GPU support is non-existent, unfortunately. It would truly be amazing if that changed because I agree that X410 is excellent. I think I had to add a creative snippet to my .bashrc to set the DISPLAY ip on WSL2, but it could not be easier to use other than that.
I volunteer a lot of my time to mod a couple very popular subreddits because I simply love Reddit over all other social media, and I agree completely with the above criticisms. Reddit is about communities first, and comments are where those communities are solidified. The posts are like a bunch of buildings, and the comments make them into a community. It’s where people sort out how they relate to one another and the posts.
I love a lot of things about the Apollo App (including the mod tool support!) but I don’t use it because it changes the reddit experience into something I don’t like as much.
This doesn’t hold at all. The blog era was a golden age of indie pop, expressly because there was no dominant platform. The blogs themselves hosted mp3 singles along with the journalism. The way we found the blogs was by each blog having a blogroll, a list of links to other blogs with associated tastes. The bloggers were almost always locally employed. They were talent buyers, musicians, indie labels and writers for local dailies. It led to a surge in music festivals that hosted gobs of smaller musicians as a result. A booming industry that was glorious for the enthusiasts like myself.
The major labels started buying the smaller labels as imprints and hiring the blog owners as representatives. In turn, the musicians that conformed and followed orders survived, and those that didn’t died. As the blogs dried up, Shazaam and Spotify filled the void of access to singles while social media filled the void of journalism, to the reluctance of the audience.
Likewise, the print journaism industry ran a similar course, with MTV and Clear Channel taking the place of local radio DJs. The issue seems to be the tendency to conform local markets to a broad average. For a corporation, it makes no sense to have local tastemakers. They always tend toward a cosmopolitan ideal but in the end we get nothing but a monoculture that alienates everyone.
It's hard to see how this is the future without experiencing it in some way personally.
Facebook Groups connected me with fans of a particular kind of fringe art about 4 years ago and made leaving Facebook really difficult. This might seem exceedingly anecdotal, and I get that, but you have to realize that, before Facebook, it would have been impossible for any of us to even know this interest existed; much less that there were others also into it. Nothing in the cultural canon quite sufficed, although some trends in music and literature had come close, none of them quite articulated the thing. Finding the thing was a necessary part of a certain stage of my life, and gave me a psychological grounding that something mainstream might never could have. I think admitting so actually devalues the spectacle in question, but I can't deny it. There was a value in the fact that this small group of people spoke this unique language. We became something like a tribe.
Attention economics are strange and only beginning to define our lives. Younger people will depend on fringe engagements to achieve a sense of self-identity that used to be a given. Life experience is going to take a new shape accordingly.
I think early evidence of this is in music scenes, which is haphazardly often the case with forms of sociocultural influence. No conventional wisdom can explain the proliferation of indie music and things like tape labels but these things are massive forces. They just genuinely don't care what you think. They have an audience and it's up to you to be a part.
Mastadon is strangely ahead of the curve and probably doing a poor job of meeting in the middle. I think it would benefit from shoving everyone into Mastadon.social at signup and letting them learn about instances from there. Finding a home is too difficult as it is. But, eventually, it does look like the future.
Your example, like all the ones in America, reflects ultimately an abuse of power.
The (sensitive) males who were raised to respect women despite power relations, and do, are in for a rude awakening they’ll be helpless to defend against. Similar males with no power at all will suffer the most.
“One bad apple, get rid of them all” has been the #metoo trend in America; and the apples are the male gender, not abusers of power. Because we are culturally tuned to only reward power, this kind of thinking is all too easy. Wouldn’t this tendency probably be multitudes more engrained in China?
In the end, abuses of power remain king in the abstract, and I am not sure we should be so encouraging.
Because money is, among other things, a massively abstract commodity, determining well-being by monetary measurements is massively contingent, nearly useless, and entirely theoretical.
Your mapping of incentives are completely mistaken. This one liner is full on face palm for anyone with a lick of comprehension of the problem.
1. Startups are companies, not governments
2. Companies don’t do what’s best for customers. They do what’s best for profit. This very often means not clear, not accessible, not useful as possible. See privacy debate for one of a million easy examples.
The most disturbing part of all of this is the presumption that there is some inherent motivation to do this kind of thing. To me, the whole behavior is so unnecessary that mere consideration of whether it justifies exploiting a stranger without their permission is unquestionably shameful. But yet, we are treating this like something our (grand)parents never taught us.
(I say “grandparents” becuse the Great Generation has generally more respectable standards for personal interaction than baby-boomers, for whom exploitation in the name of personal gain is what so often gets them out of bed in the morning.)
Culture generally has a parental relationship to art. The art is of the culture but the culture is not of the art. I think we agree on that, but I totally see where you're coming from here because I am suggesting something else with folk.
I am basically saying that the legacy of American folk is just too mysterious to nail down, and too precarious to draw conclusions from. I wonder if this would be the case without the mid-century folk revival, which amounted to a mass-commercialization of the white American south as a suffering working-class. The older field recordings in the Library Of Congress suggest the music was predominantly made by slaves. The old radio recordings from Nashville tell a slightly different story and seem to stitch together something of an art form, likely for the very first time. Then folk-revival was a massively commercial effort that made it all look very pretty. But the culture of it all still remains vague. Touring the south and studying it's history doesn't suggest much of any concern for culture in any higher sense. Literacy was surprisingly high but they mostly read the bible. Music seems to have occupied a space more like entertainment than cultural reflection. A likely theory is that it was very much a culture for slaves, but merely entertainment for white people. Hopefully this clarifies my comprehension. Hip-hop is a full embodiment in comparison; a whole new world of unmitigated expression.
I have an opinionated view of American culture, and I'm daily surrounded by other musicians, artists. These are the topics we discuss. I am opinionated as a result.
In my previous comment, please note when I say "hip-hop", I am not referring to music, but culture. Nonetheless...
I grew up in the south. My father was literally a clogger. I'm no stranger to folk. But, I am extremely skeptical of a lot of it's history. The mid-century folk-revival era did a real number on our conception of what's really there culture-wise. Behind the curtain, I am honestly afraid it's mostly puritanism, shame, and self-conflict. It's interesting but I think calling it a cultural movement is mostly romanticism. In terms of music, we could delve into details for days, and break down the whole history of hip-hop and jazz, and I do encourage that. There's a lot of good music there. But, I'm afraid it serves essentially the same end in terms of culture; a terribly familiar story. Hip-hop exhibits the whole of the cultural dynamic fairly explicitly, and is internationally renowned. Folk is mostly replicated in parody.
EDIT: Another thing to add... I think most people would be surprised how many contemporary folk musicians (young ones) would actually agree with me. They eventually are challenged with contending with things like: Did folk come from slaves? Or the working class? Or the fraught relations between the two? And is it reconcilable? Where did country music come from?