sanity_is_maddening

deleted by creator

You’re in the awful moment after college. I’m 40 and this happened to anyone I know as well. Older people than me will tell you the same. It really sucks.

So, I’m gonna give a few suggestions where you don’t have to spend any money and don’t involve clubbing, which is not cheap either.

Plenty of group activities don’t cost anything and are the most fulfilling…

Just one quick note. Don’t concern yourself too much with age groups. People are organised by age groups in school. Everywhere else the organisation is mutual interests or common goals. And then you’ll go there and find people of all ages.

So…

Find projects of your interest where you can volunteer.

If you like animals, give some of your time to local animal shelters and animal associations.

If you want to give Nature a hand, volunteer to go plant trees on the weekend, plenty of groups outthere always asking for more to come.

Check the activities at your local library, most of them are state funded and free of charge to participate in.

The same goes for Cultural Associations. Plenty of them have state funded events that are free of charge to attend.

There are also amateur groups that you can join. Just find anything of your liking. If you like to draw, almost any place has a “drink and draw” event or an Urban Sketchers group. Nobody will care if you don’t consume at these events. And if you think you can’t draw, nobody cares. People of all levels of skill show up. I know this because I go to them and nobody cares how well you draw. As long as you like drawing, looking at drawings or watching people drawing you’re always welcomed at them.

If drawing is not of your interest but you like singing, there’s for sure an amateur singing group near you. My girlfriend met a group of funny and energetic elderly ladies this way. She loves their company. And nobody young or old is there to make it to a stage. They just enjoy singing and each other’s company.

If you don’t like singing but you play an instrument, plenty of Jam sessions around and in some the musicians that play don’t pay for their drinks. And the ones where they do, you can just not consume anything. They know you’re there to play. But there’s a few who even pay some musicians to be there. It’s a matter of finding out.

There’s dancing groups.

There’s film clubs.

There’s book clubs.

There’s poetry gatherings. A lot of the poetry there will be awful and that’s fine. It’s part of the charm.

And the reason why I know of all these events I suggested so far is because I go to them and I even help organise some of them with two of my local cultural associations. The next event I’m helping out on is an Animation festival that is now in its fourth annual edition. Although not all, some of the screenings are free. But the ones that aren’t are dirt cheap anyways.

These are some examples, there are so many more. And in almost if not all of them you’ll find people of all ages, including yours and younger.

Don’t go out looking for a romantic partner. Go look for a community. You’re also more likely to find a partner in a community of people anyway.

While you were in school, you were in a secluded and rigid environment.

Welcome to the shit.

Where everyone is as clueless as you probably think you are.

I wish more people thought like you.

And I wish I gave answers as swift and succinct as yours. I wrote a reply that is too looooong. Yours is better.

Well, the DVDs and Blu-rays do not have to be of American media, but if they are, they can be of the several European special boutiques and distributors that can merely license the media you specifically care for. Although I’m sure that there are many American Filmmakers and artists we all still want to support and even increase visibility amongst the current circumstances. This allows one to have that level of targeting and to have specific and personal input, instead of just contributing to giant conglomerates that screw the artists out of fair revenue before moving to screw their costumers at every turn, which is what streaming services are and do.

With physical media, one can also borrow or lend amongst each other at leisure, check them for free from libraries or buy them second hand. This is also about cultural sovereignty and increases the resiliency in communities when it comes to culture. And in times of instability and economic hardship it becomes even more necessary.

Media is like anything else, the more people owning it the better. We don’t want culture to be in the hands of just a few. That is the wrong direction for everything.

But I’m suspect because I’ve never stopped this habit and I prefer European cinema and World Cinema to American in the first place.

I also enjoy going to screenings in my local cineclub. There’s a wonderful sense of community and great discussions to have. And it’s so much cheaper and fulfilling than going to the Multiplex which is impersonal and encourages mindlesness.

