PhilipTheBucket

joined 8 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 3 points 42 minutes ago (1 children)

Your "friend", huh

Stop acting in ways that violate the social contract and stuff like this will stop happening to you. I have no idea, but I strongly suspect that it's exactly what it looks like: You're blocked wholesale from the instances in question in some way which doesn't show in the modlog.

I don't even really know how to trace back through all the hall-of-mirrors of what original behavior led to what drama led to what sanctions led to what further drama. Regardless, step 1 is to just openly ask, hey what behavior should I be doing, what should I not be doing. And then just go from there and cooperate with the other people on the network to do the first and not the second. Lemmy is pretty frickin lenient with anyone who is willing on some level to engage with that whole process openly.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's on purpose.

There is a whole art form to creating a consensus view of reality that doesn't exist. One of the most important parts is repetition, from multiple apparently-different sources, with a ton of emotional weight behind it.

One of the constant through-lines from some small selected set of the users here is that lemmy.world, feddit.org, all the "main" instances are full of Zionists who will delete any criticism of Israel (and, also, any criticism of the Democratic Party). It's laughable nonsense, but they say it so loudly and so consistently that it's honestly kind of hard to resist it making it into the consciousness to some extent. I honestly don't know why they do this so consistently. But it's definitely noticeable once you start looking for it.

I had no particular idea whether this particular user was going to overlap with any "to save the world let's not vote for Kamala Harris" posting, just because they were pursuing some nonsense in this particular separate sense. But oh look...

https://ponder.cat/u/geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml?page=1&sort=Controversial&view=Overview

Literally the post one tick above this one, is urging people to save Gaza by letting Donald Trump win. Got it. Perfect sense. Wonder why.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 61 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I can't stop laughing.

No single person suggests making a logo that resembles an anus, but when everyone's feedback gets incorporated, that's what often emerges.

  • 1990s-2000s: 3D and Glossy - Remember when every logo needed a drop shadow and a glassy shine? Apple's aqua interface set the standard.
  • 2010-2013: Skeuomorphism - Digital designs mimicking physical objects, with stitched leather textures and realistic dials.
  • 2013-2018: Flat Design - Reaction to skeuomorphism brought minimal, clean interfaces with bright colors and no shadows.
  • 2018-2022: Neomorphism - Soft shadows and semi-flat design creating subtle, "touchable" interfaces.
  • 2022-Present: The Butthole Era
[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 4 points 16 hours ago

Never change, MuntedCrocodile

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 7 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I have no idea. And, like I said, to me it's not relevant.

If the German government can conveniently overlook that Israel is killing people by the hundreds of thousands when they send weapons, then I can conveniently overlook any amount of property damage or "threatening employees" by people trying to stop that first thing. In fact I would say it is okay to downplay that second thing. I have no idea whether it even happened or not, but even if it did (and even if it had been proven, which I think no one is saying it was), it would be okay to me.

I'm just saying you can make that argument without also needing to be an asshole to people in the comments.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 34 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (7 children)

As almost always happens with this kind of thing, you were not banned for posting the story, you were banned for being an asshole. Your post of the story is still up, and look at all the places it's being crossposted.

Put it in a different light: Country X puts someone to death because they kissed a person of the same gender in public or something. Everyone on Lemmy thinks that's incredibly fucked up, they start posting stories about it.

And then someone comes in and starts yelling about how that country and its authorities are backwards medieval idiots, and attacking anyone who tries to say anything different. Then they get banned. Which gives them a handy opening to start yelling in all directions about how the moderators are anti-queer horrible people who are trying to censor the truth about how repressive this particular government is.

No one said "violent racist idiots." Everyone said this is a bad thing. I have no idea the truth about the original issue, if the people were involved in property damage or not (and honestly I don't care either way, they shouldn't have been deported before a conviction and probably not after one even if so). But you were banned for being a twat about it and calling other people in the thread "pro-genocide" and "defending fascism" and "racist idiots."

I suspect some people do this on purpose, so they can proceed to pitch a fit about it here, and feed into the narrative that anyone at all on Lemmy is pro-genocide, so they can paint themselves as the rare voices in the wilderness who are anti-genocide and generally sow mudslinging among people to no purpose. YDI. Don't be a twat in the comments and you won't have these types of issues.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 37 points 1 day ago (5 children)

"It's kind of getting communist when a feller can't even put in a hard days' work, put in 11, 12 hours a day, and then get in your truck and at least drink 1 or 2 beers."

