• 0 Posts
  • 33 Comments
Joined 27 days ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2025

help-circle

  • I can’t speak for every place on earth, but where I live in the south of Portugal, that is very much the problem. And affordable long term rent has been destroyed in all of Europe by Airbnb and similar initiatives. And no, this is not a scapegoat theory. All you have to do is access housing registrations and match against citizenship registered to addresses in the same area and then you start to see the problem. There’s a lot more houses than people that have their permanent address registered to the same area. So then the problem can’t be housing in itself. When one starts to look closer we start to notice a lot of titles to the same people and the same last names as we all would expect. The house to person ratio is quite disproportionate in its distribution. I can tell you that this has been exposed time and time again over time, but since 2008 that it has indeed gotten worse and more so exponentially every year since then.

    The problem in just simply building more housing is that the same thing will happen to those new homes. They’ll just be absorbed into this same phenomenon of asset flipping and market speculation in which even rent, not just owning property reaches prices beyond what locals can afford with long term rent even becoming entirely unavailable due to Airbnb and other initiatives alike.

    That’s why the governments have to intervene. Especially at a local level. But if a rewiring of the general population doesn’t occur, it will just be lobbied back to the same as before. As it has happened. Because what is simply enforced is not learned. And this is what you are referring to when you speak to the public aversion to government intervention. If not understood and learned, what is then witnessed is the same rope pull of do and undo between governmental administrations, that wears off and alienates the public.

    But yes, sometimes the problem in itself can be an increase of population density that exploded beyond the local availability of houses. And then new housing development is required or people will have to choose (more like forced without an option) to relocate.

    That is why I said “the problem is not a lack of housing in itself necessarily”. In which I meant it as not always the source of the problem. I didn’t say the lack of housing in itself is NEVER the problem.

    There are many contributors to this issue.

    Environmental changes and war are also intertwined as they both lead to resource depletion, and become part of the same feedback loop that plays a part in the whole of the Metacrisis. In which both will cause mass migrations. And mass migrations will always cause a disparity between demand and availability in housing, which leads to more inflation and more conflicts over resources, which in turn leads to more mass migrations and on and on and on… This is “systems thinking” and the general public has not caught up to the descent we’re in yet. Or is in denial and refusing to engage in the face of its enormity.

    Most problems that are detected by most people are real and feeding into one another. What I said is true and what you said is true and anyone who doubts that is possible is not engaging with the complexity of the world as it is.


  • What?? Pretty soon you’re gonna be suggesting that there are better ways to transport people around than cars and that we could build better public transportation infrastructure with the tax payers money so that the same tax payers can afford mobility for a lot less while saving time in getting around and polluting a lot less the atmosphere that allows them to breath!

    What’s this? Do you want to make sense? We wouldn’t want to start making sense now, would we?

    Jokes aside now, when it comes to housing, the problem is not a lack of housing in itself necessarily. The crucial part of the problem resides in property hoarding by the wealthy and upper middle-class as long term investments in the form of assets to flip, all while they still obtain revenue in renting them to the highest bidder. Airbnb and similar initiatives destroyed affordable rent all around the world. This to say, that a lot of people in the unprivileged categories didn’t also mind screwing their peers to get ahead. This is what the capitalist system does. It re-enforces sociopathic behaviour in people through them valuing the monetary tokens more than the lives of those around them and the very world in which they have to inhabit. This is what Elizabeth Magie tried to explain the world when she created “The Landlord’s Game”. It has been explained and demonstrated as a predicted model for a very long time. And we all lose in the end. Always.

    Saying that the government needs to interfere and create measures to prevent the furthering of this crisis is incomplete without acknowledgement of the required rewiring of the general public to stave off the centuries old social conditioning of appealing to the worst in human condition.

    The default setting of a common citizen is not to contribute to a life shared by all that live around them and in turn benefit from the same efforts from others. It is instead to try and survive them all and and not needing the slightest from them. Which is never true, never possible but nevertheless the reason why we are always in this mess. And the reason why we all lose, and even those who lose the least, they still have to inhabit a world that would be better if this wasn’t true.

    Individuality also explains the housing crisis in the sense that more and more people have the desire to live alone. And therefore more houses are required. Which in a world like the one we have, that desire is perfectly understandable but in itself also a reinforcement of the loop that causes it.

    It’s a mess.


  • 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.



  • Yup. It does, doesn’t it?

    I know people with a lot of money to their name who buy second hand just to get around, and people with not much that end up with barely a cent to spare because they’re paying a loan to own a car they couldn’t really afford. Go figure.

    “It takes a special type of person”- as you said.

    Also, my comment wasn’t a dig at people for liking or enjoying cars at all. It’s about specific ones and how they’re being driven around… we see them around right?

