Tar_Alcaran

Not at all. I’m saying you should interact and stand behind your interactions.

For example, you downvoted my post, which is fine. You also replied, which is also fine. Why is it bad that one isn’t on your profile (but it is public) and the other is openly visible in a list on your profile?

Interactions are by default public, otherwise there’s no point to interacting. I’d go one further and say that having the voting information public but not visible by default is by far the worst option.

Economics is basically social psychology with some numbers sprinkled in.

Orchids indicate s… Wait…

i find it concerning because this enables creating a very detailed profile of a users interests, political alignment, medical issues, sexual orientation etc. Even if they never post anything!

So don’t interact. What you read isn’t stored, but if you interact, it should be public.

For example I accidentally upvoted a really disgusting NSFW post misclicking on my phone.

I agree that it’s dumb you don’t have a “my votes” page where you can remove that. But you can go to said post and just remove your vote.

Downvoting is a mental disorder.

That’s hilarious and simultaneously really sad

Why is that concerning? The whole system was meant to be transparent

This is literally what we do in the Netherlands though. There’s a bigger and bigger push to group underground works from multiple parties to reduce cost and nuisance

If you value stuff like safety, there’s also regulations.

Both!

And Laika wasn’t a Laika

Monoculture just means a single species crop, and does not reference a time frame at all.

Correct! Crop rotation is monoculture, even if you plant a wheat one year, beans the next and melons he third.

Monoculture is either the same crop on a field every time,

Incorrect. Crop rotation is still monoculture. Dynamic cycling is still monoculture. It only stops being monoculture when you plant and grow more types of crops from the same field at the same time.

In practice, even polyculture fields will be strips the width of whatever harvesting machine will fit, or they’re tiny hand-planted fields.

Turns out a transgender piece of shit is still a piece of shit.

Explanations for why my husband slouches.

Not anymore, but a teen habit is hard to break

Also experiments actually just fail sometimes, not even giving a positive or negative result. The method went wrong or a reagent was cooked.

You should know better than to start an experiment on Tuesdays!

Would like to do a poll for how this works in other countries compared to the US.

Most of us don’t have science fairs. We have a few projects in school, and that’s it.

The examples you’re naming are all carefully controlled, very narrow-aspect groups that are generally protected from their surroundings.

I can sketch you a big problem with turning, say, a university anarchist. Yes, in theory, you can get a greater range of ideas, but in practice the stressors will tear it apart due to human nature. There is always a limited amount of funding, so how do people work out who gets what? Unlike with food or shelter, it’s ALWAYS useful to have more funding. Why should I get more than you? Well, obviously because my history department is much more important to literally everything than your maths department.

So now what happens? Do we only cooperate with those who wish to cooperate? Sure, lets split up. Of course, from the remaining funding, my area of medieval history is much more relevant than that guys’ area of ancient history, and if we can’t cooperate we shouldn’t…

You can, of course, run a department, or a specific niche in an anarchist way. A specific research group, or a knowledge-sharing system would benefit, but that’s because those specific groups don’t really experience any pressures.

So she devises a world where the anarchists invent a new language to correct and remove “egoist” ideas.

And here’s the problem with anarchism: It requires fundamentally changing the human species.

think of how wikipedia editors work

Wikipedia is not an anarchy though. There is specifically a hierarchy in types of accounts.

At the core, anarchists seek to minimize the degree to which another group can oppress them by concentrating decision making among the small groups of people who will actually be effected by those decisions.

Right, but small groups of people are severely limited in the level of civilization they can maintain. You can’t develop antibiotics without massively investing value into specific people and groups, who will then (shock) be more valuable. That will create a natural stratification unless those people are all saints.

Anarchism falls apart when faced with outside stressors like scarcity or competition. It only works if quite literally every single person buys into it fully.

I love that list of examples, because they’re either not anarchist, or are very limited communes that function because of (and under the laws of) the larger democratic governments around them. Or they don’t exist anymore

Yeah, the holes are pretty damned obvious. Anarchism really only exists in the complete absence of stressors.