If you’re more into TV series, the U.S. does have the monopoly of interest. But I assume this is much more about visibility and a failure of venues to publicise TV series of other places. The absence of TV Series Festivals like Film Festivals that can obtain visibility for them is partially the answer that is missing. But I still remember the craze with the Scandinavian output, which had hits like “Forbrydelsen” (The Killing) or Bron (The Bridge), and both got American Remakes that were quite disappointing in comparison. But the biggest hit that came out of that was probably Borgen. Wonderful show.

But even in English, I much prefer to watch shows coming out of Britain than the U.S. And with BBC, you only need a VPN to access their shows and documentaries for free. It’s public domain there. If you are from the U.k. than this is an unnecessary step.

Some people have suggested that we should push the E.U. to start a streaming service that would make content created by European Public owned Networks and Radiostations available to all countries in the EU for free. It’s already free. It just needs distribution. It’s a great idea. Although the BBC is Brittish and therefore not EU, a deal could probably still be achieved to include them.

Anyway, I will still always suggest for anyone to not get too stuck in algorithmic suggestions of Cinema, Music and Art in General. It gets stale, and doesn’t force us to challenge ourselves in any form and in any new directions. Part of the problem we have in civilization right now is precisely stemming from this lack of broadening personal horizons and challenging individual perceptions that comes with the feedback loop that algorithms reinforce and cause the so called “bubbles” and “echo chambers” that so many like to point out, but so very few actually enjoy breaking out of.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Yes! Thank you! I’ve been shouting this for over a decade.

And I keep saying that Gamergate should’ve been the moment to take notice of this. Even yesterday I included this in another comment. That was the gate that opened this flood. And that should’ve been the moment to shut down algorithmic incentive for engagement. People shrugged and moved on. Then came Snowden trying to warn everyone of the consolidation of power. People shrugged and moved on. Then it came the Cambridge Analytica Scandal. People shrugged and moved on.

There’s that phrase… “we always have the world we deserve”. I used to rebel against this statement. But I find myself agreeing with it more and more over time. I still don’t like it as a blank statement though. Too many don’t deserve the outcomes of it.

Uh, and what is this we’re on right now?

Not to mention Mastodon, Pixelfed federating with Mastodon already, Friendica, Peertube etc…

The powers that be don’t like the Fediverse. It’s not possible to control and averts direct monetization. They know that if it keeps growing, it keeps reverting the internet back to its initial potential that was stolen from all of us. They don’t like that.

Remember when the internet was a good thing and not the gated hell that it is? I do. If you don’t, they’d like to keep it that way.

They don’t want the general population to know that the internet can be from everybody to everybody. Then people might ask for tax funding to go to server maintenance to be cheaper or even better free to anyone who would want to use it. Like a highway? Yes? Remember when that was one of the analogies for the internet? The building of new highways that would connect us all?

“We can tax fund highways instead of gates and tolls” - they can hear it already. And oh they don’t like that. Not one bit.

They want American Social Media, but you know, European. The same but ours.

But if it mimics theirs it will be just as terrible, regardless of where it comes from. Look at how the U.S. is imploding. Does it matter the social media is “theirs”?

“But the E.U. has better regulations and will do a better job.”

Do we want the folks that brought us a hit like Troika to be in charge of the entirety of the platforms in which their direct citizens can express themselves? Do we want to give them direct influence to crush dissidence? Have we learn nothing?

Yes, I prefer the E.U to the U.S. The E.U. works better, because the countries that are part of it can actually check its influence. Well, when they can. But the true reason why the E.U. really works is because we have worse things to compare it to. And that is a terrible way to build a future.

We have to imagine a better version of the world if we’re to build it. And right now, we are in a sliver of the internet that shows that it is indeed possible. Regardless of odds and issues, it is possible.

I keep saying for a while that Precision Fermentation is the future. Because if it isn’t, that probably means there isn’t one.

Using the lowest trophic level possible to grow our sustenance directly is the only way to ensure the least destruction possible. Which ensures the most environmental and ethical efficacy. As there should never be anything to distinguish between them in the first place.

