Glad they keep using the mascots to help brand and punch up their images.
Both artist links are either private or show closed commissions, so the artists aren't fishing for exposure to do lead gen, they have a passion to help make KDE be a better marketable product.
I daily drive KDE, but I'm glad that in part thanks go the KDE projects approach to accessibility to newcomers and these artists' desires to help out, we get visual aids for the masses, which are pleasant for those of us who live in walls of text and can help humanize an otherwise dry technical subject, aiding newcomers considering joining the project to have an easier time understanding what they are looking at.
I mean that is what mondex was and oystercard is today. Closest we can get on the us is a prepaid refillable gift card. I Keep hoping for digital cash, no dice so far
taco is an acronym that stands for the phrase trump always chickens out, it was coined or popularized earlier this year when Trump backed off of The Liberation Day tariff stuff when the bond market got nervous.
Monica CRM is one too, it sits abandoned on my still powered on raspi zero w because I don't have a queue habit set up to cause me to go check it, but it was nice as a digital personal Rolodex with more automation than just contacts app that's barely more than a vcard
I was just able to write a thank you letter to my sister for having me over to her house last night using this and having sent her that letter I leave very impressed.
I know she will enjoy it because we both have loved animal crossing since the original US version came out and we were given a copy in 2005.
Thank you for making such a delightful tool that both works with the nostalgia of those game consoles, yet has a much better UX for mobile phone use!
Spitballing here but if it's their code that they have copyright on, they can license it to us as agpl, without binding themselves to those same terms. They have all rights as copyright holders regardless of a given license.
Which is so much worse than the current paradigm where we have a client side SPA deciding to do all sorts of state syncing and react hooks and tracking pixels and auto pop ups all doing their own thing all over the place!
/end sarcasm/
I think for a side project, not immediately expecting your front end's first version to not horizontally scale to the moon is ok.
Wat would prevent a HTMX frontend from scaling horizontally? Maybe the backend, if it cannot scale horizontally. Otherwise, a million pages can be served the same way as a dozen. (A million is actually not so much, one average API box could suffice.)
Where HTMX would run into trouble is complicated frontend logic, where updates of one area may trigger changes in another, etc.
It's been so long since the Semantic web and RDF and OWL and SKOS. I'm so glad they stuck with W3C and didn't reinvent those wheels. Will this UDA approach catch on? I don't know, but I hope so. It seems like it is trying to move the frontier of the difficulties of applying Domain Driven Design and semantic concepts to an enterprise company of significant scale.
If we can get compound interest across development teams by giving them a common toolset and skillset that covers different applications but the same data semantics, maybe not every data contract will have to be reduced to DTOs that can be POSTed or otherwise forced to be a least common denominator just so it can fit past a network or other IPC barrier.
For that, I'm grateful Netflix is working on this and publicizing the interesting work.
The lack of deep friendships feel like a 3-fold problem.
1. You can't ever be real, if you are real, you are likely to be recorded doing something someone somewhere on the largest stage in the world (the public web) that someone will disapprove of, and someone else will raise their own profile by mining your impiety to prove their own concern and moral superiority.
2. Everyone is so mobile and connected online, they never have to break the ice and talk to those around them in the breakroom or geographical space, so all of our social skills have atrophied at best, or were never learned at worst. We know just enough civility to not get in fights, but we don't know how to easily break the ice or become acquaintances.
3. All the people that live in the cities are not close with each other, they didn't grow up together and don't go to church / rotary club / male-only spaces any longer because we are all supposed to pretend to be cool liberated yuppies in a hookup culture. Can't have real ties or any strongly held beliefs, that would make you religious (or worse, Religious on an actual religion), those people are bad. So I'm okay, you're okay, and we all smile. And inside, no real connections are ever made.
Not to mention testosterone levels dropping, schools being geared towards women, always co-ed spaces, and a breakup of younger and older generations because of cultural differences there too...not that the old people are always nice.
"if you are real, you are likely to be recorded doing something someone somewhere on the largest stage in the world (the public web) that someone will disapprove of" -> is this a concern for many men? It's never crossed my mind or been a problem for anyone I've known.
