be innovative is more philosophical. "Innovation", to me, is a very specific thing: it is the collective process of discovering and iterating on new techniques and technologies, to make society a little better for everyone every time.
The "iterating on" is important there; innovation is about *collective knowledge building*, about improving humanity's collective understanding of the world in a durable and sustainable way, and ensuring that those who come after us can build on our work to improve a little further.
Proprietary systems, by their very nature, cannot do this. "Innovations" in proprietary systems will live and die with the organizations in which they are built; the knowledge of their workings is secret and deliberately obscured, practically guaranteeing a loss of knowledge when the organization eventually folds - as every organization does sooner or later.
Proprietary organizations simply do not participate in the process of innovation at all; they *emulate* it, as a cheap party trick to impress investors and accumulate more power, economic or otherwise.
For something to be truly innovative, it *must* happen in the open, no exceptions. If others outside of your control cannot iterate on it, it is not truly innovation, no matter how clever it sounds.
exhaustedly again asking folks not to use "crazy" as a generic derogative
don't boost shit that says "insane" when they really mean "coldly calculatingly evil" or "responding rationally but disappointingly to perverse incentives" or "foolish and shitty"
mental health problems are not the enemy you're aiming for
in fact by using this lazy shorthand you are doing the fascists' work for them - associating mental health issues with degeneracy, chaos, and evil, and furthering eugenicist beliefs.
fundraiser for an african family trying to rebuild their house after a natural disaster
neo-nazi doxxed
There will come a point where you ask internet-oracle-of-choice "how do I self-host a Netflix alternative" and they will intentionally give you bad advice in order to discourage you.
That point is coming sooner rather than later, and we need to train *an entire generation* of internet users how to get out of this trap.
That's *our* work to do, RIGHT NOW.
this is going to be increasingly relevant from now (July '24) until November of this year. please, fellow white people, *check your sources* and be especially careful about what you say--and what you repeat. there is nuanced debate to be had, but you *must* understand the nuances *before* you speak up. this is a very important time to *listen* to BIPOC, *think* about what they say, and *not make assumptions*.
we all have a lot of learning, and unlearning, to do, especially right now. it's an excellent time and opportunity for *all of us* to sit down, shut up, pay attention, and think carefully.
Technical debt collector and general hype-hater. Early 30s, non-binary, ND, poly, relationship anarchist, generally queer.
- No alt text (request) = no boost.
- Boosts OK for all boostable posts.
- DMs are open.
- Flirting welcome, but be explicit if you want something out of it!
- The devil doesn't need an advocate; no combative arguing in my mentions.
Sometimes horny on main (behind CW), very much into kink (bondage, freeuse, CNC, and other stuff), and believe it or not, very much a submissive bottom :p
My spoons are limited, so I may not always have the energy to respond to messages.
Strong views about abolishing oppression, hierarchy, agency, and self-governance - but I also trust people by default and give them room to grow, unless they give me reason not to. That all also applies to technology and how it's built.