Somehow, a unicorn driving a well-maintained 20-year-old van with a mural painted on the side and promising positive change is the most trustworthy thing I've ever seen. That van probably runs on either solar power, magic, or dreams/hope too.

Is living while rejecting hope actually living? Personally, even if there won't ever be change. Even if the future is truly a lost cause. I would rather delusionally hope for a better future than succumb to a form of realism that demands an expectation of progressively worse suffering. So, I choose to believe that improvement is possible, regardless of whether there is evidence for it, but also becuse there is evidence that it can happen.

I think Lemmy would either need to find a way to wean Redditors off of their dopamine machine or replace that dopamine machine long-term to sustain an exodus from Reddit. Either that, or Reddit will need to break their dopamine feedback loop. There are some cracks showing, and that might have already killed the platform in the long term, but it'll keep going from pure momentum for a while. Maybe as long as months or years.

Seems like there's more sexists and racists than I used to see over there, which is definitely offputting. I've found communities that are supportive of thoughtful discussion are more appealing, and Reddit definitely lacks that lately, outside of some small, relatively niche communities.

You're welcome to dislike something, but that doesn't mean you need to discourage someone else from liking that thing. You can share an opinion without making it sound like it's a sin against nature to disagree with that opinion.

• Crafting bows to hunt. Wood selection, shaping, tillering, natural bowstring materials.
• Some edible wild plants
• Some basic farming knowledge
• Some construction/shelter repair techniques
• Algebra and concepts of calculus, and why they're useful
• How to preserve foods
• Basic concepts of electricity's importance and how to make it, but someone would need to explain how to go from raw material to a functional wire, find some rare earth magnets, and figure out how to make LEDs or something else worth using the electricity for.
• The scientific method
• Concepts of how to engineer/design a solution to a problem
• Troubleshooting techniques
• Some basic concepts of boat stability and construction
• Some concepts of modern psychology
• Concepts of critical thinking and rejection of groupthink
• Basic physics. Loose explanations of kinematic equations, gravity, friction, pendulums, air resistance, aerodynamics, basic concepts of rocketry and flight/parachutes/gliders
• Evaporative cooling? I could describe the concepts of modern air conditioning, but that doesn't seem useful yet.
• I could probably work out how a windmill works, how to make a wagon, how to purify water, how to make water-tight storage.
• Germ Theory
• The Paradox of Tolerance
• How pasteurization works
• Fermentation, concepts of distillation
• Basic oral hygiene? Habits of at least rinsing sugar out of your mouth afterwards, if brushes aren't available.
• Use of alcohol and heat as antiseptics. Suggestion to use honey in a pinch
• Basic concepts of how magnifying lenses work and why they're important

If we must tolerate healthcare being tied to work, the least we could do is require employers to pay part of healthcare for all workers based on the fraction of full time they work. 10hrs/30? You get 33% of a full time worker's healthcare benefit. Either as cash or with you covering part of the cost. Work multiple jobs that total 30 hrs? Pick your favorite employer plan and your other employers pay towards it.

But yeah, universal is long overdue, and this would be one of the worst tolerable ways to impelment improvement

I've heard this is a problem among nurses. Having just enough knowledge to be able to think you know what you're doing is dangerous. I suppose that's also a reason education shouldn't stop at the bare minimum to perform your work tasks. (obviously not all nurses, but statistically much more so than doctors)

I think you'd need to start by getting them to admit that the heat is a problem without mentioning climate change. Don't use any of the buzz words they've been taught how to respond to. Just try to get them to have a conversation where they have to come up with their own answers.

In fact, maybe don't even start off with anything related to the topics they've been told what to think about. Ask about something they care about more directly that isn't on their party's agenda. You'd need to keep at it long enough for them to start understanding you're not their enemy, which could be anywhere from a few hours to a few weeks/months, depending on how deeply entrenched they are. Then, start trying to work towards the lesser issues their authority doesn't bring up often but has expressed an opinion on. Basically, you need to de-indoctrinate them.

If you can get them to talk about an issue without recognizing immediately that they're in danger of contradicting their chosen authorities, then slowly transition towards getting them to talk about more and more "dangerous" topics, you might help them to bridge that disconnect and start thinking critically about the key issues.

That all said, You'll have an easier time working with people who haven't been deeply entrenched in an authoritarian ideology. The less developed their beliefs, the easier it'll be to guide them towards thinking about their beliefs critically. That's one reason it's so important to teach critical thinking in primary/secondary schools.

logic will never convince them because they aren't arguing from a position of logic. It's about conforming to the beliefs required to be part of their tribe and/or protecting themselves from coming to terms with the harsh realities of climate change. It's reactionary against a challenge to their beliefs.

You would need to first convince them to consider that their respected authorities could be wrong. But within this reactionary mindset, being wrong is disgraceful. So unless they lose respect for their leaders or manage to shift away from believing fallibility is disgraceful, I don't know if they can be convinced.

In my admittedly limited and likely biased experience, progressives and further left tend to be more critical in the way they approach authority figures. The GOP is just pissed they can't as easily indoctrinate younger generations into fighting against their own interests.

I've heard it said several times, the GOP tends to say the opposite of what they mean. "college kids are being indoctrinated" = "umm, guys, we're having a hard time indoctrinating the college kids..."

If we end up triggering a self-sustaining feedback loop, that's how I understand it, yeah. We still do have some very high risk strategies we could implement, like solar shielding to reduce total light reaching the earth, or bioengineering plants that suck up carbon super efficiently, but it's hard to say what the impacts of those would be

Reminds me of this discussion of how a scene/subculture grows and evetnaully dies: https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths

Feels like federated social networks are creating a new fresh scene, and there's now an influx of new users (including myself)