"they never have to break the ice and talk to those around them in the breakroom or geographical space" -> I've always talked to people at work and also I joined the most socially awkward hobby I've ever seen (historical sword fencing) and people are still very chatty. I also recently started volunteering at a wildlife rehabilitator and find myself just constantly chatting.
"Can't have real ties or any strongly held beliefs, that would make you religious (or worse, Religious on an actual religion), those people are bad" -> I've been friends with a lot of religious people but also non-religious people have strongly held beliefs (I hang out with a lot of vegans and I cannot imagine claiming they are afraid to publicly hold strong beliefs).
I think your post just goes to show how different mens' experiences can be because, while I'm sure a lot of men probably can connect with this, my personal experiences could not be more opposite. I think it depends a ton on the sorts of crowds you run in, it almost sounds to me like the people you meet are generally judgy and antisocial but I've found people I'm around to be generally friendly (though I've found many people are happy to chat but are often hard to actually organize to otherwise hang out since people in their 30s are busy and some of my friends have kids now).
> is this a concern for many men? It's never crossed my mind or been a problem for anyone I've known.
Not for me, I have been to plenty of meetups in my city. If you're not liked or don't get along with the others, the worst that can happen is that you'll be politely ostracized. The paranoia about being publicly "cancelled" seems very overblown.
Well we already have people on this page commenting on the demograpic represented on the submitted web site. Yes, in today's world there are almost always people looking to play "gotcha" and will try to pin you as a racist, misogynist, homophobe, or some other sort of bigot or pariah.
How would that apply in a real life setting? You're assuming that busy people would take time out of their day to attend a social event in person to nitpick the demographic makeup of said event instead of making friendly banter. How often has that happened at social events you've attended?
Anecdotally, when I lived in Victoria BC (a very lefty city) this did actually happen at events I went to more than once. I didn't go to events much so unless I just was unlucky to witness this sort of thing more than once, it was frequent
For what it is worth, I didn't think the complainers went out of their way just to complain, they did have a genuine interest in the events. They just also liked to complain about the demographics and steer the groups towards things that would make us "more inclusive"
It always ended the same way: the group mostly dissolved
Ok, but it still seems to be quite rare? I don’t live in the woods or anything and I’ve never been the victim of a “gotcha.” I’ve definitely offended people on various occasions (which I mostly felt bad about), but none of those people ever felt so strongly they tried to ruin my life over it. Nor have I ever known anyone that was “gotcha”-ed as you described.
I unfortunately have known people that have died in car crashes, which is very tragic, but I don’t refuse to drive anywhere as a result. There’s no data on this but I suspect we have far more car deaths than we do individuals who have been socially ostracized as a result of someone spinning their comments as racist/misogynistic/etc…
Basically, it seems like a bad way to run your life. “I might get hit by lightning, better not go outside.”
I think the "They might 'gotcha' me and then cancel me as a [racist/sexist/bigot/etc]" fear is overblown and comes mostly from people chronically online and people who care what randos on Twitter write. Yes, the Internet is full of keyboard warriors just waiting to catch you saying something they can twist into some -ism, but these people don't exist in real life, or at least they keep their opinions to themselves in real life. I personally don't care what random people on the Internet think. They might be over there on Twitter canceling me as a racist or sexist right now, and it doesn't affect my life even slightly.
> I think the "They might 'gotcha' me and then cancel me as a [racist/sexist/bigot/etc]" fear is overblown
Even if someone films you saying something, unless it's something that's offensive to enough people for it getting out to actually impact your life... what are they going to do with it? Real life is not infested by these hyper-politically-correct boogeymen people seem to fear. Nobody really cares.
Don't go around saying stuff that would disgust your grandma/boss/etc in such a way that they'd feel the need to distance themselves from you, and what power does anyone really hold here?
The only way I can really take this as a legitimate worry is someone asking for a space where they can say overtly [racist/sexist/bigoted/etc] things without consequence in which case... yeah, there might be consequences. But then at least be honest and just say "I want to start a racism club." instead of trying to convince us all the boogeyman is real.
