this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
908 points (92.4% liked)
Open Source
33367 readers
229 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I will tell you why this is not true.
Any platform that becomes successful enough to grow and cater to a larger audience eventually gets sold to large corpos. This is inevitable, because the owner usually doesn't have the principles to say "no" to $100m+. This is a bad thing, why? Because you joined the platform due to its reliability and its culture. These things are no longer guaranteed to stay when the owner is replaced. So the previous owner essentially did a bait-and-switch by selling you (the user-base) to a corporation.
On one hand this leads to a more stable platform that can withstand legal trouble and has a steady inflow of money to maintain service. On the other hand, you get cencorship, woke ESG-score-friendly ideology and UX anti-patterns (like when Reddit constantly pushes their app to track you and show you ads). The ending of such a platform is hatred from most common people and aggressive monetization by the owners to compensate for a lower rate of growth. These owners, usually shareholders of publicly traded companies, do not care about maintaining quality as much as they care about generating wealth. This means that they will resort to several anti-user tactics to keep growing their wealth, like for example milking the platform dry with ads & micro-transactions.
Lemmy.world and other large instances are just like Condé Nast Reddit. Same censorship, same garbage. If you think that Lemmy is more free, then let me remind you that Reddit pre-2014 was more free than Lemmy.world. Yes, once upon a time Reddit was much more free and open than the so called "Lemmyverse". Why I say this is because of Lemmy's rules and policies. As an anecdote, I literally got banned from a community for saying that there are only two sexes (no foul language, nothing). For me, who was a Redditor during the pre-2014 era, this was unheard of. Lemmy is less like Old Reddit, and more like Raddle.me (Communist Old Reddit-clone). Lemmy is the LGBT/woke Old Reddit clone. It's not as fringe as Raddle.me, but it is still fringe, and it will therefore not be able to have the same reach as Old Reddit once had. The fact that Reddit is woke now is a bait-and-switch, as I explained earlier. Reddit would have never been successful had it been woke from Day 1. I predict that Lemmy will never grow as large as Reddit because of this reason.
To mods: Leave this post be. If not, you can have your echo-chamber, and I'm fucking out of here.
I mean, it depends on how you define the term "biological sex", which really is a fuzzy term that can refer to distinct things. There's two types of gametes in humans and intersex people and everyone else still has X or Y chromosomes not Z or something. In that sense there are very much two sexes. Phenotypically of course there's tons of variations but unlike with plants an individual carrying both male and female gametes in one body is exceedingly rare, that is, our biology does generally speaking prefer our reproductive phenotypes to be dimorphic whereas the biology of most plants is happy to have individuals carry both types, switch around, and whatnot. It's wild over there. Imagine you're hanging out with the gals and because there's so much gal pheromones floating around your body decides to switch into hairy woodchuck mode and grow a dick. That kind of flexibility is generally not what enbies mean when identifying as enbies.
...because that's just the reproductive aspect. It gets progressively more complicated and less sensible to talk about a binary the further you get away from that, what we get instead is bimodal distributions: Distinct peaks, but also overlap. Sticking to easily measurable things: The height of an individual human (within a single population and social class i.e. let's ignore malnourishment) is not entirely useless as a predictor of that individual's sex. Once you get to general behaviour, let's say "enjoys walks on the beach more than going clubbing" all bets are off.