This is such an odd title to an article. Is the fallacy ever a good thing? The fallacy itself is a concept - so not really good or bad. Using it as a logical premise in an argument is recognized to be problematic.
Are we actually asking: is ever good to keep doing something you yourself hate only because you yourself already spent money on it? The answer seems clearly to be no.
Loved this game. Used to play with my bro. Always XL map, hours until we even found each other.
A year or so ago he showed me: https://goblinzstudio.com/game/heros-hour/
Very similar but a hilarious battle system that actually renders ALL of your creatures. Love it
Understandable. Would be nice if it were available through sidequest or something more wholesome. Cool game though.
Agreed. Always a good thought to have when one is considering going down that road. Is the future predictable enough to really expect that particular end?
I think you’re onto something saying toxic is a pretty unspecific term to use when talking about such things. Maybe it would be a better conversation to ask: when do the ends justify the means?
I think you’re right that there are people out there trying to manipulate and influence social media - I mean even that platforms themselves do this to a certain extent.
The idea that they purposely try to make it toxic to push the more intellectually-honest, emotionally-controlled people out of the conversation is the interesting part to me.
This particular facet feels less like intentional manipulation and more like a side-effect of our platforms and how they function.
Intriguing. I don’t totally know what I think about this argument. A purposeful initiative to make politics toxic to get people to stop paying attention. It’s not one I had totally considered before. You think that’s really going on?
I have had many experiences with real people not on the internet that seem to fixate largely on politics and believe so fervently that they are right that they allow themselves to become toxic. I always thought it was a kind of inconsistent latent belief in utilitarianism combined with overconfidence.
It seems like you could so long as this instance federated with any other instance without implementing any type of whitelisting or vetting. I’m just guessing based off various things I’ve read.
I hear you. There is a lot of premature celebration. But, developers need to see the excitement about this type of platform if they are going to spend time working on it. There’s a lot of us out there who can contribute more if this type of fervor and excitement can be sustained. It’s tough working on things that it feels like no one will ever use. We’re fighting against major corporations here with some of the deepest pockets in the world.
This is good news, I’m still having trouble getting my homepage to stop showing repeated posts. Also, it’s all fediverse Reddit migration related stuff because it seems to be overriding the popularity of anything else. I’m not sure these algorithms are doing what they are supposed to, as it was my understanding that it should attempt to show a more balanced view of your subscribed communities.
Might we easily make it more clear that the poster or the server owns them outright?
Hypothetically, a corporation federates and wants to monetize my posts. Can they do this? I’m not personally fixated on ownership (which could easily be viewed as my systemic privilege), but the pathway out of this type of thought in general doesn’t seem to be yielding all power to already powerful growth-based corporations. I didn’t create the current systems, but I do acknowledge their existence.