And hell, even if someone catches you calling an autistic 5 year old black kid racist names... just start a GiveSendGo and apparently people will just give you almost a million dollars for your trouble.
Fact is that in a social situation, you don't get to decide how you're viewed. If someone says you're being a jerk, then in their eyes, you're being a jerk. You can't change society or whatever so that they don't view you as a jerk. It's not up to you how they view you. This is not a flaw with society, it is by design. By definition it is how socialization works, and it goes both ways.
You DO, however, control your own words and actions, and generally those have a strong correlation with how you're perceived. Food for thought.
I dunno, I try not to be evil, but I slapstick flipped into a leftist circular firing squad back in my college days. Back then we could all just say fuck you too, and move on with life with no long-term consequences. The truth is there's a lot of mini-cults and other groups who want to recruit and then exclude people.
> is this a concern for many men? It's never crossed my mind or been a problem for anyone I've known
Yes, I talk to an older guy, probably mid-50s, at my gym. He completely stopped helping women at the gym or even giving advise. To my knowledge, no one ever accused him of anything, but he acknowledge that he absolutely have no experience talking to or otherwise interacting with younger women. He is terrified of doing or saying something wrong and lose access to the only gym in town, so he simply avoided women at the gym. He helps out the men, young and old, just not women.
> he absolutely have no experience talking to or otherwise interacting with younger women.
A sad fact of life, but at 50, most men aren't attractive to women 10 years younger than them, and it becomes pretty awkward and socially unacceptable to do anything that could be interpreted as flirting.
Now I don't know about the situation in gyms in the US, maybe the situation is extreme there. But generally speaking, I don't find it particularly sad if people mind their own business in the gym.
> I don't find it particularly sad if people mind their own business in the gym.
But that is part of the whole loneliness issue isn't it. I can certainly understand people wanting to just do their workout, but it's one less source of interaction between people. We don't talk to be people at the supermarket, we don't talk to people waiting for the bus, we'd rather listen to a podcast during our workout, than talk to the guy sitting on the next bench.
Very anecdotally: I'm fairly introvert, but have issues not talking, so I'll fairly regularly talk to random people. Some people will clearly prefer to be left alone, but frequently people smile and light up and start talking about all sorts of random stuff.
From a guy's point of view, initiating a conversation with a random woman anywhere, not just in the gym, is fraught with peril, and probably not worth it. The difference between "flirting" and "creepy" is entirely in the mind of the recipient, and if you initiate a conversation, you really have no control over how it's interpreted. The downside can be pretty bad if it's received poorly.
I'm exceedingly grateful I'm already married and don't have to put up with this minefield anymore!
IMO this mostly stems from not having walkable, livable communities. People live in detached homes and they drive to work and the grocery store and… that’s it.
There’s next to zero room for random events because travel becomes such a deliberate action. I can’t just pop into a cafe - first I need to find it and drive there.
Also our social signals are completely fucked up. Headphones and phones means that most interactions are off-limits. Probably a lot of these people do want to talk, but they’re not signaling it. And I’m not gonna be the one to bother a stranger.
To add, in walkable communities you are much more likely to be a “regular” at more places, since you are walking to the places nearby, and to share multiple regular places with other people. Walking 15 minutes to 30 minutes still keep you in about a 1-2 mile radius, which is pretty small and has a lot of overlap with other people walking. So you are likely to see the same people at the bar as at the gym or the coffee shop.
If you are driving 15 minutes to 30 minutes, especially if you get on a highway for any amount of time, you could be anywhere in a 15+ mile radius. Your grocery store and your preferred bar could be 20 miles away from each other, so not likely you will run into Jim from the bar in the cereal aisle.
It's more cultural than walkability.
I've lived about 20 years in NYC but now spend months at a time outside the city as well.
In the US, in VHCOL places like NYC filled with upper middle class striver / PMC types.. everything is so fleeting & ephemeral you just don't have "regulars". You just feel anonymous. Everything is moving/changing all the time, expectations and trust are low. There is a lot of classism.
I lived in buildings 8 years & had neighbors on my floor who re-introduced themselves to me many times, somehow forgetting we've met. I knew their dogs names.
