Consoom.Soy

A New Year, a New World of Thoughts

René Hickersberger — Tue, 31 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0000

A new year is at the doorstep, unfolding like a blank page. New Year’s Eve – bleak, cold, and noisy as it may be – invites us to turn inward and reflect upon the past year.

Recognizing Truth

Buried in the depths of our consciousness, we find more than just fleeting illusions. Quite the contrary: Those who engage sufficiently may discover a deeper, profound truth. It is the only truth we truly know. It is deeply personal. It is the foundation of life. It is the ego in the third person.

In those moments, freedom presents itself in all its brilliance. The ego appears as an active creator rather than a passive observer. For those who believe they recognize an objective reality in the external world are mistaken.¹ The only world we can recognize as true is the one that presents itself in our thoughts.

The world is my representation [idea].

— Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation

The Malleability of Truth

A logical consequence of this is that the world – even across the timeline – is not immutable. It is malleable: a single thought has the potential to turn it upside down. It may also be elastic: it has a natural tendency to return to its original state. Yet it is precisely this realization that opens up the possibility for us to actively shape our reality.

We all tend to lock ourselves into our own world of thoughts. Since it is the only manifestation of our own truth, it can be so deceptive that breaking free seems almost impossible.² Those who believe they are incapable of something restrict themselves through this very conviction. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy of the simplest kind. But those who are convinced of their path will not be held back by any inhibiting self-doubt.

He, who toys with life, never gets it right; He, who does not command himself, always remains a servant.

— Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Tame Xenia

The Boundaries of Truth

But those who learn to shape their own thoughts also risk not getting closer to truth, but drifting even further away from it – slipping into a fantasy world far removed from reality, from which it is just as difficult to break free.

In such cases, a grave mistake was made: losing sight of the meaning of life.³ Getting lost in your own world of thoughts will inevitably lead you down some bad paths. So what is the meaning of life? Each person must answer this question for themselves. From that answer, one can derive a thought model that will undoubtedly fulfill that meaning.

[…] every reality, i.e., every fulfilled present moment, consists of two halves: the subject and the object, though bound in as necessary and close a union as oxygen and hydrogen in water. With the objective half wholly the same, yet the subjective half different, the present reality is entirely different – just as would be the case in reverse.

— Arthur Schopenhauer, Aphorisms on the Wisdom of Life

Conclusion

We conclude that our personal perception of this world is the only individual truth of which we can be certain. Let us shape it so that it accompanies us on the right path. Let us be careful not to lose touch with reality. This is the only road that leads to success.

While the turn of the year may be an arbitrary date – after all, some cultures celebrate New Year’s months later – it nevertheless serves as a great symbolic night for reflection and for looking to the future. Let us seize this date as an opportunity to guide our thoughts to courageously venture onto new paths as the upcoming year unfolds.

Even from stones placed in one’s path, one can build something beautiful.

Whether or not an objective reality exists (which would be modeled imprecisely in our thinking) is of no relevance here. Even in case an objective reality does exist, we can neither perceive it with our senses nor process it with our mental faculties. ↩︎
Moving from the abstract back to reality, I recommend reading more about cognitive biases, which influence our everyday actions and being dramatically. This knowledge helps in understanding both our own and other people’s systems of thought, but explaining that further would exceed the scope of this article. ↩︎
I deliberately refrain from talking about specific goals, referring to meaning or a path instead. After all, one does not travel to arrive, but to enjoy the journey. This is not to say that goalsetting is pointless – but if all you want in life is to achieve goals, you will never be content, as the first action after completing a goal is to start chasing another. ↩︎

Human Wolves

Marko Mirceski — Wed, 07 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0000

This is a fascinating idea, to be quite honest. Exploring the idea that humanity tends to devour itself has always been quite interesting, and now I get to write about it. The inspiration came to me after I talked to an 84-year-old gentleman in the subway, and we exchanged some philosophical views.

Mind you, the conversation did not directly touch this topic, but it gave me ample reason to say the following quote in German:

„Der Mensch ist dem Menschen ein Wolf.“

Of Men and Wolves

“Men can be wolves to other men.”¹

A statement that stuck with me, far before I even came to think about the topic at hand. Simple, yet so complex. Short, but with the might to tell a thousand stories. So unseemly, yet talking with the pain of countless betrayals, of mistreatments, broken contracts, dreams, families, the disenfranchisement of so many. Few quotes managed to stick with me quite like this one.

And the reason for that is simple to find, but hard to understand.

It is a sad fact of the human existence that we have to deal with betrayal. It is a state of being so heinous and disgusting to our complex understanding of social structures, that on the highest levels, we equate it to crimes like rape and mass murder. But why do we do this? Why are betrayal and treason so painful to us humans, that we choose to equate them to the violation of one’s autonomy, and the forceful termination of another human beings life?

The idea that betrayal and treason are this bad stems from quite a few places. Things like social norms, our own survival instincts, Human emotions, the formation of relationships and their decline, among others, heavily contribute to our understanding of how a breach of trust affects us, our psyche, and our surroundings, to an extent.

But human wolves don’t just fall into the category of traitors, friends turned enemies, or others of that same makeup. Classifiable amongst them are so many more, sometimes affectionally described as “vultures”, picking off and devouring anything that might be left of the downtrodden and lost. And yet, even after winning, the wolves surround you, wearing sheep’s coats, trying to get you to become chummy with them, until they rob you blind.

Let us elaborate further upon this interesting dynamic…

Dog Eat Dog

This dynamic, that needs our exploring, encompasses a world where dogs eat dogs. Alas, the dogs are we. We are devouring each other. On battlefields, in war rooms, in the great halls of politics, on the streets… even our own homes. Not even the internet, our great companion, which seems, even through our daily interactions, so untouchable, has been spared from being sullied by the blood we spill in the pursuit of victory.

It begs the question why I now describe bloodshed when the topic is the uncivilized preying upon our own kin to further one’s own goals. The answer is simple: In our animalistic minds, no victory is accomplished without spilling the blood of one’s enemy. Oh, and enemies they are. Once we taste blood there is no turning back.