-People in the 1980s upset that they were trying to make it illegal to drive with a .15 BAC (which was the previous limit).

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 7 points 2 days ago

Yeah, I didn’t know about the retraction and it looks like Techdirt didn’t either. Oops.

 

There are obviously a wide range of philosophies companies have when it comes to both intellectual property and modding communities that tend to spring up around successful video games. Some are jealous protectors of all things IP, which is generally a giant mistake that limits the reach, the fun, and the engagement these companies should be having with their biggest fans. The other is one that is more lenient or even celebratory of the harmless use of these fan-works. But rarely do we see the dichotomy at work in one specific instance.

But rarely doesn’t mean never. You can see both philosophies at play in the case of a mod made for the hit game Stardew Valley, still kicking nearly a decade after release. The mod in question is called Baldur’s Village and consists of a new town to play in, along with the inclusion of a bunch of characters from another hit game, Baldur’s Gate 3.

Created by NexusMods user BV and uploaded on March 8, Baldur’s Village added over 20 characters from the 2023 GOTY winner to the farming sim, along with new locations, shops, special items, dynamic story events, and other content. “So much love went into this—amazing work!” Larian CEO and BG3 director Swen Vincke wrote at the time.

But the fan mashup of two beloved games is no longer available to download on Nexus. “This mod is under moderation review,” reads a disclaimer added to the page on March 29. According to a spokesperson for the mod database, Wizards of the Coast was responsible for sending a DMCA takedown notice against the fan content for infringing on its ownership of Dungeons & Dragons, which Baldur’s Gate 3 is based on.

It’s a bit stunning to see this play out with such diametrically opposed responses. Larian Studios, the folks that actually poured their efforts into making an absolute masterpiece of a game, saw the mod that made use of that work and loved it. This isn’t entirely surprising, given that Larian has a habit of doing new and interesting things generally. That a higher up like Vincke even chimed in personally to express his admiration is genuinely unsurprising.

Sadly, it is equally unsurprising that Wizards of the Coast simply sent the lawyers at the mod. WotC has been slowly descending into IP troll-dom in recent years. Whether the takedown ends up getting rescinded now that this is all going public is an open question, but it should be obvious that nothing in this free mod represents any kind of threat to WotC.

And it is natural to wonder, given Vincke’s comments on the matter, if this sort of philisophical difference didn’t play a role in Larian deciding to get out of the Baldur’s Gate franchise moving forward.

Apparently someone at Hasbro or Wizards thinks a fan mashup of BG3 and one of the most popular games of all time in a non-competing genre might get in the way of whatever it’s doing with the franchise. Vincke wasn’t impressed with the move. “Free quality fan mods highlighting your characters in other game genres are proof your work resonates and a unique form of word of mouth,” he wrote on Monday. “Imho they shouldn’t be treated like commercial ventures that infringe on your property.”

One of these two is the good guy in this story and the other is the big bad. If you’re having trouble figuring out which is which, you may have an evil alignment problem.

 
 

After the Trump administration inadvertently texted its war plans to this magazine’s editor in chief last month, people all over the world—including spies, fighter pilots, and foreign leaders—had to wonder if their secrets were safe with the United States government.

But the humiliating gaffes of Signalgate are only one measure of the Donald Trump team’s recklessness. The air war against Yemen’s Houthi rebels—the subject of the texts—could end up becoming a scandal in its own right, and for similar reasons. It is a war with no apparent strategy apart from Trump’s hunger for what he calls “swift and unrelenting action” on almost every front. And it is likely to backfire badly if the administration doesn’t change course.

Since mid-March, the U.S. military has hurled more than $200 million worth of missiles, bombs, and rockets into the remote deserts and mountains of Yemen, in what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has dubbed, with sublime ahistorical clumsiness, Operation Rough Rider. The name is meant to evoke Theodore Roosevelt’s vainglorious 1898 cavalry charge up San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War. Hegseth may not know that the U.S. suffered twice as many casualties as the Spanish in that long-ago battle, the prelude to a needless and costly war of aggression.

Trump has said that he aims to “completely annihilate” the Houthis, who, ostensibly in defense of Palestinians, have been attacking ships in the Red Sea for the past 18 months. The new air strikes are much more intensive than those the Biden administration carried out last year and include efforts to assassinate Houthi commanders (one of these commanders was mentioned in the Signal text chain, though not by name).