The shops I go 2x/week have 50-150% annual staff turnover and even the staff that somehow last 5 years barely acknowledge recognizing me. The staff who work in my building disappear without a trace one day. My condo board president introduced herself to me for the third time recently. We stopped having package pickup for a couple years because allegedly our staff & mail woman didn't get along.
Meanwhile in the small town I spend more time, I drive, but I am a regular at some restaurants that I go maybe monthly or less. Regular to the point of waiters sending us free drinks, or knowing the same waiter from 3 different restaurants he's worked over the years, being on a first name basis. I knew my last mailman by name and sent him a retirement card. I bump into the postal clerk at my vet. The guy who cleaned my chimney gave me a great greenhouse recommendation recently.
Backing up a sister comment on this thread: I've lived in SF and Chicago, both also as walkable as it gets for the US, and in both had relationships as a "regular," whether at a corner store, cafe, or the grocer. I remember our Albanian corner store guy in particular, who would comment on me gaining or losing weight. Our neighborhoods felt like a small town where we all knew each other (including the homeless!).
I live near New York now, and while I hear from friends that they find that kind of community in some faraway boroughs of NYC, everyone in Manhattan reports your profound and deep sense of alienation from their fellow man, though some with a positive spin.
I have not seen this alienating anonymity in any other part of the country, though I have felt it whenever I'm there. As there is no other place in this country even remotely as dense or with faster turnover (not even SF), I'm fairly confident Manhattan is unique (in this country).
But I'm pointing out that just because NYC fails the claim does not mean that the claim is wrong.
I think there's a goldilocks zone of walkable, at least for the purposes of this "urbanist-I-know-everyone-utopia" feeling – you could have perfectly walkable places that aren't dense enough (people wise), so they won't work. I'm thinking of Gorham's Bluff, Alabama, which is an attempted New Urbanist project. Or, you could have Manhattan, which is also walkable but frankly mind-boggling in its density.
No offense to New York. I sometimes find myself in wordless awe of its sheer power.
I mean, Manhattan is the most densely populated place in the entire country. I’m talking about communities designed around walkability, not places where people are so densely packed your local services are basically within the same block out of necessity.
Philadelphia, Chicago, and Seattle are extremely walkable for a large part of the city proper, in my experience. Whereas places like Phoenix, Orlando, and Dallas are sprawls where almost none of the city is walkable.
In a small town, it is easy to become a regular when there are only 5 restaurants and one vet. But in a proper "city" walkability is a major factor in community level.
1) Real friends certainly let you be real. And the scene I frequent deeply frowns on unconsensual photography. Most of the events I go to they sticker all the cameras. I love that. I go there for the people not for Instagram.
That's not to say nobody takes pics but they do it in a quiet corner so they don't catch anyone by mistake. It makes it very respectful. The stickers are just a reminder so you don't just start flicking away when you're drunk. It makes everyone feel safer and more genuine.
2) I guess but nothing some quick ice breaking games won't fix
3) In a small town there's much more familiarity yes. But also a much deeper sense of being watched and judged. I can't live with that. Even the small city I lived in was too small for me. Everyone knows everyone's business and constantly gossip behind your back.
The nice thing in a big city is meeting new people and finding new places. And the variety. In a small town there's a lot of pressure to conform, eg often you're an outcast if you're not religious. I don't think they're bad but there's little acceptance of people who are different. So what do you do? Pretend. That's not real connection.
In a big city you can really be yourself because there's always others that are like you and you can meet them in like-minded places or events. And you can make real ties there. And even find out about other communities you might fit in.
I really hate going to male-exclusive places by the way. There's very few men I have a deep connection with (I'm male) because the whole BS thing that it's frowned upon to talk about feelings. "Men's weekends" just end up with too much beer, macho talk, shooting the shit and hanging in front of the TV watching boring sports or crappy porn. Nothing serious, fun or enlightening. That's my experience with those anyway. I find that exhausting and I always excuse myself from them now. I used to try to fit in but the others would know I hated it anyway so it was awkward.
I have much deeper relationships with lady friends. They're more open and less judgemental in general. I feel safer around them. So mixed events are a must for me.