“But what about civilization? We humans are much more advanced than the animals you claim us to be!” For that, I only have to ask: Are we? Are we really this civilized, that we can cooperate, use our intelligence, spare the weak and help each other? On an individual level, I’d agree. Strongly, at that. But in the grand scheme of things, as a species? NOT AT ALL.

A quick look through human history will give you all you need to know. Wars[1][2], extinction[3][4], crimes of all sorts that make the stomach churn and your eyes tear [5][6][7]. So tell me: Where is this advanced, civilized and supposedly intelligent species when it comes to annihilating itself? Is this the civil discourse? The thing that lifts us up from “animalistic behavior”? Is this our Legacy to the universe?

Because if that is indeed the case, then even at our most advanced, our most intelligent, we are still animals. And there’d be no point in arguing otherwise.

Our Best Selves

And yet, there is this paradox occurence, where our outwardly displayed “best selves” are inconceivably advanced and civilized, showing minimal signs of the animal within. This makes the situation even more confusing, because of the point made beforehand. Yet it begs the following questions: Why paradox? Shouldn’t this change everything? How can the previous point still stand after such a claim? But even for this there is a plausible explanation. And it is not as outlandish as my little tirade from before might make it out to be.

Simply put, there is this idea. A rather compelling and sensible idea. Humans are social creatures.²

And as social creatures, we tend to band together. If we weren’t, then we’d have faced extinction as a species a long time ago. And as with everything, our survival was a group effort, and I’m not even talking about reproduction. I’m talking about the very simple fact that there is strength in numbers. In the end, this matters because our whole way of life, all of our social and cultural constructs, everything we are made out to be, depends on us staying in at least a loose group structure.

But to really show our best selves, we need to look inwards. Not to nations, or alliances, or anything of that sort. We need to look to the oldest and most sacred bond a human being can possess. The bond of family. From the earliest ages, humans tend to look out for each other. As a species with an absurd lifespan compared to most animals³, we also tend to have an absurdly long maturing phase, as our time to adulthood takes somewhere between 18 to 25 years from the day we are born. The point I want to make here is that our species shows it’s best traits in raising it’s own, or in general, in caring for other humans. Now, at first that might sound like an absolute garbage statement, given that we wage war on each other, try to often destroy what other people have built, and even sometimes try to erase the mere existence of something we don’t like, wiping it from the face of the earth like it was some mistake, not even supposed to be there at all.

Of course, with a track record like this, how can we even claim that we are anywhere near good? Given this type of behavior, I’d say it’s an awful look for us humans. And that is absolutely correct. We are far from a good species, and some might claim we’re irredeemable, but that doesn’t mean we can’t still do good. And helping each other, going against this destructiveness, that is what constitutes our best selves. This is the makeup of what gives this awful species of featherless bipeds a silver lining. Then again, we need to accept that there is a lot we need to work on.

First of all, we are very conceited in our own beliefs. A human can’t be wrong. “Think about it, we’re the most intelligent species on this planet! Of course we are superior!” And that might be correct if we were as cohesive as we’d need to be to actually advance in our development. But everything falls apart the moment there is one human perceived to be superior compared to another.

Envious Eyes and Prideful Stance

If looks could kill, this “superior” person (perceived, of course), would have died ten times over, and still counting. As it stands, there can’t be someone else that possesses more than you yourself do. Think about it: Was there ever someone that had something that you wanted so bad, you ended up loathing that person for it? Your answers might vary from person to person, but in most cases there is at least one instance where that answer is “yes”. But why is that?

The answer is simple: Envy.

Envy (from the Latin “invidia”; “envy”, combined from “in” + “video”; “to gaze after something”), is best defined as a feeling of discontent or resentment at the possessions or good fortune of another person, stemming from a deep and intrinsic longing for these fortunes for oneself. Or to put it into a different perspective: “you despise someone because that someone has something that you want, but don’t possess.” So instead on working to get said something, an envious person focuses their energy on loathing the other person.

But what keeps that person from using their energy in a useful manner (i.e. actually working for said desires)? That’s an even simpler question to answer.

We’re of course talking about pride.

And no, not the event where people senselessly celebrate their mere existence. I mean the cardinal sin of having an extremely inflated ego, not being able to see past conflicts, failure and your own conceitedness. The inability to ask for help when in obvious need, that metaphorical “high horse” everyone tells you to come down from, which promptly is absolutely denied and/or ignored.

Pride tends to feed on the ego of a person, their own self-perception. How they see the world, and more importantly: Where they perceive their own place in said world. And envy? Envy is most often used as a justification of why they are not at said perceived place.

There are a lot of things that can be derived from these emotions. Conspiracies, simple perceived attacks, even a theory of a possible murder attempt. These theories can easily come to mind for an envious and prideful person, but on a world stage, surrounded by Wolves? They just don’t work. The justifications, of course. The theories, on the other hand? Commonplace in global politics.

And these wolves can go nuclear if you look at them the wrong way.

Overkill

At this point I feel tempted to remind you that we can wipe ourselves out a hundred times over if we wanted to. But we haven’t done that yet. Now, why might that be?

Is it Envy over the other guy having the bigger bomb, luring us into building bigger bombs instead of using the ones already at our disposal? Or is it pride, over potentially losing our “superior way of life”, if we actually use them. Or number three: just plain fear over this invention of ours, as is often presented with artificial intelligence in movies?

If I were to bet, it would be fear. We created something so powerful yet so destructive, that we fear it as a whole. We quite literally made our own tools of extinction, our own meteorite⁴, so to speak. And knowing what happened to the dinosaurs, we naturally are afraid.

Only that our meteorite is a thousand times worse.

And that we have created it. Our own hands. Our own minds. The key to wiping out humanity, if nature doesn’t do the job first.

Nuclear weapons have this tendency of even making the most ferocious wolves fear for their wellbeing. So much so, that there are agreements in place to prevent the total mutual annihilation of humanity through said weapons. Are we still building them? Of course we are. But we are most definitely not using them. That, for now at least, lets us breathe a sigh of relief.

Another fascinating thing is how almost everyone agrees on this one fact of life.

Pack of Wolves

The idea we should also agree upon, in my opinion at least: If we are to act as wolves, we should at least act as a pack. Not as individual beasts tearing each other apart. But rather, as a group, working towards a common goal.