Have an acount on both and use them to verify each other.

I have a Proton mail account. While I’m ready to scold them for stop posting on Mastodon while still posting you know where!!.. I think the stupid tweet that Andy Yen posted got way too out of hand. It was one tweet. You should find the tweet and read it yourself. It’s just a dig at the “Left” in the vein of “wait, since when is a Republican defending small tech from Big Tech more than the Left?” It was tone deaf, and dumb and calls caution to the fact that this may be another dumb tech Bro who likes to tweet irresponsibly just as much as the idiots we know too well. But it wasn’t any form of endorsement at all. Just a tone deaf attempt to create social pressure for the supposed “Left” to do what it is supposed to do. And oh boy, did the tone deaf tweet backfire.

But anyway, I belive, like many people here do, that one shouldn’t put all of one’s efforts to just one bet. That is how we got Google in the first place. You should also have a Tuta Mail as well, especially if you seem inclined to and don’t have an alternative mail to Proton. I’m always ready to jump at any time that I find something that displeases me. And that includes Proton.

There’s also personal preferences at play. What works really well for one person, might not for another.

We should try to spread our choice amongst all the villagers. Do not replace your entire Google suite for the Proton one. That’s how we get another powerful conglomerate.

And how many people kept warning everyone of this and for how long?

I am a bit tired of the lack of foresight. In reactive vs proactive measures people only seem to understand reactive ones.

I’ve been telling people about the dangers of the lack of digital sovereignty, in relation to nations, communities and individuals for I don’t even know how long. As many many others have for even longer.

It’s as if one keeps telling someone to fix the fissures in the hull of their boat while on shore, but they only seem to understand what you mean when the boat is leaking through these same fissures at sea.

It’s only then that it starts to sink - pun very much intended.

By that point it’s too late. And the outcome might be a tragic one.

It’s the same with the environment.

It’s the same with their own health.

It’s the same with everything.

One doesn’t need to ponder about this for very long to pinpoint that this is because the absence of reference is what makes it harder to acknowledge it. Because one has a harder time understanding what one doesn’t have a frame of reference of, and then the subsequent dismissiveness ensues.

The great tragedy of all the proactive efforts is that when they are successful, something has been avoided, and therefore unseen.

We register rescue, not prevention.

And it’s only in the rescuing that the understanding of what could have been avoided starts to be perceived. Not everyone is like this, but most people seem to be.

But I don’t know how as one gets older, sees what might be a cliff ahead and finds only reasoning for a faint downslope.

And I no longer care to know if it is due to denial, laziness or ignorance anymore. Because I’m quite exhausted of this.

I understand you being protective of the communities you manage and that it’s a delicate task to begin with. And an effort that so often goes unrecognised and unappreciated.

But please, don’t feel accused or worse, insulted, because I oppose banning. My opposition to it is not a personal stance against you or anyone else.

In relation to upvotes/downvotes, I use them to generate a quick dislplay of engagement in the communities I follow. But even though I do it, I still find that it is always a lazy form of engagement that is both unappealing and uninteresting and on top of it all it is a system that lacks clarity and it’s easy to hijack with bots and brigade hits. And it is that way because it requires very little effort and time to do so. So I always found that we could do without that system and I would much prefer it.

In relation to banning, I think it is possible to devise other methods of guiding online spaces. I never like when I see a comment or a post removed. Never. I would much prefer that in the case of mods, a system of different flags used for flagging different circumstances was set in place. Like one for trolling, another one for spam, a different one for toxic and insulting use of language, and especially the one for the ban that upsets me the most out of all the banning choices, the off topic one. As I’ve said in another comment in this thread, I’ve never been banned from any community in any platform. But I have had comments removed where I was merely responding to other people and a new branch of conversation emerges amongst a few of us, only for our comments to be removed and our conversation ended with total disregard or respect for the conversation we were having. This is insulting to everyone involved, as any good conversation can lead us anywhere and these are not in person or broadcast events running on a clock. People can respond at their own leisure, and anyone who is not interested can just collapse the comment branch and move to the next branch within the thread. This way of fencing topics is a community killer and I’ve left quite a few communities over the years because of this type of moderation alone and not the community itself. It is not of my interest to be in a space where people are shut down, especially when everyone involved is being respectful and we’re doing what these platforms were really intended for, which is to take in different perspectives from all types of people from anywhere in the world. If not for that, I have a life and this is of no interest to me to waste my time on if I’m not reaching and accessing people and realities that are not my own.

