« La République une et indivisible - Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité ou la mort »

  • 36 Posts
  • 33 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: February 8th, 2025

help-circle









  • Understand what makes you happy. I’m not going to waste my time knowing that you’re not going to do anything at all. Here’s a quote from the comment I linked:

    Matrix foundation heavily courting law enforcement and getting funded by Israel.

    Where do you see that it’s just a possibility? That’s ridiculous. Again, it’s not a strawman.

    Even the first video linked here “Metadata is shared” asserts that “There’s a bunch of sensitivity to it because they are tightly linked to Israeli intelligence” at 15:00. That is the very definition of disinformation.








  • They spun it off into a non-profit, which somehow removes any connection between those two things now

    Yes, by definition, but we can keep going.

    [BIG PICTURE TO PROVE NOTHING]

    You can’t reject the Matrix Foundation because it’s a non-profit. There is no credible evidence that Israel (government or intelligence agencies) funds or controls Matrix as a protocol.

    If you like Matrix and find absolutely nothing concerning about the connections of the two most influential entities in that space, than by all means, carry on.

    If you write a client that uses a protocol to communicate over the internet, you better stick to that protocol, no? I mean, think about it for a second? What’s wrong with youuuu? lol












  • Mills didn’t live through fucking First and Second World War.

    Less well known is the paradox of tolerance : Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies ; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most imwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force ; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument ; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself out- side the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

    Popper, Karl R. The Open Society and Its Enemies: Volume 1, The Spell of Plato. Routledge, 1945