Now, whatever that common goal ends up being is not of the greatest importance. But what is important is the sense of community, to give each and every human a feeling of belonging. Not to cast them out because of their standing, the color of their skin, their wealth, disabilities, their feelings, or any other reason to discriminate. This might sound a tad bit idealistic at first, but hear me out.

In wolf packs, even the eldest are protected and cared for. Compared to us humans, who in recent times have lost all respect for our elders⁵. What does this say about us?

Simple. Social creatures that have forgotten their ways, and have become vain, egotistical hyper-individualists, who only care about what positives can be bestowed upon themselves as individuals. Gone are the days where people voluntarily worked for the good of each other. Gone are the days where morality and common sense reigned supreme. Gone are the days, where our children could safely play outside, hurt themselves, then continue playing. Gone are the days, where we respected one another.

Conclusion

I wanted to end this on a positive note. To talk about the goods that came from humanity. But the more I ended up thinking, the more I ended up writing, the more miserable the thought of humanity itself became. It saddens me to my core that this is the case. It saddens me that I even felt I had to address this topic in the first place. But if not I, who else? And is there any hope left?

“Is life even worth living,” some might ask…

And to stand with unwavering honesty before you, I say: I don’t know anymore.

This is not to say that I am questioning my own will to live⁶. Rather, it is a statement which stands as a testament to my definitive lack of an answer to this specific question. The will to live, the evaluation of life itself, and the possibility of it being worthwhile, are very sensitive and complex subjects. Some might not want to talk about it. And that is alright! But now, for a moment, to a different topic.

I remember a different time. A time where you could play outside with almost no worries, a time where people didn’t just look out for themselves. A time, where people were generally polite to each other, and where people actually cared. Now, at the age of 22, I realize that times have changed significantly, and I subconsciously chose not to change with them. I don’t see the joys of hyper-individualistic success stories. I don’t see joy in them, because to me, they are lonely. I don’t see the advantages of only looking out for yourself. I don’t see them, because they imply you are the only one that matters. You are not. The world, our Earth[8][9], will turn, make its grand and awe-inspiring journey around our livegiver, the sun[10], no matter if you stand upon it or not.

You may ask yourself now: “Why are you talking about this? This is an article about bad people, not about old-timey views and sob stories!” And that hypothetical person saying this is completely and absolutely right. Yet, this is the conclusion of this absurdly long text. And I wanted to give you some context about why I put in so much work.

I have spent the better part of the last 1½ weeks, spending at least 2 hours every day, working on this text. Even while sick in bed with a cold, the sheer will to complete this (and while on a rage and caffeine-fueled bender) compelled me to write, even without the energy.

I still won’t think that this text will have turned out the way I wanted it to. For this is one of my biggest flaws. Then again, I have spent so much time and energy on one article alone, it feels almost nonsensical at this point. And to be honest, I might be done for the next 2 to 3 months or so. Who knows?

But to finalize this, I want to say thank you. To everyone.

Politics in Movies

Marko Mirceski — Mon, 19 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0000

“Stop making movies about your political agenda!” This is a popular sentence, often uttered by many right-wing talking-heads at modern movies and TV shows. Citing the good, old times, they often remark how modern media is laced with a toxic liberal agenda. But are they in the right? And can they cite older movies to prove their point? Here we’ll see if politics in movies is a modern invention, or if the right-wingers are being overdramatic.

What Do You Mean by Politics?

Before we digest the idea of political indoctrination in movies and TV, we first have to see what counts as politics in the given context of media.

At a surface level, it would be the mentioning of existing political parties, entities and ideas by name, association or any other measure inside the plot of said media, regardless of depiction. This would be very shallow and is only one aspect among other, more (or less) subtle inclusions of politics.

If we go a bit deeper, we start losing the names and only work by association. This is also where the polarizing begins. More often than not, the idea is that there is good and bad, and that heroes and villains depict these sides, mirroring politics in a twisted dance of ideological conflict.

Next, we go even deeper, looking at the general plot of a movie, and what exactly it encompasses. If we take a movie about the LGBTQ+ community, we can confidently assume it is pretty liberal/left-leaning. But if we take a movie about someone fighting a group of school shooters by using their own guns against them, it could be interpreted as depicting guns as tools to stop evil, even though they can also be used for harm.

There are a few other things we can talk about, like casting choices that conflict with existing source material, etc., but it would just be padding for something we don’t need.

Modern Indoctrination

Since the point is about politics in movies, we’ll start with the most obvious suspect: “liberal agenda”. The idea is that the depiction of racially diverse, queer people in mainstream movies and TV is inherently political and should be stopped immediately. From a liberal standpoint, my first instinct would be to call the person a racist, homophobic bigot.

And if I were liberal, I’d be right. But as usual, the situation is more complex than it might lead on. See, the existing problem with the current way we portray said people is that they are exclusively the good guys. Antagonists in movies with queer, racially diverse protagonists are always exclusively straight, white and male.¹

People who don’t have much understanding for queer culture might see this and say “They wanna kill the straights! They wanna turn my kids into fucking transgendered gays!” And they’ll start hating even more. Same thing with racial diversity.

But there is another side to this coin.

Red-Blooded Americans

In days long gone, when there was still such a thing as a “soviet union”, Hollywood did a completely different type of movie. One where protagonists didn’t push a liberal agenda, as accused, but rather fought the enemy in an explosive and heroic way.

Films like Top Gun, Rambo II and III and Rocky IV, among many, were clever propaganda tricks to show the triumph of America over the evil commies. While these movies are pretty good quality-wise, they are, in nature, very political.

The common fallacy right-wingers commit nowadays is to claim otherwise. When they look back at movies like these, and say that they didn’t shove politics down your throat, they are mistaken. And while it is true that politics are often used nowadays to push a liberal agenda, we shouldn’t claim that it is unprecedented.

How to Do It Properly

There is no such thing as an apolitical movie. And that begs the question: How can we bake it into our movies without causing too much uproar?

The first idea would be equal representation. By making the villains as queer as the heroes, and also by not making straight white men the butt of jokes, you create an even playing field, where your protagonists have to work together in harmony, without mockery and resentment. In such an atmosphere, people become a lot more accepting of things they don’t know.