But this is my opinion. And by definition I’m a commenter not a poster. And I’ve never been interested in moderating. Because I like the equalitarianism of being amongst others sharing ideas without any disparity to differentiate us. Which is another reason as to why we could do without the lazy upvote/downvote system which interferes without engaging.

But I am going to repeat what I said at the beginning… I understand you being protective of the communities you manage and it’s a really delicate task to begin with. And it truly is an effort that so often goes unrecognised and unappreciated.

So, regardless of what our differences of opinion might be, I’m still grateful for your efforts and I’m glad that there’s still people around that care enough to try a hand at what is a hard bargain from the get go.

Yeah, I agree that the complexity is larger in practice than just saying no bans. And I’ve even commented recently that I’ve heard directly from coders that it is easier to code and built the platforms than it is to manage the user base. I also said I’m not a coder so I can’t make that claim. But I’ve heard it first hand.

But I still can’t agree in principle with the blank nature of banning. I have to say that I’ve never been banned from any online space. Not once. Not on reddit, not on Lemmy, and I hope that continues now on Piefed. So, I’m not defending this principle on a basis that I’ve experienced a ban in its true opressive form like some people are sharing in this thread. Because I haven’t. But I have in the past taken a stand in defence of people that I vehemently disagreed with, because I believe however heinous their comments or choice of words were, I want them to be out in the open. That is how the accountability can actually occur. And that is how they get to be challenged. Not cast out without reasoning. If they leave to set up shop somewhere where only the heinous will follow, that’s how we allow this wound to fester and spread its putrefaction. And no form of accountability or consequence actuality took place. None whatsoever.

And it was extremely bad news when I saw the freedom of speech starting to become a proud talking point of conservative and retrograde outlets more than a decade ago. Which was in my impression at the tail-end of Gamergate. ( But did it ever end though? SJW versus Anti-SJW just got rebranded as Woke versus Anti-Woke) But sill, I think back then was when all the grifters that are now famous spotted this great online grift : Say something obnoxious or questionably dubious, then let in the brigade that want to tell them they can’t say that, so that they can sound the horn and call the free speech absolutists and cry out that freedom of speech is under threat and nearly gone. All while they have the freedom to recycle and repeat this nonsense over and over.

This type of political play has been around for a long time…

But here, online, it’s truly the same method of the old online Troll. I mean, I even found some trolling in the past absolutely ingenious and even hilarious in some cases. But I guess a lot of people didn’t learn the old ungated ways of the internet, where we would spot the Troll and know not to feed it. As the online spaces became more deranged it became harder to distinguish and we went from playing “spot the troll” to playing “is this satire?” really quickly.

But still, anyone perceptive knew these rising grifters only wanted to defend this right so they could get to opress the rights of others and control the narrative all while cashing in on furthering the protective barrier for the wealthy class to keep hoarding more wealth and control. I believe some were even being sponsored to do so. And there’s been some evidence uncovered of some extreme far right groups even directly funding this type of bait in Europe. I mean, it was always clear as day, but they managed to garner a lot of suppport from gullible people who thought they were being virtuous in the defense of freedom. But they were surrendering control to the faction and people who want to control speech the most. Because they always have wanted to control it the most all along.

But this was only possible because some people really intended on policing speech instead of disarming the nonsense with facts through the same freedom. As righteous as their motivations might’ve been, this was a truly misguided step.