The strikes have done some damage to the Houthi war machine, killing some officers and fighters and driving the rest underground. But air power alone rarely wins wars, and the Houthis have the advantage of a remote, mountainous hinterland where much of their arsenal is probably safe from harm. If they withstand the current stepped-up campaign, “they could come out of it politically stronger and with a more solidified support base,” Mohammed al-Basha, a Yemen analyst and the founder of the Basha Report, a risk-advisory firm, told me.

[Read: The Houthis are very, very pleased]

To take territory from the Houthis would require a ground offensive. Operation Rough Rider does not include one. Nor has there been any diplomatic engagement with the Houthis’ divided but numerous domestic rivals in the south and west of the country. What is known, politely, as Yemen’s “internationally recognized” government is based in the south and dependent on foreign support. “The Americans are not even answering our questions,” an official there told me. “There’s no diplomatic presence at all.”

In fact, the Trump administration has accidentally damaged its Yemeni allies: The south-based government depends on aid programs from USAID that Elon Musk and his minions have axed, a Yemeni official told me. Last year, USAID sponsored a new effort to unify and strengthen the Houthis’ domestic rivals, but DOGE pulled the plug on that too.

Trump may intend to kill the Houthis’ supreme leader, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi. That would certainly knock the Houthis back a bit, and it would give Trump a TV-friendly moment of triumph like the one he scored five years ago with the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, the powerful Iranian spy chief who masterminded many attacks on Americans over the years.

But if Trump and his team think they can decapitate the Houthis and then ignore them, they need to pay more attention to history. The Houthi movement has been repeatedly decimated in war over the past two decades, and each time it has emerged stronger. The group’s first leader, Abdul-Malik’s older brother Hussein al-Houthi, was killed in 2004 during a brutal offensive by the Yemeni military. The movement replaced him very quickly and would no doubt do the same for the current leader.

Finding a real solution to the Houthi problem would not be easy. It would require a sustained effort to organize the Yemeni opposition, now split into eight armed factions backed by rival foreign patrons, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Those divisions undermined the Saudi-led effort to topple the Houthis that began in 2015, left much of Yemen in ruins, and helped push many people into starvation. But the Pentagon could succeed where Riyadh failed if it were to guarantee air support for the Yemeni ground forces and shield the Gulf from Houthi retaliation, according to Michael Knights, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

This may seem like a heavy lift, even for an administration less mercurial than Trump’s. Joe Biden didn’t really try to tackle the Houthis, preferring to support a long-standing United Nations–backed effort to reach a peace deal between the group and its Yemeni rivals.

But the United States may well have to fight the Houthis eventually. They have grown steadily more dangerous, as they continue to obstruct a vital waterway that carries about 15 percent of the world’s trade via the Suez Canal. And other potential targets abound in the Red Sea, including at least 14 underwater data cables (almost as many as run across the northern Atlantic). The Houthis claim to have destroyed 17 Reaper drones since the Red Sea conflict began, worth about $30 million each. The Pentagon’s supply of missiles and shells was running very short even last year, as Mark Bowden wrote in this magazine in December. And the cost of Operation Rough Rider could have already topped $1 billion, by one estimate.

[Read: The crumbling foundation of America’s military]

Recently, the Houthis appear to have gained hydrogen-fuel-cell technologies that would make their drones, which have already struck Israel, more difficult to detect and capable of flying much farther. The Houthis now manufacture their own weapons, in an amazing turnaround for a group that once depended on stolen Yemeni army stocks and Iranian donations. They even export small arms to the Horn of Africa, another region burdened by war and terrorism.

The Houthis’ ability to hamper global commerce has made them more and more useful to nations aligned against the United States and Europe. Foremost among these is Iran, whose other allies in the “Axis of Resistance” have been damaged or destroyed recently. Russia has supplied some weapons to the Houthis and last year came close to providing them with advanced anti-ship weapons in retaliation for American assistance to Ukraine. Russian ultranationalist figures such as Aleksandr Dugin have praised the Houthis for their bravery and held them up as resistance fighters against the West. China has sold the Houthis weapons components that are useful for their arsenal.

The Houthis are thrilled with their new relevance, as their leader has made clear in his frequent unhinged speeches. They have redoubled their efforts to indoctrinate young people into their revolutionary ethos, which is rooted in Zaydism, an offshoot of Shia Islam. They gained a global following last year because of their defiant stance on Gaza, which set them apart from most of the Arab world’s leaders. And they have tried to capitalize on that popularity, even though their ideology of religious dictatorship and anti-Semitism isn’t always an easy sell.