The second idea is to cut out any patriotic fury that doesn’t belong where it is. At this point in time, we are past making movies about how magnificent one country is, and how much better it is than its foes.

Conclusion

In truth, we are all humans. Straight, gay, black, white, cis, trans, left, right. None of it makes a difference in the end. So we should stop hating what we don’t do. What we don’t have. What we aren’t.

This is, of course, an overgeneralization, but it shows a real pattern. ↩︎

Weak Leaders

Marko Mirceski — Mon, 15 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0000

Take a good look at our current leaders. The western ones. Did you notice something? Exactly, they’re all old. Like, really old. If you look at them, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Could it be “This guy’s going to bite it soon”? Or do you think something along the lines of “Wow, what a pathetic person we elected”? Here we’ll analyze the line of thought that calls western leaders weak.

Old, White Men

There is this idea that the oldest members of our society are the wisest among us. This is not always the case. Especially politicians, who are some of the most corrupt and greedy people you’ll ever meet. And many are old, white men.¹ Not meaning to sound like a “Social Justice Warrior™”, I just want to highlight that these leaders never have the people’s interests in mind. Your main goal, as a politician, is to line your pockets before your time’s up. And that’s exactly what you’ll do.

Money, Money, Money

“Want to know a politician’s true intent? Follow the money.”

Although this quote is mostly original, it rings true. The fastest way to know what a politician truly wants is to look at his benefactors. If the arms industry is funding a politician, you’ll know that he’ll defend the right to bear arms. If big tech does it, you can be sure that your digital freedoms will be infringed upon.²

Case in point being that money controls politics, never the other way around. This makes money a weakness for all leaders. If you take away the money, you take away their power. It’s that simple. A poor politician is as useful as a knife when eating soup.

Divide et Impera

Another show of our politicians’ weakness is the fact that they can’t control people in unison. So they need to create conflict, stir up rumors, and create panic so the populace starts turning on each other instead of them. This has been used by many leaders throughout history, and it’s been making a grand comeback in Europe and the U.S.³

This need to divide people to make them more controllable has shown us how baseless their claim of being in charge actually is. Their claim is not just baseless; it is also crumbling. As we can see in many different countries, the longing for freedom is starting to overrule many borderline dictatorial practices, and shows us how much control these governments have actually lost.

#StandWithOurLeaders

And of course, another way to pull at people’s emotions is to invoke solidarity. Whatever currently demands it, the weakest leaders are often the ones crying the loudest to show solidarity with a relevant cause.⁴ This solidarity, on the politician’s side, is often just your usual “snake oil salesman” talk, and isn’t usually based on a vested interest unless it coincides with them profiting from the cause.

Using the example of Ukraine, the biggest profiteers are the politicians, along with arms companies, who sell weapons to the Ukrainian forces. Since their profit margins are astronomical in times of war, politicians are doing everything to keep it going, as long as they are not required to take part themselves. This also means that children may starve to death in the name of “solidarity”.

Hopes for the Future

But not all is lost in the West. Sure, we live in a vile and corrupt system where the illusion of freedom can cloud our judgement.⁵ Our outlook for the future might look grim, but only if we tread the same path. What the West needs is strong men and women, people with willpower to make hard decisions. Young, fresh people with a vision for the future.

Conclusion

Although my approach might sound a bit naive, and in some people’s eyes, radical, I truly think that this is the only way to solve our problems.

Mainly in the west. The whole text attributes to the fact that we tend to elect old white men into positions of power. ↩︎
This can and will be a huge problem in the future, since neither politics nor big tech companies are your friends. Both will want to take away your freedom, but each wants it for themselves. ↩︎
We’ve seen it with the coronavirus pandemic, where fear of the unknown has been used to scare the people docile. This way they could legally strip us of our rights in the name of security. ↩︎
We’ve been seeing it with any issue regarding LGBTQ+ folks, and we’re seeing it with Ukraine. Any way to divert people’s attention away from what you’re really doing. ↩︎
Calling the west the most corrupt system might sound ungrateful at first, but if you look deeper into it you’ll see that our so-called “freedom” is really nothing more than just a smokescreen. In most dictatorships you usually know what to expect. ↩︎

The Eye of the Beholder

Marko Mirceski — Tue, 10 May 2022 00:00:00 +0000

“It’s the same fucking rock, just closer!”

The given quote has caused quite a stir within me. On one hand, I wanted to tell that person that they understand shit about the beauty of nature and that they need to open themselves up, on the other hand I didn’t want to spoil my own appreciation of said beauty by quarreling with someone who just doesn’t live on the same wavelength as myself.

One fact of life is that beauty, and I mean true beauty, lies in the eye of the beholder, meaning it’s exclusively subjective, and thus not subject to any measureable values. I want to address that subjectivity, and also talk about what nature really has to offer, maybe even change a few minds in the process.

See the Same Rock Twice

The Blue Grotto on Malta might just be one of the most beautiful places on earth. And some people just can’t see it. In fact, the quote from the beginning is something I overheard exactly at that Grotto. It gave me a general idea of how we lost the beauty of our planet to mindless consumerism. People look at their phones most of the time, spend too much time overloading and overstimulating their senses to a point where they don’t feel any real feelings anymore, only to be annoyed when they get to see what nature can create without human intervention.

Of course it is a shame to see that many people have lost this understanding of what our planet has to offer. But it gets worse, the more we think about all the vanity going around when it comes to the perversion of beauty.

I’d Like 2 Pounds of Silicone!

We as humans have become obsessed with our perverted version of what we tend to call “beauty standards”, which is a term I absolutely despise. Beauty cannot be standardized, and the fact that we have trends supporting the Idea of standardized beauty shows how far we have fallen. To destroy what nature gave us, we started chopping people off to fix their appearance, we started injecting biohazardous material into people’s faces, cut up the women’s breasts to fill them with silicone to make them appear bigger than they should be.

What I want to address is the so-called “beauty industry”, which preys upon the insecurity of certain people by marketing their products and services as the desire and envy of all. Starting with makeup, it already makes billions upon billions of dollars. Accounting for plastic surgery, where we take the gift of nature and pervert it through fake implants in the name of beauty, we can clearly see that humanity has become obsessed with all things that are in vain.