The righteous path cannot mimic the behaviours and practices of oppression and tyranny. It will only bring about the same cycles of resistance. As it obviously has.

Nothing that is merely enforced is ever truly learned, and this way true progress is never achieved.

The upvote/downvote system was always meant to be in relation to one agreeing/ disagreeing or liking/disliking with what one is interacting with, and I do believe that it is the inescapable function of it, regardless of how much thought one puts into it or not. One would have to find a bizarre thought process that could result in one avoiding that inevitability. Like someone who chooses to upvote what they disagree with or downvote what they agree with. Doesn’t sound conceivable. Maybe in an algorithm driven platform one could use this as a thought experiment to find the opposite of oneself or one’s own opposition in suggested content, but here without an algorithm to drive it, not even that is conceivable.

In regards to people piling on and using downvotes in a form of a brigade attack, similar to review bombing pieces of media… While I dislike this profoundly and find it enormously toxic, it is still within the realm of public expression. If one means to silence it, one means to suppress the freedom for others to express themselves as both individuals and as a group. As much as I find it despicable or toxic in a lot of contexts, I can’t bring myself to justify the act of banning this form of expression in showing discontent. As I’m sure we’ve all found moments in which we agreed with a form of public outrage expression such as this one. But we’re still all being baited into pack mentality which is an essential feature to maximise engagement in algorithmic platforms. And it is why it is a key requirement for me now that if I’m to join any platform that this feature needs to be non-existent. No algorithm driven platforms for me, thanks. If the user is not driving the experience, I find it repulsive, and so should anyone else.

As to banning in general… The user as an individual can block whomever they so desire, including entire instances. That is the control that anyone should be allowed to have as an individual. But not banning. Moderating or not, I find banning a suppression tool that can be used to suppress legitimate criticism, and it does happen all the time. Everywhere. So, I’m opposed to banning. Even in extreme cases of crude language and abhorrent and toxic behaviour. As I find that banning is sweeping the problem under the rug and not allowing it to be seen, identified, analysed and to further uncover the root causes of that said problem. Be that of an individual or any type of mob mentality. Back when I left reddit, I didn’t leave because there were too many shitty users, I left because they were being rewarded with attention without examination. And the algorithm there was what did that and still does. There and everywhere else.

I’m 40. Even recently someone here reminded me of the concept of “Eternal September”. I hadn’t heard it in a long time. But I’ve seen it happen many times. The absence of an algorithm alone is enough to build a fence to stave off some of the largest problems of modern online spaces.

For anyone who doesn’t know, not even the incel community was a toxic one when it started. In the late 90’s it was just people sharing their insecurities in those forums. And it was composed of both male and female users seeking to find connection through the act of sharing their insecurities in an attempt to find a way out of loneliness. Cut to now and what the hell happened? I was too young back then to parse through the nuances and complexities of what was going on those forums. But one thing that I always pondered was if whatever happened there was the prelude to Gamergate. Because I think Gamergate was what “trained” algorithms to reinforce toxicity because it tracked the maximising of engagement that occurred, and then reinforced it because maximising engagement was what it was supposed to do. And just like people swept under the rug the incel community gone terribly wrong by dismissing it as some trivial internet phenomena, people did the same with Gamergate as they dismissed it as some trivial dumb gamer thing. And now look at where we are. But the fact is that this was and has been growing for a long time, people just didn’t bother to assess it, and banning this to the outer margins was one of the reasons it grew. And then the algorithms came and rewarded and emboldened it all.

If I had to sum it up I would say… Modern civilization isolates people, which generates loneliness, which generates resentment for others and an enormous need for connection, which then finds connection in resemblance in the loneliness and resentment of others online, with the internet not solving the loniless that is seething underneath of it all and even reinforcing it. It’s a loop. And it is not secular to men or young men, it’s everyone without a social life and real connections that gets caught in this loop. And the algorithimc influence only accelerates it.

