Same. The thing lacking is user base and content. Also a backlog of older content as knowledge source, but that would come overtime with through the former.

As far as usability goes Iemmy is just as good as reddit was for me. My instance (lemme.ee) is stable and the app experience (currently “connect”) is just as smooth as it was for reddit (where I used “relay”).

I sadly have to admit that I don’t contribute enough in terms of creating and posting threads.

deleted by creator

Yeah, i’d have also loved if we moved to an “opt-out” system or one where you are asked to choose at some point.

If we had more than enough organs for everyone we might be able to afford the “luxury” to not adress the issue, but we don’t. And compared to the very real consequences this deficit has, it really isn’t a burden to reverse the burden through opt-out or at least force people to choose. Not making a choice has just as much consequences, if not more (since it leaves it ambiguous for others that might later have to make the choice for you).

And as you said the majority probably has no problem being a donor, but the default state is a form of apathy/lazyness/ignorance. So like with many other issues a top down approach would be way more effective, compared to putting the burden on every single individual to be proactive.

I am not registered, but I have a organ donor card (where I approve organ donations).

Background:

Germany just recently (18th of March this year) launched an online database where you can register your preference. Until then there was only a small organ donor card that you could fill out and carry with you.

Reason I haven’t registered there yet is that I first need to unlock the online function on my passport (nowadays always enabled, but I still have one from when it was optional). So I’ll eventually get around to doing both.

As for my reasoning behind being a donor:

• I would like to receive them in an emergency (or for someone I care about to do so).

• And in case I become a donor I am not there anymore to care about what people do with my organs.

By banning porn. Out of all the things that could motivate people to search for alternatives, this might be the most durable driving factor.

Outside of that I think it will be a slow decline in quality. Eventually quality content will decrease more and more, and low effort memes and bot content will take over.

I never had an Xbox and probably am not the target audience, but I can definitely see the value proposition.

Seems great for casual gaming with a very low barrier of entry. Who knows how long game pass retains the value it currently offers, but until then there is nothing wrong with enjoying it.

Personally Xbox never was for me because PC is just very different (I e.g. wouldn’t want to play strategy games on a console) and if I were to get an additional console it would likely be a PlayStation since the exclusives usually seem stronger.

Glad to hear that! I think there are plenty of us, it’s just really hard to to have these kind of discussions online and other voices are just louder.

I feel like this reasoning would change character of the right to vote from something inherent, to something that has to be earned. Which i am not really a fan of.

If you are too young to work you shouldn’t have to vote

Makes it sound like a chore, not sure if that was intended. The phrasing however somewhat leads to another completely different discussion, whether or not it would be a good idea to require everyone to vote (even if they just mark their ballot invalid) to combat low voter turnouts.

But as with other arguments, we again don’t tie voting rights to having a job otherwise we would deny them from the elderly or sick aswell. I think in this context the argument is sometimes made that when you have a job you are forced to pay taxes and therefore should be allowed to vote, but there are other taxes like sales tax that everybody pays earlier.

This of course won’t solve all the parties being shit tho.

Now that is the truth.

I agree with you, but a baby can’t read a ballot or pull a lever

I absolutely get the sentiment, but with arguments like these i always end up running into hypocrisy and double standards. There are plenty of illiterate adults and we are rightfully allowing them to vote, so do the blind. Paralyzed people are also voting despite them not being physically able to move a lever. As you said, there should always be help available.

In practice i doubt many babies will articulate a desire to vote and the number of extremely young children will also be limited. So to me if a 6 year old comes up and says “i want to vote” i say let him, he certainly is affected by the consequences of the elections regardless.

let anyone who is able to register go to the polls.

I would note that depending on the implementation this can also be a unneccesary hurdle and be abused as seen in the US.

As an inherent right it really should be as automatic as practial limits allow it to be (some sort of register is ofc needed to prevent voting multiple times).