Many. And I don't even mind but it's usually really bad porn. Also it's not like anyone does anything, they just sit there and pretend they're not interested or ignore it. It's really weird. Also a kind of macho thing I think. Anyway in Holland this is not uncommon.
I have nothing against pornography at all but I do have a minimum quality :) I like the more stylish stuff.
Though I prefer watching people in real life, I'm lucky to have some other friends who are into that too.
It sounds like when you say you go to "male specific" events, you have a very specific set of male-specific events in mind. I suspect the experiences you described earlier are less due to the male-ness of those present, and more simply a function of the social events you tend to go to?
Like, not that that's a bad thing- live your lice how you want- but complaints of "my complaint with all-male gatherings is that the collectively viewed pornography is of insufficiently high quality" are not necessarily the most relatable.
That wasn't the only complaint :) It was more the overall uninterested feel and senseless macho behavior that maybe they have pent up being with the wife or something and they need to act the tool to justify their manhood. Or to forget the day to day family routine or something. Most of the time they sit around bored.
What my friends don't know is that I'm pretty 'liberal'. And I don't have this pent up need for horseplay. I get enough of the more real kind of play :) I just felt so out of sync. It's just so senseless and not enjoyable at all.
The kind of event is pretty common in Holland. It's a pretty typical thing for male friends to go off for a weekend once a year or so in a cabin somewhere. I've done it with several different groups.
> In a big city you can really be yourself because there's always others that
> are like you and you can meet them in like-minded places.
> And you can make real ties there.
This is a massive assumption, but maybe 'yourself' is limited to a standard deviation from the accepted mean.
Well yes of course there's a maximum deviation. If you're too different you won't fit in. Not a bad thing because then there's no real point in being there anyway.
That's why you have to pick the communities you engage in so you fit. You don't have to change yourself but you pick the community to suit.
It's not an assumption though. I live in a city of millions and I'm in some communities of only hundreds of people. Which thrive and even have their own places. That's the nice thing, in a city it's easy to have enough scale even to make niche communities thrive.
What's the majority? There's so much difference in people. There's the IT/intellectual worker and there's blue collar workers, there's sport fans and book enthusiasts, there's religious communities and lgbt-friendly ones. All examples of dualities that are common to some degree but don't have so much overlap in interests.
In my experience social settings work a lot better when they're a bit more specific. Like, about something. And there's not really one majority that fits all. In the US even the two major parties are extremely polarised and yet they are about equal in size.
Queer nightclubs - Berghain and FOLD (London) e.g.
Some parties I occasionally go to in London have a “we really really don’t want you to use your phone on the dance floor and will tell you off” policy.
Like te_chris says, they're the more expressive parties. The "embrace different" ones. Not specifically queer in my case but certainly queer friendly.
Not necessarily as extreme as Berghain mind you. But just places and events where people are encouraged to dress or behave less typical.
Even the cosplay community now has signs to always ask before photographing a cosplayer as they might not want to be photographed without their knowledge.
IME, none of those things are issues that prevent deep friendships in my own life.
1. I've never worried about this.
2. I regularly chat with strangers and acquaintances IRL, though I don't feel it does much to relieve loneliness or cultivate deep friendships.
3. I'm an atheist, but I don't think I've ever worried about being "religious" about something nor judged someone for being so.
I would analyze my own life as follows: friendship requires time spent together. I'm a parent with a full time job in a car centric city, which keeps me pretty busy. I may get one day or night a week to go be social or do hobbies or go to a rotary club or whatever. That's a limited amount of time, so there's a corresponding limit on how many friendships I can realistically maintain. Let alone start new friendships.
So I feel like "having it all" is not realistic. Everything takes time: working out, eating healthy, having friends, having a family, having a job, having a community, writing hacker news comments, and on and on. Most data shows that Dads now spend significantly more time with their kids than those of previous generations. So I think for people of my cohort (millennial dads) its just a case where we traded time with friends for time with family.
I lived under all of this, plus two immigrant parents with no community / role modeling, isolated in suburbia as a kid with a chronically online 20s.