Last month, as American bombs were falling, the Houthis hosted their third Palestine conference in Yemen’s capital, a four-day event that drew guests and speakers from around the world. (Among the oddballs who showed up was Jackson Hinkle, a 25-year-old Moscow-based influencer from Southern California who calls himself a “MAGA Communist” and has somehow drawn almost 3 million followers on X.)

Perhaps the Houthis’ most important asset is asabiyya, a quality that was identified centuries ago by the Arab philosopher Ibn Khaldun as the binding force of empires. It means “group cohesion,” or “solidarity.” The Houthis may be a band of fanatics in the wilds of Yemen, but they are more unified than their enemies, and that has allowed them to grow and thrive.

[Content truncated due to length...]

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 1 points 3 days ago

yes, assuming Trump’s goal is to have more manufacturing in the US, tariffs will

Destroy domestic manufacturing by enacting insane tariffs on the raw materials it depends on, without any nontrivial increase in manufacturing to counterbalance the pain, even in the long run.

This type of command economy “might makes right” stuff can fail catastrophically. As recently as the 1990s, there were people starving in North Korea by the hundreds of thousands (at least) because someone decided that enforcing his will was more important than listening to people who even on the most rudimentary level knew what they were doing.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I mean, if I am more qualified at recognizing horseshit than The Guardian is, that’s a problem. It’s weird to me that you are classifying this view of how Trump operates with respect to things like tariffs and whether or not he is a total moron as a matter of opinion.

I’ve seen them get other things about him wrong before, too. They were super happy about how Trump was finally going to lay the hammer down on the Israelis and create peace in Gaza:

https://ponder.cat/post/1323549

There were a bunch of Lemmy commentators in there, too, saying more or less that it was super easy, Trump had made progress with his tough negotiating, and this was just evidence that Biden hadn’t been trying to do it. Since that happened, Isarel’s occupied roughly half of Gaza and resumed killing at scale, and also starting doing the same a little bit in the West Bank. They’re also not letting any food in.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 4 points 3 days ago (3 children)

For example, think about the sheer amount of executive orders he has put out in his first few days of his second term. This must have been planned and prepared.

Absolutely true.

It was not just some random sh*t.

Also true. They put together a detailed plan about it, it was published. Some of it was his own ideas but there was also a lot that was coordinated and coherent, put together by smarter people.

You may be underestimating him a lot if you only think of “insane” etc. It was for a purpose.

Now you’re switching back to talking about tariffs. Those were not for a purpose. He literally thinks (or thought, at one point, I don’t know if he still does) that the country doing the exporting pays the tariff. He put 50% tariffs on Lethoso. That’s not underestimating, that’s just facts.

Other more coherent people have written about his motivations, the source of his tariff ideas, all kinds of stuff. You can do analysis of any of his ideas and the goals (if any) behind them without agreeing with any of it. But this article’s thesis is more or less “he’s trying to devalue the dollar to set right the balance of trade, and it might work” and that is a bunch of sanewashing and horseshit with some additional fantasies about how well Reagan’s stuff worked out thrown in for good measure.

The world is much more than “pro or against trump”. They want diversity and they are doing well.

You don’t need to have diversity between horseshit and non-horseshit. I’m fine with many many points of view, including pro-Trump ones if they make sense (one random example from recently being that he seems genuinely surprised and angry that Russia broke the cease-fire instantly). My complaint with this article is not that it’s pro-Trump, it’s that it is horseshit.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 22 points 3 days ago (5 children)

This is one of the weirdest goddamned articles I have ever read.

The US dollar being devalued so people could accept our exports more readily would make some sense if we had manufacturing capacity to make some exports people will buy. We don’t. What will happen is we’ll lose the ability to buy everyone else’s stuff, and the history of where global capital chooses to site factories argues strongly against them moving them back to the US even with a cheaper dollar. It’s just suffering with no upside, short term or long term.

Other insane things he says, like that defaulting on T-bills would be sort of a good thing or that Reagan’s people made “the economy” boom in the 1980s, are sort of side notes. And the idea that Trump is competently executing on plans that can be laid out coherently is also laughable. The whole thing is just insane in multiple overlapping respects. Why are they putting this in the newspaper? This is not the first totally insane pro-Trump story I have seen in The Guardian.

view more: next ›