Still, there are some things that people misunderstand when they use their body as a canvas to be chopped, sliced and painted.

Mother Nature, the Best Artist of Them All

As with the rocks in the Blue Grotto, and many other places, they have all been formed by the tides of days long gone, mother nature playing her integral part in creating these works of art over millennia, making them into the beautiful sceneries that we know to love today. Calling nature the greatest artist is an understatement.

Through just existing, the earth formed some truly breathtaking locations, monuments of the sheer power of nature, which even manages to take back the land when humanity has abandoned it.

It’s All About the Mindset

Observing beauty is strictly tied to our mindset, our mental health and ability and willingness to grow. The people who think of a cliff or a grotto as “just rocks”, they don’t seem to want to grow out of their bubbles. Yet they are the loudest when it comes to “unfair beauty standards” (which, as mentioned before, are stupid).

Those who see the monumental power of nature to create a spectacle, they are rewarded with the view of a lifetime, and with the knowledge that beauty can be found everywhere.

Conclusion

Our planet formed about 4.5 billion years ago, and in this time, it has formed itself into the planet we know today. And yet, all we do is look into devices all the time, giving in to the temptations of vanity, hedonism and pride. We need to return to a more conscious lifestyle in conjunction with nature, and stop looking at a rock as “just a rock”.

“Nice Guys”...?

Marko Mirceski — Sat, 13 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The internet loves raving about so-called Nice Guys. From their misogynistic views to their unrealistic expectations of receiving sexual favors for doing the bare minimum, it can clearly be deduced that they are not the people they think they are. But what about the other side of the coin? Are the greatest critics of Nice Guys really better than the people they oh so generously drag through the manure every so often? And is every Nice Guy (i.e. the ones that are insanely resentful) born out of sexual frustration? In this article, I will delve into one of the more toxic parts of the internet, and clear up some biases that one might have accumulated over the years.

Clearing Out Misconceptions

The first thing to state here is that Nice Guy does NOT equal Nice Guy. Why? Because the former is a blessing, and the latter is a curse. Nice Guys (without quotation marks) are actual, genuine nice people, that go out of their way to show more than just basic human decency. Nice Guys on the other hand are extremely resentful, mostly lonely men that show some borderline incel traits, and only want women for their own sexual gain.

Or is that so?

Basic Human Decency

The problem arises when you start assuming that everyone who resents some people must be a bitter Nice Guy who just couldn’t get laid. This stems from the belief that what is considered the “bare minimum” of decency has been lowered, and that no one is entitled to something as simple as a look. In almost every human society, it is customary to thank a person if they do something for us, e.g. holding open a door, regardless of a person’s sex. But over the years, especially in western countries, this custom has fallen into obscurity, as people became more and more self-absorbed, feeling entitled to it while not even paying attention to the person doing said thing.

This in turn may lead to many different outcomes, with two very prominent ones. The first one would be that the person doing a certain thing continues being the decent human being they are, thus resulting in their environment exploiting them ad mortem. The second outcome is that the nice person lashes out, starting to resent the parts of society that treated them “like something less than a human being”. This in turn results in some very questionable world views (questionable according to mainstream society). What I want to say is that not all Nice Guys are born out of sexual frustration, but rather a need for validation by other people. A need that, if not satisfied, results in erratic and vengeful thinking. I’m not saying we should cave in to them. I’m just stating, that we should treat these people more humanely as a preventative measure.

Born of Hatred

We create our own demons. We create the things we dread the most. What do I mean by that? By treating people differently, we create these Nice Guys and we start dreading them.¹ In turn, we lash out at this creation of our making, thus branding us the villains in their eyes. But since we can’t admit our own failure, our own guilt in creating them, we project it as hatred onto them. It is a vicious cycle, which can only be broken from the outside. We cannot “cure” them, rather, they have to help themselves, and the first thing to do would be to admit that we are partly to be blamed for their creation.

This opinion would spark outrage in some internet communities that were specifically made to maliciously make fun of these Nice Guys, marking the believer of said opinion as a Nice Guy themselves, and projecting even more hatred unto them. It is a witch hunt born out of contempt, that stems from the self-induced lie that all Nice Guys feel entitled to unwarranted sexual activity. Thus, the strawman Nice Guy was born. A template, which is being applied to every person that even remotely shows signs of entitlement to some basic human decency.

Conclusion

People should stop holding onto this modern belief that no one is entitled to human decency. Instead, we all should embrace a more traditionalist point of view, where we all treat each other as human beings, and thank the kind stranger holding the door open for us.

This statement is overly deterministic. Of course, not all Nice Guys are created by external mistreatment. It is, however, a sufficiently prevalent phenomenon that it needs to be taken seriously. ↩︎

In Defense of GNOME

Marko Mirceski — Wed, 22 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

We all know and hate the GNOME desktop environment. It’s the dreaded “anti-user” human interface guidelines, that, quite frankly, make Windows and macOS look perfectly usable. But what if I told you that our criticism stems from the wrong reasons, and that you should give GNOME a second chance, or at least, a try? In this article, I will make a case for using GNOME and explain why it is by far the most unique desktop environment there is.

The Basics

For all of us that have been living in a cave until now, here are the basics: GNOME is a desktop environment of the GNU/Linux operating system, which has been around since 1997. The developers, at first, took a rather common approach to GNOME’s design philosophy, creating a desktop environment that looked quite familiar to users of Windows, for example. But with version 3, they started going in a different direction, doing radical things to transform the Linux desktop into a truly unique experience. And for all their faults, these devs truly believe in what they do, creating quality software that doesn’t compromise their design philosophy.

The Philosophy

GNOME’s philosophy is mainly to be “out of the way”, meaning that the system won’t stand in your way of getting your work done. This translates into a sleek, minimal desktop, with a small top bar and nothing else. The apps can be accessed by opening the Applications overview with a shortcut, or by using the mouse to open your activities on the top bar, and then accessing your applications from the dock that only shows up in the activities and applications menu. (In fact, the button on the far right of the dock opens the applications panel.) This also shows through the fact that there are no desktop icons by default. The Activities are virtual desktops that can help you separate different workflows easily and efficiently. With the use of extensions, you can regain some of the “traditional” desktop functionality. Some people, though, are really opposed to this way of working. Let’s see why:

Why People Hate on GNOME

The main reason, I think, why people hate on GNOME is the fact that it feels very alien to them. They don’t know how to handle something so weird and unusual and they resort to negativity as their only way of coping with it. Of course, some people just don’t like the way GNOME handles certain tasks, and they resort to using more traditional environments, like KDE, Xfce, and Cinnamon. It’s true that some decisions are very questionable, like omitting the minimize and maximize buttons from the default system, and not even allowing desktop icons without an extension. In my opinion, though, these are just things one needs to adjust to when using GNOME, or by installing the aforementioned extensions to restore this functionality.