Here in Germany for example it’s simply tied to your registered primary residence, which means that only people without such have to actively seek out registration wherever they live.

I would be concerned about a certain type of person trying to make as many little voters as they can crank out, but I suppose some people do that anyway and just wait until they turn 18.

And that’s the slippery slope: Who gets to decide that “certain type of person”?

To go with your example of the number of children: I think statistically poor people have more than the rich. Is that what we want to fight? Also who is to say that children vote the same as their parents?

Agreed. And it’s good that we aren’t keeping those away. Always a slippery slope to make rules about who can or can’t vote.

Honestly I might even go as far as stripping down the requirements to the very basics:

• Citizenship (including special cases that e.g. EU citizens can vote in regional elections of other EU countries if they live there)

• the desire to vote

Just let them start voting when they express their desire to do so.

because most will be able to read and understand government

People with dementia and other mental illnesses don’t lose their voting rights, neither is it coupled to IQ. And imo with good reason.

So I am actually not sure why we are applying this hurdle to children to begin with, when we aren’t doing it in other situations.

Ah, one of our classic lullabies, perfect for the evening.

You stopped that quote a few words too early and left out the “as i hoped” part. I guess i simply had unrealistic high hopes that we would collectively move here, but the mods of /r/de opened back up at some point and the majority is still there.

But you are of course right that overall there are quite a few of us here. I guess expanding into a new space that is leaning towards communism is something we have experience with.

Unsuprisingly !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com and !selfhosted@lemmy.world made the transition quite well.

The german communities didn’t transition quite as well as i hoped, but the like of !deutschland@feddit.de and !dach@feddit.de still see enough engagement to serve their purpose.

So i guess those are my favorites so far. Simply because they already function quite well.

Beyond that i am more of a Star Wars/Lotr guy, but i am warming up more and more towards Star Trek (liked it before aswell, but didn’t dive into it too much). Especially since i enjoy some of the current series (Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks) quite a bit.

Well Munich is a city and not a state, so hard to compare to Texas. However the state of which it is the capital (Bavaria) can in many ways be compared to Texas as it is rather conservative and rural in many parts.

That said Munich itself is actually quite progressive and open.

Case in point regarding politics: On a local level the major has almost always been from the SPD (social democrats, the last conservative one was in the early 80s), and in the last federal election the green party actually got the most votes (compared to the overall result for Bavaria where the conservative CSU won with a wide margin)

I like the idea, but I fear that I would quickly run out of things to print that I actually need. After then I’d start looking for applications. And the one thing I don’t need in my life are more small (or large) plastic things.

If I remember correctly here in German it was marketed as “Dredd 3D”, which turned me off at the time.

Glad it was at least somewhat helpful. This is such a vast topic that it simply can’t all fit into a discussion like this and there’ll always be inaccuracies or mistakes. So there are certainly plenty of those in my reasoning. You are also making a good point about discrimination being a root issue in some of my examples.

Why is people’s first instinct here to hide instead of work to fight discrimination?

I see advocating for privacy not as “hiding”, but in fact as one way to fight. And in many ways as one of the most effective. How can you discriminate against something you have no information about? To me it seems unrealistic to eliminate biases as a whole. Especially because many (arguably most) decisions are so complex that filtering out individual aspects is more or less impossible, and we can’t know a persons thoughts (some they might not even be conscious about themself).

I believe we’ve come a long way, and only because people’s weaknesses were laid out in the open and they fought to be able to live the way they are

And i would argue that to do so privacy was needed. A whistleblower or journalist needs privacy as a form of protection. And those movements fighting for a good cause most of the time will not have started in the open. Instead there will likely have been a phase where people met in private to organize, discuss and share. A lack of privacy here would have probably benefited the stronger oppresive side.

As for the AfD scenario: what good does having privacy now have, if their first move can be to just forbid privacy?

The benefit is that they can (at least partially) only have access moving forward, privacy now is a shield against change in circumstances. And as mentioned once privacy on certain things is lost it can not be restored. Right now it might not be an issue to be associated with a certain person or ideology, but things can change (and we might not know how in advance).

