How is using self-hosted Nitter as a 1:1 proxy meaningfully different from just logging in to your account?
646 karma · joined May 13, 2023
Essentially Ron Swanson minus the satire
U.S. Sanctions Against the a/I Collective
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49477854
US sanctions Italian hosting provider Autistici Inventati
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49451343
US Government designates host of noblogs.org a "global terrorist"
Both parties of capital interests have lots of blood on their hands for the intentional mishandling of the pandemic (which has not ended) in the name of propping up our archaic consumption-first economies.
https://www.thegauntlet.news/p/how-the-press-manufactured-co...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSPM-7
And a bit rich that it mentions its reasoning included the Kirk assassination. Kirk was starting to make noise about the Epstein stuff, so Trump personally called him and told him to knock it off. Shortly after he was assassinated.
You did not. But you have lots of boot to clean out of your mouth, so I won't bother you any longer.
You denialists have one favorite go-to rebuttal, don't you?
If you can't see how these are related, then we're done here.
Repubs are only putting on a show of getting nervous about certain voters voting to excite their base.
But as far as the Uniparty is concerned, they'd be much more nervous if overall voter turnout plummeted by choice, because then it becomes immediately obvious to everybody that increasing amounts of people no longer believe in the illusory democracy. It's a similiar threat to the bad optics of when a "joke" party gets a sizeable amount of votes (see: Count Binface as recently discussed https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49301260)
The Uniparty wants high-ish turnout (2/3 is good) because then we can all other-ify the 1/3 with the narrative that they were "too lazy" and thus to blame, while the 1/3 + 1/3 who did vote hopefully make for a close election, propping up the democratic illusion of choice and popularity.
It's not their job to break up monopolies and ever-shifting financial abstractions a few steps ahead of the law that enable monopolistic behavior?
> Think of a single enshittified product that matters to you for which there is no alternative but to use it.
* Mobile devices and their respective walled gardens if you expect to do something as simple as access your own bank account or reliably receive text messages
* Social media which only really works when lots of people are on any given platform
* Food that is safe, nutritious, and sustainable
> Television sets are now commodities, which tend to be cheaper adjusted for inflation.
Oh neat, they didn't enshitify the legacy propaganda client devices yet. How nice of them, and quite the measure of progress.
More importantly, even if it did contain the solution, there is no obvious way for a country with an already corrupt government to transition to such a thing.
You speak as if these things are unrelated.
> Buy an alternative, you have those choices.
Increasingly, we don't:
"Modern Capitalism Is Weirder Than You Think: It also no longer works as advertised"
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/how-asset-managers-h... (https://archive.is/wSmtd)
No.
This reflects the common understanding of the term:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_denial_movement_in_th...
> The election denial movement in the United States is a widespread false belief that elections in the United States are rigged and stolen through election fraud by the opposing political party. Adherents of the movement are referred to as election deniers.
It requires that people still believe they're being given legitimate choices. My comments above do not.
No, the non-con man option was an unpopular candidate who was installed after skipping a primary process. A primary process that was shown to be a complete joke during the previous cycle.
> When people type what you type it seems obvious you are attempting to avoid responsibility for choosing the con man.
I never chose the con man. Nor did I choose the party who manufactured consent for him with their pied piper "strategy" that was exposed only by wikileaks. Did the party reflect on this? No. They got mad at the person who leaked it.
Ever-growing wealth disparities, eroded rights, mass enshitification in a race to the bottom, and widespread hatred of ones neighbor over fake outrage culture war propaganda disseminated from corporate media are not a trends of improvement. They are trends of decline, unless you're of the class who has their doomsday bunker on standby.
But keep trying to wave the away the obvious. You only look more ridiculous the harder you try.
Convincing argument you have there, but the choices we're provided between shit sandwich A and shit sandwich B are the problem, not which one wins.
Sounds great, except it ignores the fact that capital interests have controlled the levers of our faux democracies for decades, with no end in sight.
In the spirit of that, here's some brainstorming:
Strange you're being flagged since it's easy to find many other people on the graphene forums reporting the same (unresolved) problem.
Doesn't mean it's guaranteed to be limited to graphene in scope, but definitely seems to be a prevalent issue for some yet-to-be-determined reason.
Possibly related, does anybody know if graphene is vulnerable to Pegasus?