Why You Should Give It a Chance

In my opinion, all the issues GNOME has are things people can adjust to. If you like Wayland, I highly suggest GNOME. There is no experience like GNOME on Wayland, and I think that says a lot about the system. Another reason to try it is if you seek a truly unique experience, far away from all the traditional Windows/macOS stuff that has been burned into your brain over the decades. If you are a massive Qt-lover/super-fanboy, I say you should skip GNOME, because Qt just looks odd in the posterboy-GTK-environment. Other than that, I say: Give it a spin. Who knows, maybe you’ll love it?

Conclusion

You can say whatever you want about GNOME. But you can’t¹ criticize their attempt at offering something new. And it is the best “unique” desktop experience out there.

or at least shouldn’t ↩︎

Linux Is About the Journey

Marko Mirceski — Wed, 28 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

I often take the time to think about the things that are important to me. Stuff like family, programming, life, philosophy, psychology, free software and Linux, among many. And it made me wonder: What makes Linux so special? What makes it stand out from all the other Operating Systems? How does Linux take effect on your life where other systems don’t? Of course, the GOTO argument would be all the technical aspects, its respect of privacy, and the user’s freedoms compared to proprietary systems. You could also argue that the thing that makes Linux outstanding is its general system security, as in being basically the safest system you could use.

But none of that matters here. I’m here to offer a new point of view on the quirks of the GNU/Linux operating system: What truly makes it the greatest system that currently exists, and why people should start learning it.

The “Linux Lifestyle”

As with all things in Life, people like to attribute a certain way of living to GNU/Linux users. Most of the time it’s all about horrible stereotypes, like the neckbeard and the elitist. Two archetypes that present the average Linux user as a greasy, conceited and misogynistic asshole, and that couldn’t be farther from the truth. The average Linux user is usually a normal person, just living their life without any need to rub their use of GNU/Linux in anyone’s face.

But what about that “Linux Lifestyle”? It’s simple: It doesn’t revolve around some sort of Elitism or militant preaching. In truth, this lifestyle is centered around being conscious about your privacy, and your freedoms, to ensure that they are in your hands and your hands only. Another thing that is part of this lifestyle is a willingness to solve problems, if needed. Because only that way can you guarantee that your stuff actually works the way you want it to. And most of the time, this way of living involves the Linux community.

The Linux Community

Some might argue that there is no such thing as a Linux Community. They say that the word “Community” doesn’t apply because it’s mainly present on the internet. But I think that this line of thinking is wrong. Because the Linux Community is one of the most vital parts of the experience and definitely a great asset, and a fantastic way to make new friends. Anyone discrediting a perfectly legitimate community is at the very least a bitter loner with no grasp on how people nowadays work and thrive. You do not have to always assemble in person to form bonds, and nowhere is that more true than in the Linux community.

It is inevitable that you encounter this odd bunch of people, and you might even be appalled by some. But that is perfectly fine! No one has to like everyone. But keep in mind that most of the people in this community are very good folks who only want to see you succeed. Because while we are a very vocal community, we are still pretty small compared to some others. And driving away potential new members is the last thing we’d want to do. In the end, the community is a part of your journey. And that is important.

Learning

Linux is all about learning. Be it some simple stuff like a few terminal commands, or complex cron jobs that you can use for some advanced automation. It doesn’t really matter where you stand, if you are a beginner or a pro, you never stop learning on Linux. That is the charm of it all: the ability to further your knowledge of computers and programming whilst also using a free and open-source operating system. Some might not care about the freedom it gives you, and that is fine. But it is still important to keep it in mind when working with software.

The Journey

In the end, it is of the essence that one realizes that Linux isn’t about the end goal. It isn’t about some free software utopia, or about the ultimate privacy-driven society. Linux is a tool. And it is about the journey you make with this tool. And on this journey you will experience hardships and failure. And it is only normal that you might not want to use it after your first encounter. The trick lies in actually using it again, instead of giving up and never looking back.

This journey is about what you want from your perfect computer operating system, and the friends you make along the way. Learning Linux isn’t just about jobs, or “nerd cred”. It is an experience that forever shapes the way you see computers, and shows you the most efficient ways of using one. Personally, I see it as a kind of semi-spiritual experience, but that is just my personal perception.

Conclusion

Whether you already use the system or are in the process of installing it, I hope you take this advice to heart: “Never try to force success, it will only leave you disappointed. Rather, learn about why you fail, and then try again. For failure is more a teacher than a mark of shame.”

Non-Free JavaScript: The Gateway to Internet Enslavement

Marko Mirceski — Sun, 11 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Every developer has at least heard of JavaScript. The dreaded language that runs most of the World Wide Web’s logic. But did you know that it harbors great peril not just for developers, but also for regular end users, no matter which system they use. This danger comes from so-called “non-free JavaScript code”.

Digital Slavery

Non-free JavaScript performs a lot of functions. Among the most harmful are telemetry, espionage, and other intrusive practices that harm the end user in many different ways.

Telemetry is the process of collecting user data to create a “usage profile”, making targeted advertising a lot easier. This is often embedded in non-free JavaScript.

General data collection, in other words espionage, is often used in tandem with telemetry to gather information that governments or companies may want from end users. Both espionage and telemetry scripts have the tendency to “phone home”, secretly stealing sensitive user data and sending it to servers running proprietary software for further processing.

Since data is one of the most powerful resources available in the digital age, these companies have a stranglehold over what we want and don’t want, effectively turning us into digital slaves.