This all to say that banning people is another one of the contributors that leads people down darker and darker paths to find somebody that will listen to them. As uncomfortable as it might be to encounter this, I want all this in plain sight, and I want everyone of sound mind to try to engage and try to disarm what is causing the people in question to spiral down.

I know it’s not pleasant nor easy, but if we avoid it, the result will be even more unpleasant and harder to deal with.

Just take a look at the world now… Loneliness was weaponized by the indecent, because the decent refused to engage. And it is still going on and on.

And the antidote can’t be the continuous matching of resentment nor to allow the conditions that set this in motion to remain unacknowledged.

We lost track of what money was supposed to be for… a representation of the resources and services in circulation. In which it was supposed to facilitate trade by creating tokens to facilitate transactions without the requirement of trust in the absence of a good, like when a farmer would need a tool from a blacksmith but the goods that the farmer has are only available when harvested in which the tool that the blacksmith has is required to retrieve them. In the presence of trust, the blacksmith was going to still trade and expect the goods when time was due. In the absence of trust, like in relation to a stranger, this trade wouldn’t go forward. Money as a representational token solved this sort of common issue. And this became a necessity when tribes went above the Dunbar’s number.

Cut to now…

What the hell is an economy even supposed to represent anymore? It is certainly not a representation of the resources and services in circulation, that’s for sure. 6 out of 9 planetary boundaries already breached all to ensure the survival of this abstraction. Some even call it Moloch as a reference to the pagan god which required human sacrifice. I thinks it’s worse, as it requires the sacrifice of everything, not just humans. But it is certainly a clever nod to something that was only real because people believed it to be.

Back to your project. A FOSS Barter Facilitator. There’s nothing I don’t like about this. Just make sure the protocols remain open to federation of future FOSS Barter Facilitators and you have a slice of Utopia to challenge the dystopian hell we’re in.

You have something here that can alleviate people’s lives in times of great need. Resource collapse is imminent now. If that is not at least partially avoided, that makes the collapse of the global economic system inevitable. What happens after that is a fool’s errand to even attempt to guess. We only know it’s not gonna be peaceful and nice given the stupidity in human nature. Scarcity always leads to the forming of new predation systems. That is how predation was formed in Nature. The incapacity for self-regulation led to animals to reproduce and consume more than the regenerative availability of their setting allowed, leading them to predate on each other. This is how violence emerged in Nature and still does to this day. When we lose track of self regulation we return to the scavenger’s rule of the wild.

But this helps in giving people access to trade without the requirement of capital tokens. Huge spikes in inflation, unemployment and mass migrations are only going to increase in volume and in rate as resources continue to collapse worldwide. We’re in a feedback loop and war and A.I. will only accelerate the velocity of it.

Or, you know, we could have more ideas like yours and reduce resource intake, increase individual resiliency and in doing so, lessening the panic in the common struggles.

So…

I’m certainly saving this post and link and share it with anyone who is inclined to listen.

I’m not a coder, so I thank you for such a wonderful contribution to the world.

I’m not entirely clear as if you just meant that as a thought experiment… Because I wasn’t suggesting anything in that direction, actually. I was merely stating that the ratio of space required to grow food for the population in cities should match the vertical design of cities themselves. And even include these vertical farming structures within cities themselves. It all needs to match the design of efficiency in housing. Otherwise, it’s just a race to the bottom in how to run out of surface land and resources the fastest way.

Also, I want to mention that this idea that the entire lives of people would have to be dedicated entirely to farming has always been greatly exaggerated as to scare off people from procuring sovereignty for themselves and their communities. My girlfriend and I grow some of our food. I would say even if I took the task alone with the intention of feeding us both entirely all year round, it would take me about less then 2 months worth of work spread out across two seasons. That out of an entire year leaves a lot of time to spare. Not to mention, that I could use the same time to grow more for more people. After you put what you need in the ground, setting an automatic irrigation system, the maintenance work is not that much of a hassle, especially using the syntropic method within a permaculture design. The early stages of setting this up are laborious indeed, but after that, not really, not really at all.

