@atomicpoet sure, I agree. I'd be interested to see how many scientists (again, it's hard to determine *who* is a scientist, but that's a different story) are compelled by these narratives, vs. the non-scientific demographic.
Everyone is welcome to believe what they like - legislating belief is pointless. That said, there're are lots of beliefs that are dangerous. Believing in comforting fictions might make some people happy, but when, on a societal level, it causes us to not take action to counter existential threats, it's ignorant and tragic in the extreme. And, as usual, it's not the 'believers' who bear the brunt. It's those whose words the believers chose to ignore.
@atomicpoet I'm not sure what you're suggesting... seems like you might be suggesting that non-scientific thinking (e.g. anecdote, hearsay, mythology, religion) are as legitimate as the scientific method. Yes, science is carried out by humans, so it's not foolproof, but it has safeguards that make it, generally, vastly superior to those other forms of knowledge.
Part one of the solution to almost all of our digital ills?
Do everything open and decentralised digital spaces first, and then, if resources allow, address those in centralised proprietary spaces.
If we all do this - because, let's face it, those of us in the Fedisphere are clearly the vanguard of digital tech makers and users globally - the rest of the world will eventually follow because (and I'm confident of this) they can't continue to function as they are without our help. .
I occurs to me that using proprietary software is a bit like paying someone to include you in their protection racket. (and if you're not paying in $, you're paying in loss of privacy and/or data sovereignty... or all 3).
@danie10 Nice one. I'm on a similar journey. Ditched Disqus comments on my blog and have been implementing Matomo for all my analytics (running my own instance via Docker). It's a very nice option!
Yes, this modus operandi, used by Microsoft and other faux-#FOSS "friends" does ring very true, especially if we consider the Linux Foundation: http://techrights.org/2020/09/27/proprietary-monopoly-github/ This is how the proprietary incumbents can use their exploitative profits to destroy those with far better ethics (and software).
In NZ, if we're teaching kids in high school how to do digital art, these are the tools we should be using: https://opensource.com/education/13/5/teaching-blender-students We shouldn't be using the "first hit's free" proprietary tools (from foreign multinationals like Adobe) that will force them into a continuous cycle of paying to access their own creativity once they leave school.
At a recent meeting where Min of Ed staffers were present, between sessions I heard them talk about wanting to do a "what is blockchain" course... *sigh*. I told them that blockchain was the least of their worries. It's definitely mostly hype. Same with AI. The Min of Ed would do better by giving staff enough tools to understand how their tech policies are needlessly making a couple generations of NZ learners hostages of monopolistic foreign proprietary software corporate...
Has anyone I know tried this non-Google ReCAPTCHA alternative, ReMAPCHA? https://wiki.hsr.ch/StefanKeller/wiki.cgi?ReMAPTCHA - it appears to ask people to do things that will improve the quality of OpenStreetMaps data... I like the sound of that! Perhaps NZ Gov't could use this instead of Google's service (which is used to train Google's AI, but is quite US-centric).
FOSS, OER, & CC. Nerd on many levels Democratising HigherEd by day, increasing digital, intellectual, & physical autonomy, equity, & agency always. I build, read (mostly scifi), bake, percuss, sing, strum, ponder, advocate, & use OxfordCommas. SelfHost w/ DockerCompose & Linux DoughnutEconomics Degrowth Equity AntiColonial Herpotology Biodiversity Cycling SwingDancing Ultimate DiscGolf. In ลtautahi Christchurch, Aotearoa NZ #searchable