How to Circumvent This

There are mainly three ways to prevent this. The first method would be to outright ban the internet from your life. This might be good for your psyche, but you will look like some hobo outcast when you do it. The second way would be to block any and all JavaScript while browsing. This is a good idea, but it is not ideal, since many modern websites are practically unusable with JavaScript disabled. The last method would be to block only non-free JavaScript. This would make a few more websites usable and enable you to allowlist trivial scripts, even if they are non-free. There is a browser extension called LibreJS that does exactly that.

Conclusion

Blocking non-free JavaScript is a good way to reclaim your freedom on the World Wide Web. The better it becomes when you realize that the websites of all the big data thieves become virtually unusable.

The Internet Before 2015 and What It Means for Us

Marko Mirceski — Wed, 07 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The Internet is a peculiar place. On one side, it is the gateway to an immeasurable amount of information, open to anyone curious enough to look for it, and a community that is often friendlier and more forthcoming than most of your real-life friends. On the other hand, it opens us up to mass surveillance and scrutiny from anyone whose opinion you so blatantly defy. But something around 2015 changed the internet drastically, and made it lean toward the latter evil.

So in this rather lengthy article, I will give insight into ancient internet history, and analyze how the change affected every user on the net.

A “Short” History of the Internet

There is this peculiar rumor that Tim Berners-Lee started the internet. That is completely false, but he committed a lot of technologies without which the internet wouldn’t be usable for us today. No, the internet has existed for a few decades longer than just that.

It all started with DARPA building connections between mainframe computers at government agencies and various universities, therefore creating the first Meshed Wide Area Network, called ARPANET. The ARPANET served the purpose of sending messages across the United States of America via telephone lines, by dialing into the target computer. (Fun Fact: The first computer worm originated in the ARPANET. It was called Creeper, and wasn’t really malicious. The only thing it did was sending itself from mainframe to mainframe, printing the message “I’m the Creeper, catch me if you can”. Of course, someone also created the first antivirus program on the same network, called Reaper. It’s only purpose was to hunt down the Creeper.) Of course, the ARPANET wasn’t the only Network in existence, so it was foreseeable that it would be connected with other networks over time. And so, when the 90s rolled around, we already had a somewhat working internet infrastructure. All it needed was that little “extra” to make it work just as we know it today.

That of course came in the form of new specifications and protocols, the most important of them being the HyperText Markup Language, also known as HTML, and the corresponding HyperText Transfer Protocol, also known as HTTP. These two make up the most important building blocks of the internet, and are still used by all webpages today.

“Before 2015”: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

The internet before 2015 was like the wild west. A new frontier, unexplored by most, with its own culture, rules and crazy people talking about the world ending tomorrow. At first glance, it looks like a horrible place to be. And you might even be right. But the internet back then wasn’t as horrible as it at first seems. It is the time when the meme, the digital form of insider jokes, was born. It was also the time when websites were somewhat loadable, and browsers were only programs used to access these loadable websites.

But it wasn’t all sunshine and roses. I hate to say it, but if you were anything other than straight, white or assigned male at birth, you were basically excluded from all the fun. Because the “old” internet was a pretty xenophobic place, and you could forget any type of inclusion. And god forbid if you were a female gamer complaining about sexism.

But as mentioned, not all was bad during these times. Yes, it was a bit horrible for some people. But all in all, most of the users of the old internet had their fair share of fun. They messed around, and showed a real passion for this strange digital realm.

“After 2015”: Old Frontiers, New Times

2015 as an absolute changing point is actually inaccurate. Because if one thing is true about this change, it is that it happened over a long timespan, and not abruptly within one year. I only use 2015 as a reference point, because the changes became very noticeable in the following years.

The first change I want to highlight is the fact that people on the internet became socially aware. More and more people started to use the internet to berate bigots and educate people on the importance of “Social Justice”. Another noticeable change was the fact that more people started to talk about actual issues, things like racial inequality, climate change, discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation and the exploitation of users by nonfree software, among many.

But this change wasn’t all positive. Big corporations started to approach the internet with a more “Hands-On”-mindset, pushing their proprietary technologies down the throats of the people. And thus the people got addicted. Also, the rise of awareness brought out the worst white liberals you could possibly imagine. With their soy lattes and MacBooks, they started policing the speech of people, sparking outrage on Twitter over allegedly racist things, “cancelling” people over statements that were almost a decade old, and so on.

Big companies, as it is in their nature, started to pick up on this, firing employees over things they said over 10 years ago, meticulously looking for dirt on some people then kicking them out over the artificial outrage they themselves incited.

The Rise of Surveillance

And with these things, we entered the age of surveillance. Inarguably the worst time to be online, this time in the history of the internet will be remembered as the last stand for privacy on the net, and in our lives. The big issue with this is that it’s not just the big companies that are after your data. It’s also your government that wants to know all about you. And when two big parties compete for your data, you won’t win.

I think the main motivation behind this push for data collection is the struggle for total control. Everyone wants power, and with that power you can subjugate people to your will. The more this continues, the less freedoms we have, and it will be even harder to hold onto the ones that are left.

How Not to Give Up Hope

With this as a possible future, many don’t even see the point in fighting. They willingly give up to these “corporate overlords” because in their eyes, there’s no way around it. But I tell you, you shouldn’t give up just yet. Because there is still a lot to fight for, and you can still reclaim all of your freedoms.

And although the peer pressure to just give up is very real, it is indeed a horrible idea. Just because your friends and family have succumbed to the nightmare that is proprietary software, doesn’t mean you have to do that too. You can always make the switch to free software and evade the data-collecting grasp of big tech and your government. It may be inconvenient, but it is definitely worth it.

Conclusion

This is the most important time of our lives. And if we don’t fight against these greedy data-hoarders, we will all lose. In the end, ambivalence to this problem will make us into slaves of our impulses and desires, and we must never fall that low. I have hope that one day, we will beat them all. And then we will restore freedom in cyberspace, one computer at a time.

Self-Improvement

Marko Mirceski — Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Let’s say, you are the average man. You spend a lot of time on the internet, playing video games or watching porn. Are you happy? I don’t mean do you feel good right now, I’m talking about true happiness. So, let me ask you again: Are you really happy? If your answer is yes: Congratulations, you are a liar. If it is no, let me tell you something:

I was there once. I know what it feels like to be deeply unhappy. Rotting away in a smelly, messy room, with no work to your name, no apparent purpose and using porn and video games as a crutch. In fact, I still do. It’s been quite a while since I discovered self-improvement, but only recently did I decide to take it seriously.