    It’s the same with motorcycles to.

    The problem is never the vehicles themselves, obviously, it’s the idiots that get drawn to them and ruin what others might enjoy in them as well.



  • Why is it always the kind of person you think it’s gonna be? I mean, always. One can match the level of inconsiderable idiocy from car models alone.

    Imagine knowing you’re wrong and persist and insist this much in continuing to do the wrong thing in front of everyone, so that everyone can behold the thing that everyone knows that is wrong for you to be doing, and you still continue to do the wrong thing that you know that everyone knows that you know that is wrong to do. No? Hurts your brain, doesn’t it?

    Now… Why is his license plate blurred in the video? Does this level of inconsiderate behaviour deserve that level of consideration in return?


  • I’m not sure if the OP is trying to expose this article as an idiotic thing or not, but I can’t take this nothingness of an article seriously.

    I’m 40 and I’m sure that I “gave” this supposed “stare” to both older and younger people several times this month alone. And we’re barely past midway through it.

    Yes, it is smug and rude and most of the times uncalled for. But I don’t remember a time when this wasn’t around. I’ve given this look and received it since I’m able to remember existing. It’s not a generational feature, it’s not even a cultural one, as I’ve met people from all ages and places that do this my whole life.

    And it’s not that the young are more rude, is that everyone is more rude now.

    We all know that social exchanges took a turn for the worst since algorithmic social media really started to take off circa 2010, and it only got worse when everyone got locked with it as their only form of social exchange during covid lockdowns. This is not a GenZ problem, nor a U.S. problem, this is a problem for most people in most places now.

    Blaming this on the young when they had no saying in establishing this mess and when they were obviously never in charge of any decisions that led us here is the typical nonsense to expect from the most idiotic reasoning of the establishment and legacy media.

    “Oh, you know who we should blame for the shitty world we have? The people who were never in charge of anything and never had any saying in a single thing whatsoever. That’s who!!”

    I’ve witnessed this nonsense too many times my entire life and I don’t know how people fall for something so easy to recognize as inconceivable. And not with just the youth. It’s always stupid to assign blame to the people with the least available agency in the room, or in the world.

    And I hope you all catch it and stop it everytime someone is trying this nonsense in front of you.

    This article deserves the very “stare” that is trying to attribute to GenZ. If they do indeed do it more than others, articles like this only re-enforce that they should keep doing it. Because it very much earns that reaction.


  • 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.


  • 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.


  • I don’t think white nationalists mind being called white nationalists. The same for zionists or islamists. What these descriptors and the people who stand by them have in common is that they all share isolationism, supremacy and the disdain for otherness. These features are all intertwined and inseparable, like the three sides of a shitty triangle.

    One can say being called one of those descriptors when one finds them wrong and disagreeable is obviously offensive to the person in question.

    As for if it constitutes hate speech… it’s a mess. I’m not one to police language and speech.

    As the defense of every hateful person is that they can just be ignorant. And how true that is. But how convenient as well.

    Trying to legislate intention is impossible, and banning words is a terrible idea. And using the elusive concept of the status quo for a barometer of what is acceptable is also not a good idea at all. So… what are we left with? Allowing speech to fight back speech, basically. It’s far from perfect, but is the best we have.

    But in this case, yes, this is just someone drumming up fear in the racist bias of a portion of the public.

    As for if he is ignorant and believes the nonsense he speaks or doesn’t and is just mad that there’s an actual voice for the people to hinder and reduce the control of the elites, which include him and the moron tech bro brigade he’s a part of…

    I would say the distinction is irrelevant.

    But that’s just me.


  • I’m going to hinder the complexity that is required to properly answer your question, for the sake of brevity…

    Islamist=zionist=supremacist

    You can say that it’s the same product in different colours.

    As to this case in particular… It’s a racist trying to call someone a racist to distract from the fact that this is a capitalist that doesn’t like a socialist, because power doesn’t concede and it hates sharing.

    Mamdani is actually succeeding at connecting the elite class to all the societal issues in the population’s eye.

    So… It’s time for whistling in the racists through the post 9/11 phobia. Which in New York… you can fill in the rest.

    If someone wants to add more complexity to my very reductionist take, please do.


  • 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.




  • Why this level of vitriol and condescension in this exchange?

    I’m also going to repeat… Taking your stance to an extreme, and you have yourself a reductionist view of the world with nothing but intolerance or hatred for those who don’t share it. Sounds familiar?

    I don’t know what’s going on in your life, you could be going through something and I don’t want to add more to the pile of what you’re already dealing with. So I’m just gonna leave this here, because I suspect that even my concerning tone right now will read as passive aggressive to you. It isn’t. But I can’t control that.

    So take care.