Yeah that nurturing left its mark. Yet I learned to see it, and learn new patterns. In my 30s I have deep friendships. Younger, older, men, women, nb. Most are still shallow, my energy is limited, but even there sometimes we touch into depth when it comes to relationship or existential stuff.
For me things like “loneliness epidemic” is fatalistic. End is nigh if some specific stat is not maintained. Giant foot will squish us all.
It’s pop-sci, gate-keeping, always be hustling zeitgeist obfuscated by high minded toxic positivity.
Media post says there’s an epidemic. Academics come up with a theory of social science in a world where the Executive branch is blatantly manipulating the market. Fed and Congress manipulate employment options, COL through rates and tax code.
Predictions of 10-12 billion people by 2100 do not line up with real birth trends.
So much of our social truisms are made up cable TV hype that zapped the elders brains into anxious compliance. Narratives propagated in service to a random researchers rent and food money search.
Fatalistic towards a social concept is not the same as “launch the nukes, humans suck.” Non-Christians can not believe without going about shooting Christians. Not accepting someone’s dissertation is the same thing.
The 800lb elephant in the room about this whole idea - some people have trouble building friendships because they can't stop themselves from bringing up fringe topics with people they just met, and insisting on having conversations about them.
I think it’s mostly men just not being that interested in being friends with other men unless there is something tangible to gain. Also 1:1 friendship is hard to maintain if you don’t have a shared 3rd space. A 3rd space allowed you to maintain friendships much more time effectively.
Elephant's weigh more like 11,000lbs. I think you mean Gorilla?
Speaking of Gorillas, have you ever read the book Chimpanzee Politics? Crazy how at the end the other two chimps break into the one chimps cage and literally rip his nuts off. Crazy huh?
You’re missing that you’re probably not the kind of person who has the problem being outlined in the comment you’re replying to.
For what it’s worth, I remember being a closeted teenager, I remember feeling like I “couldn’t” be real - but that feeling was wrong. I just hadn’t figured that out yet at the time. It seemed too scary, too risky to be real. That’s probably one of the only pieces of advice I would have given my younger self if I could go back in time - come out sooner, come out before you’re ready, come out as bi before you know you’re gay, come out as curious/questioning before that even.
Force other people to deal with you as you are, instead of constantly working to make yourself into something that you think will be more acceptable to them. Take the risk of being real.
I do think that the kind of people that complain about the male loneliness epidemic are the kind of people who would struggle with those issues-
The only way to establish relationships is to be real - so of course if you believe you can’t be real, that’ll be a problem.
Relationships kick off and grow and solidify via socializing - so of course if you’ve let your social skills atrophy and believe you have no chance to practice and improve them, that’ll be a problem.
Your third point sounds like it’s really just a combination of your first two points, discomfort with being open and honest with others, and discomfort with intentionally socializing with strangers. Of course if you avoid those things to spare yourself the discomfort, you’re also avoiding the opportunity to make friends.
The rest of it (testosterone? Co-ed?) sounds like bullshit to me.
What I hear you being concerned about is: people don’t see the value in leaving their comfort zone in order to pursue what they want. Those fears you mention about not being real, and not knowing how to socialize, and not being around others, and being forced to go to schools for women (??) just sound like irrational fears to me. None of that stuff will kill you.
If being a man is anything, then surely, being a man is facing those kinds of situations and saying “this makes me uncomfortable but it has to be done, I am afraid but I will do it anyway.”
For me, that is the male loneliness epidemic, if such a thing even exists - it’s the unwillingness of some men to face their fears and do what needs to be done to make a connection with another human being.
Overall I agree with the point that people don't take the effort to change themselves and connect with another human being.
> The only way to establish relationships is to be real
Personally, I found emotional dissonance when people tell me this phrase. For a long time, acting like myself has ostracized me from other people and built shallow relationships. It's only when I didn't act like myself and faked it until it became a habit did I build deeper friendships.
It's emotionally difficult when your natural way of acting is not accepted.
Don't get me wrong, I hate religion and everything, but America is still basically totally controlled by religious people and in many situations being non-religious is the weird thing. I can't imagine anyone would be feel stigmatized by religious belief in this country.
