Look up what controlled opposition means.

Yes, but have you considered this?

One side.

You're in a mono-party system.

Figure it out.

"tHaNkS nOn-VoTeRs"

proceeds to support a party that skipped the primaries, has been anointing unlikable candidates for over 10 years with zero input

"ITs ThE nOn VoTeRs!!"

Maybe your shit party should hold actual primaries where people can select their candidate? Maybe, when in power, they should actually make meaningful change that helps people? Maybe they should actually appoint supreme court judges when given the chance?

Somehow when they aren't in power, they are spinelessly fighting "if only we were in power we could fix all of this" then when they're in power, they are somehow even more powerless "the Republicans keep blocking us".

You got to be a real piece of work to think putting your trust in that party will fix anything. They are controlled opposition and the democracy has been lost for a long time.

Non-voters already know this.

Instead of attacking them, how about you hold your party accountable? They stole a primary from Bernie Sanders twice, and went ahead and eliminated primaries this last time. What will it take for you to look in the mirror and reflect instead of blaming everything around you?

We need a cap per owner. When you have multiple owners, the cap sums between them. Owners share equal rights.

So take a megacorp, like Google. They would be essentially need to make every employee an owner plus hire thousands of new "owner employees" to maintain their profit margin. Those profits get divided equally among owners, and the owners decide the direction of the company.

This pattern is also future proof against AI.

That is just the tip of the iceberg with the moderation framework I have in mind.

Anyone can become a moderator by publishing their block / hide list.

The more people that subscribe to a moderator or a moderator team, the more "votes" they get to become the default moderator profile for a topic (whatever that is on the given platform, subreddit for reddit etc).

By being subscribed to a moderation team (or multiple), when you block or hide, it gets sent to the report queues of who you're subscribed to. They can then review the content and make a determination to block or hide it for all their subscribers.

Someone who is blocked or hidden is notified that their content has been blocked or hidden when it is by a large enough mod team. They can then file an appeal. The appeal is akin to a trial, and it is distributed among all the more active people that block or hide content in line with the moderation collective.

An appeal goes through multiple rounds of analysis by randomly selected users who participate in review. It is provided with the user context and all relevant data to make a decision. People reviewing the appeal can make decision comments and the user can read their feedback.

All of this moderation has a "karma" associated with it. When people make decisions in line with the general populace, they get more justice karma. That creates a ranking.

Those rankings can be used to make a tiered justice system, that select the best representative sample of how a topic wishes to have justice applied. The higher ranking moderators get selected for higher tiered decisions. If a lower level appeal decision is appealed again, it gets added to their queue, and they can choose to take the appeal or not.

All decisions are public for the benefit of users and accountability of moderators.

When a user doesn't like a moderator's decision they can unblock or unhide content, and that counts as a vote against them. This is where it gets interesting, because this forms a graph of desired content, with branching decision logic. You can follow that train of thought to some very fascinating results. Everyone will have a personally curated content tree.

Some will have a "cute" internet, filled with adorable content. Some will have a "violent" internet, filled with war videos and martial arts. Some will have a "cozy" internet, filled with non-triggering safe content. And we will be able to share our curations and preferences so others can benefit.

There is much more but the system would make moderation not just more equitable, but more scalable, transparent, and appreciated. We'd be able to measure moderators and respect them while honoring the freedom of individuals. Everyone would win.

I see a future where we respect the individual voices of everyone, and make space for all to learn and grow. Where we are able to decide what we want to see and share without constant anxiety. Where everything is so fluid and decentralized that no one can be captured by money or influence, and when they are, we have the tools to swiftly branch with minimal impact. Passively democratic online mechanisms.

That's correct. We can't put the genie back in the bottle. We have to increase our mastery of it instead.

The core relationship is rather simple and needs to be redefined. Remote compute does not assign numbers to any of us, we provide them with identities we create.

All data allowances are revokable. Systems need to be engineered to make the flow of data transparent and easy to manage.

No one can censor us to other people without the consent of the viewer. This means moderation needs to be redefined. We subscribe to moderation, and it is curated towards what we individually want to see. No one makes the choice for us on what we can and cannot see.

This among much more in the same thread of thinking is needed. Power back to the people, entrenched by mastery.