In short, I think a lack of privacy is only bad in combination with the evil intent of people wanting to abuse others’ weaknesses. We should try to fight the evil instead of clinging to privacy in the digital era (which I believe will be impossible within the next decade or so anyway)

I think this is a very idealisitc view and i disagree with your view that keeping at least some form of privacy is impossible. I do think there is an inherent value to privacy, but at least it is a valid tool to fight those malicious actors. And while it certainly cuts both ways and can also be abused, i wouldn’t want to give it up because of that.

[…] so we can have the advantages of more data-driven tech advancements while minimizing the negative consequences of a loss of privacy. I think we can have our cake and eat it too.

That i agree with, but in the exact opposite way. I believe that we can have digitalisation AND keep privacy as a default.

Yes in some areas we might weigh up the pros and cons, and decide that something else takes priority. But the important part for me here is the direction and the hieracy of those arguments. Because there are many benefits privacy provides (some of which i’ve tried to explain), i want that there to be good arguments if we decide to remove it. So convenience for example should not trump privacy.

As a side note and another example:

Anonymity (such as we have here in on this forum) can help with freedom of thought and growth. If everything i do can be directly tied to me, i might be much more conservative and careful about what i write. This ofc is something that cuts both ways and leads to harrassment, but it can also lead to safely exploring new things and growth. I don’t know about you, but for me there is value in having such a space as this to discuss things. If we were e.g. on Facebook it would definitely influence me.

I’ll try to make a case for why you should care about privacy aswell:

First of all there are some aspects where privacy is simply a requirement for things to work. For example there is a lot of talk about banning end-to-end encryption, but things like banking or remote work rely on this. Even if you wouldn’t care about someone else having the opportunity to read your personal messages, if those aren’t encrypted you are opening the gates for malicious actors.

I care about consent and freedom of choice

For me in a lot of aspects you simply can’t have “freedom of choice” or “consent” without the default being privacy.

Take for example medical records: those aren’t just relevant for you, but also anyone you are related to. At somepoint insurance might factor in medical history in their rates. You might not care about your record being public, but if you e.g. carry some genetic predisposition for a disease that will also have consequences for your child or sibling.

If the default for privacy is “opt-in”, then in many cases this will have a negative affect on people who do want it. Want to rent an appartment and the finances of most people are public? Well tough luck. Guess you have to decide, if you give up that privacy or keep searching. Because surely you have something terrible to hide otherwise you wouldn’t want privacy. Not much of a fair choice.

For a lot of things once the genie is out of the bottle you can’t reverse it. Extreme case: a far right party like the AfD comes into power. Suddenly you might get targeted for certain information that is available about you. And you can’t also easily hide it for future things, because that sudden shift might make you suspicious.

I think there are a lot of cases where most people might not care about their privacy. But those that do need it are reliant on the default being privacy and most people having it. Because otherwise it does not work. Then you just have “those that have nothing to hide” and “those that clearly have that particular thing to hide, because otherwise they wouldn’t chose privacy”.

Another aspect is targeted advertisement. Despite whatever you think, even if you know how it works, it’ll have an affect on you. Whether you like it or not. Human beings can’t be perfectly rational and psychology will have an affect.

Besides that a lot of efforts to dismantle privacy will just lead to average people losing it, while e.g. criminals will still use it. Privacy is also highly important for things like journalism or whistleblowers, something you are also profiting from.

I’m saying this because it feels like Germany is 10y behind other countries in digitization solely because regulators think I’m too stupid to give me the agency to opt in to sell my soul to our digital overlords.

This i disagree with, we certainly aren’t SOLELY behind in digitalization because of privacy concerns. Most of the time it’s just incompetence or bad implementations (often time coupled with some corruption and lobbying).

These are just some random thoughts and far from exhaustive (probably also not perfect arguments)