> Everyone is so mobile and connected online, they never have to break the ice and talk to those around them
one of the unexpected consequences of social media is that people have been conflating being informed with being connected.
asking "what have you been up to?" was to be a nice easy opening into a conversation that lead to connection.
but thanks to broadcast updates on social media, your friends already know what have you've been up to, so they can delude themselves into thinking that they've maintained a relationship because they know superficial details.
but a relationship isn't built on updating a list of superficial facts. it's built by having a conversation
> thanks to broadcast updates on social media, your friends already know what have you've been up to, so they can delude themselves into thinking that they've maintained a relationship because they know superficial details.
This is a huge reason (possibly the top reason) why I quit Facebook. I wasn't getting value from my "connections", and I figured everyone knew, more or less, what I was doing (& I knew what they were doing), so we didn't actually interact. I figured if I was no longer going to be friends with these people, I didn't want a facade. So I quit it, and I don't use the other usual suspects (Instagram, Snapchat, tiktok, etc.)
It's great. I actually have some honest to goodness friends IRL that I hug, with whom I talk about real things, etc.
>but thanks to broadcast updates on social media, your friends already know what have you've been up to, so they can delude themselves into thinking that they've maintained a relationship because they know superficial details.
I don't think this is really a big deal. "hey I saw you posted pictures from your trip. How was it" there, conversation started. Social media posts are basically all conversation starters.
Assuming you can even remember. I pretty quickly forget people's posts and updates.
I don't think so. I think some of us early adopters of this stuff got tired of it and dropped out before being tired of social media was cool, but we were replaced by a new crowd that's as hooked on it as ever.
Appreciate the thoughts - totally agree on those issues, but I don't think the problem is insurmountable. There is a real - albeit latent, maybe - demand for deep friendship and male-only spaces. Everyone recognizes it's an issue, at the very least, and is being more vocal about it in the face of the dramatic enshittification of the internet over the last few years.
It just takes too much self-discipline to break out of the internet consistently enough to build meaningful relationships without someone / something taking the initiative. I am sort of trying to replicate that at a larger scale by removing any friction to making plans.
Would love to hear your thoughts on if / what you think the solution is.
> You can't ever be real, if you are real, you are likely to be recorded doing something someone somewhere on the largest stage in the world (the public web) that someone will disapprove of, and someone else will raise their own profile by mining your impiety to prove their own concern and moral superiority.
Male cops have changed from being thin and fit men (or average man) in the 1960's to large men with muscles, and sometimes roid rage.
People earn good money playing video games now (that wasn't the case in the 1980's) or streaming video games.
The sports heros children had while growing up used performance enhancing drugs in the 1990's.
> Not to mention testosterone levels dropping, schools being geared towards women, always co-ed spaces ...
If your childhood heros take the lazy way to success, why do we need to blame it on the other things? Using your brain is hard, as it turns out.
I've always detested parents who saw sports as the only path of success for their children. So often they were disappointed. If the parents spent time and sucked up and learned the math/science/etc their kids were learning, it may have been a better outcome for all involved.
Is your comment just in response to the falling testosterone levels point? Because that’s been an ongoing trend since I believe the 80s and has absolutely nothing to do with performance enhancing drugs. Testosterone levels being in healthy range is absolutely critical for men’s health for psychological as well as physical reasons and being in said healthy range is unrelated with sports culture. Whether meathead or whiz kid, physical activity, healthy food, good sleep, limited drugs & alcohol, and minimal or no pornography are all essential parts of reaching one’s peak.
Maybe I’m totally misinterpreting your comment but it kinda just seems like a diatribe unrelated to the comment you’re responding to.
Both artist links are either private or show closed commissions, so the artists aren't fishing for exposure to do lead gen, they have a passion to help make KDE be a better marketable product.
I daily drive KDE, but I'm glad that in part thanks go the KDE projects approach to accessibility to newcomers and these artists' desires to help out, we get visual aids for the masses, which are pleasant for those of us who live in walls of text and can help humanize an otherwise dry technical subject, aiding newcomers considering joining the project to have an easier time understanding what they are looking at.
reply