When you think like this more and more the pattern becomes clearer, and you know what technology to look for. The nice thing is, all of this is possible right now at our current tech level. That can bring a lot of hope.

Just because there exists people who don't think like you doesn't mean they live a boring life. That's a bit mean to assume, isn't it?

I believe there is a wisdom in many of the books people find holy. I'm also an atheist. I believe in the void of nothingness as the ultimate reality. I'm also a theist. I believe in higher powers spanning dimensions.

Nothing needs to be so small or simple as binary coded, but maybe everything can be? We all enjoy the game of this or that, in or out, true or false, but that sounds incredibly boring to me. So I don't play it. It's more fun to be anything we want.

I am both a believer in nothing and a believer in everything. It may appear as a contradiction, because it is. It also isn't. It is completely internally consistent and orderly but it's also pure beautiful chaos.

Just because people misunderstand things and take bad actions doesn't mean the thing itself isn't still useful. We don't completely understand our own bodies yet they continue to function in spite of our understanding.

Navigating a wilderness without a compass is a difficult thing. We all have a compass inside of us. I hope that everyone everywhere will find it.

I brought up the top percentile to further illustrate how broken the mindset and mechanics of online dating are.

I hear you. All the things you said are possible by taking a hike. That's why I suggested taking it. We all come from nature, and we are all connected to it. It is an easy hobby to have. You pick a beautiful place, and you walk in it. It is important to do it alone or with friends you have no romantic interest in. It has countless mental health and physical fitness benefits, so it serves functional purposes in addition.

I don't know how to explain this without sounding crazy. The Earth is alive and conscious. The Earth is most definitely a "she" and she is a higher order intelligence than us. She is the first mother on this planet. None of this matters because the logic holds whether or not you believe me.

Nature is capable of replacing the longing for human companionship. It is full and it is complete. It provides the thing that feels like it's missing in every relationship I've had. When you connect with her, you connect with something much larger than any one person can bring.

But what's more, she is connected to everyone. In other words....Earth is the ultimate matchmaker. It is a strange contradiction. You spend time with nature, and that time becomes a pure pursuit where you eventually do it because you love the Earth. Then, and I absolutely promise this with certainty, the Earth will connect you with people that you've been looking for.

Among those connections is a special person you will want to meet.

Buddhism has a more Christian example of Christ-like behavior concerning a "living being Satan". That is to say, if "living being Jesus" was real, he would be a Bodhisattva, perhaps akin to Kṣitigarbha.

In the story, Bodhisattva Kṣitigarbha vowed:

“Until the hells are empty, I will not become a Buddha.

Only when all sentient beings are saved will I attain enlightenment.”

It is a vow to never abandon any being regardless of their state.

I like that idea. Boundless love and compassion doesn't stop at the bounds of some hell. It is boundless. It has boundless time, so it will spend an eternity reaching out to even cyclic hells.

Let's clarify some things:

• This is criminal, not civil. The board of directors and executive leadership should be held criminally liable.
• polluting waters directly leads to suffering and death on a mass scale. It would not an exaggeration to compare it to a weapon of mass destruction.
• the board of directors and executive leadership are, therefore, mass murderers and should be prosecuted as such.
• the business should be dissolved and sold off. Major shareholders should be on the hook to repair all the damage done by the company.

Until we all start internalizing this way of thinking, nothing will ever change. Fines will not fix anything. The corporate shield is a lie. When your company kills people at this scale, your liability shielding is irrelevant.

This is not correct.

As an example, have you had the smallpox vaccine? It is effective for about 10 years before the effectiveness reduces, so a top up is needed.

The anthrax vaccine? It needs 3 or 4 doses and regular top ups, and it only gives resistance.

The tetanus vaccine? It lasts about 10 years also.

Lots if vaccines have a time period where they grant primarily resistance. In the case of something like anthrax, the objective is to make it largely survivable.

I know you used a lot of your logic to arrive where tou are, so hopefully this additional information allows you to arrive at a better conclusion.

So they discovered faulty code and made some money?

Can anyone explain to me how this is illegal?

The code is a contract. If someone writes bad code and loses money, then write better code - just like if someone writes a bad legal contract and loses money.

The justice system is awful.