This all to say that this is another one of those myths that capitalism has ingrained falsely in people as to keep the labour of the masses retained to the benefit of the few who gain the most from it. It’s about insuring the conditions where the elite can keep manufacturing the consent in others to exploit them. And insuring dependency is always the way to do it.

Farming wise, and regarding our current food systems, I think that people in general should learn more about syntropy if we are to communicate better as to what needs to be achieved. As it will mean different approaches depending on geography. Not to mention Urban vs rural settings would also require different approaches as well.

Then it would also be easier to gather support for innovations such as Precision Fermentation. Because using bacterial and microbial life to grow our sustenance is ingenious. The lower the trophic level we consume from, the lesser the destruction. And it would also be faster. Always.

If we truly insure true efficiency, we truly minimise destruction. And maximise the potential for prosperity for all, including non-human animals, plants and all other organisms.

Unfortunately the only efficiency that our current systems are designed for is to maximise profit. Which requires continuous growth, which is unsustainable and will ultimately lead to its own inevitable collapse. 6 of the 9 established planetary boundaries have already been breached. It’s only a matter of time now. As to how much time that will take and how much of the world will be taken with it, that is all tied to massive amounts of data for us to even fathom to process.

And AI is currently accelerating all this race to depletion in all fronts.

So, yeah, optimism right now, would be indeed for fools as you say.

Thank you for beating me to it. I 100% agree with you.

But I have to say, in order to meet the nutrient density requirements, they would have to completely reform the agricultural sector. Which I would love, but we know how this goes with these people.

And the fact that in 2025, we keep stacking people on top of each other to the point that more than half of the world’s population is living like this in cities, which is integrated in a vertical axis, but the energy consumption of the same people is still spreading elsewhere on an horizontal axis… that is foreboding the worst of outcomes in this regard.

The permaculture philosophy and the syntropic method would have to be integrated. And with it, vertical indoor farming in cities as a necessary response. But this would mean the end of monocultures and pesticide use. No more plowing either. Terrible for the microorganisms in the soil, means terrible for everything else. Soil policy would have to be in place as a baseline… it’s a lot.

But I keep saying this… Environmentalism, veganism, sustainability and ethics are all the same thing. The very same thing. It’s trying to insure that our lives as both the individual and the mass population causes the least destruction and suffering as possible. And that we can aspire to be net positive to all biological life on the planet. If the general population understood this, we could be heading somewhere. Unfortunately without understanding entropy and how the trophic balance is achieved, I doubt that one can understand syntropy or what the hell I’m even talking about right now.

But yeah… Syntropy vs Entropy is hard to explain in a small paragraph to the ADHD crowd of our time, I guess.

So… Optimism is just not in the cards. Not for me at least.

In my opinion it lacks the core essentials of game design.

But one ought to get used to it. With the A.I. boom, procedurally generated is no longer secluded to the dungeons and “rogue like” games, as the future in the mind of a lot of game devs these days is how it augments the possibilities of any given game. And while in theory it is true, in practice it translates into very bland gaming. Because it lacks the intention and precision in hitting whatever makes the contextual gameplay interesting and engaging in the first place.

But… to each their own, I’d say.

Oh, there’s an app called “HappyCow”. It’s an app that helps anyone find vegan restaurants or restaurants with vegan options with geolocation. It’s a very famous app amongst Vegans. And it’s not recent at all.

I install it when I travel for the reasons you just describe.

I’m sorry to hear about your hard time. Hope that app helps you the next time you travel.

I just caught your comment. Sorry for the late reply.

Yeah, looking around as you said brings me nothing but a sense of loss.

I’m 40. And I’ve been at this for what it feels so long now… what it’s about 20 years of this to me probably feels like a blink to you. But anyway, to me it’s not the ignorance that upsets me the most, it’s the people who know what I do and even share the anxiety of it, and do nothing differently.

I hope wherever you chose to move to, that you found peace of mind and a more tolerable climate.