In this article, I would like to stray away from the usual technical things, and focus more on helping men build the best version of themselves, independent of societal expectations.

The Two Pills

There is a famous scene in the movie “The Matrix”, where the main character, Neo, is offered a significant choice: either he takes the blue pill and returns to his average 9-to-5 life, or he takes the red pill. Morpheus explains that if Neo chooses the red pill, he will stay in Wonderland and discover just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

In self improvement, this concept comes up right at the beginning: Do you want to stay who you are, average and miserable, or do you want to rise above yourself, find true purpose and meaning in life? And I see the misunderstanding that could arise from this: Self improvement is not about losing some arbitrary old self, but rather about finding who you truly are, and who you can be with enough effort.

Be Independent

“Marvel vs DC”

“Republican vs Democrat”

“Pepsi vs Coca Cola”

“Windows vs Linux”

It is truly maddening to see how many people fall for pop culture, politics, and all the other instruments of division that can be used to split the people of the world into groups that despise each other. It also makes me sad that so few people realize the impact that this has on us. We are literally taught to hate the opposition, and to not interact with outsiders. And who taught us this? The internet, politics, anyone who might profit off of division.

The best, nay, the only right choice in this modern era is to say “no”. To reject societal norms, to reject the people’s obsession with politics and popular culture. To reject all the activism, all the economical and political strides made to harm you as a person, and us as a community. Independence as it stands is the only way for a person to thrive.

Of course, one can’t just go out and shit on someone’s car and say, “it’s okay, I reject society.” All rules of engagement still stand, and should be followed to the smallest detail. “Rejecting society” just means the above: not falling for the traps that have been placed to ensnare every person on this planet.

Brotherhood and Community

Self-Improvement isn’t a “lone wolf”-type ordeal. Everything you do will be representative of others that follow the same path as you do. Therefore, the next conclusion is to walk the path together. Be it as friends, as colleagues, or as a tribe. Brotherhood and Community is an important step in this journey.

But why is that? Can’t I just walk for myself, by myself, and attain greatness that way? The simple answer is no. The complex answer is also no, but with context. When you go on this journey, you are prone to making mistakes. If no one calls you out on them, in a civil and brotherly manner, you will, unknowingly, repeat these mistakes. And when you notice it might already be too late, and you might be prone to fall back to your old ways.

The best friends, brothers, and comrades you can have are the ones who call you out on your bullshit.

Jeffrey versus Adonis

And your brothers are the ones you need to be able to rely on in times of need.

Jeffrey condemns brotherhood. He claims it as toxic masculinity, men banding together, bonding over their achievements. He thinks the strive to be a better version of yourself every day is a waste of time, and that you should enjoy life. Of course, his enjoyment stems from masturbating to porn, and over-indulging in video games, wasting his time and subsequently his life.

Adonis. Adonis doesn’t care about Jeffreys opinion regarding masculinity. Adonis takes one look at Jeffrey and pities him, since he always takes the easy way out. He thinks that every man should strive to be better, he encourages his community, his tribe, to spend time on rich, fulfilling things, not to indulge, not to consume mindlessly. Adonis teaches gratitude, a concept most important on the way of becoming your best self.

These rather overdone texts are here to highlight two archetypes in self-improvement. The “Jeffrey”, and the “Adonis”. Both show extreme tendencies in their respective side, and are, on one side the worst case, and on the other nigh unachievable.

The Jeffrey (name as a stand-in, you can use whatever normie name you like) represents modern society. He is a constant victim, always looking for reasons why he can’t (or won’t) do something. A loathsome person, he is unwilling to change, to learn or to even reflect on himself. Jeffrey can’t take advice, he always has to know better. Being a Jeffrey is the worst thing that can happen to you, and quite a lot of men are already there, or on their way to becoming a Jeffrey.

Adonis is an unachievable concept of a man. He is the ultimate tribe leader, someone who always takes the hardest path because he knows it will be better, he is the polar opposite to Jeffrey. He knows that he is the master of his own decisions, and stands by them. He learns from his mistakes, he learns from the mistakes of others, and he isn’t afraid to take criticism. He never acts in pure self-interest, and will always step up to choose what’s best for his tribe.

In modern society, it is infinitely easier to become a Jeffrey than Adonis. This is because we over-indulge and overstimulate to the point where we’re damaged almost beyond repair. Breaking our curse requires a lot more than just a few good words.

Do the hard work…

To fix our problem, we require a lot of work. A lot of hard work. This consists of starting your journey, falling, getting up, falling, getting up again, etc. Journaling, working out, meditating, following a fulfilling passion that doesn’t harm you is a lot of work. Creating small habits is a lot of hard work.

And most won’t do it. Exactly because it is hard work. It isn’t easy, and it never will be. The thing about this journey is that you get used to hard work, and you start to be grateful about it. Because most of the time the harder thing is the one with the greatest long-term benefits.

…especially when you don’t feel like it

Go. Make your bed. Go clean your room. Go dust off your shelves, vacuum your place. Go take a walk without your phone.

If you said no to all of these, you are a victim of comfort. If I ask you why you won’t do these chores, you’d probably say something along the lines of “I don’t feel like it”. This is the trap of comfort, of the easy way. The reason why you don’t do it is because you think that easy comfort is more important than putting in the work to make something better.

You probably expect things to fall in place eventually, which is a bad line of thought. You may wait for the world, but the world won’t wait for you. And that is the problem with comfort. You’ll always be behind, because you chose to wait.

We should strive for discomfort. Only through doing the things we don’t feel like doing can we grow as men, even through the smallest things, like fixing up your bed.

Conclusion

This is just the end of the text. But what I expect it to be is the beginning of your self-improvement journey. So many before us managed to be the best versions of themselves. So many before us managed to find purpose in life.

And if they managed, so can we. So will we.

How Nonfree Software Makes You Dependent

Marko Mirceski — Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

We all know that nonfree (or proprietary) software is bad for you. With all the closed code and all the pleas for trust, there is not much else that you can say about it. But not many people talk about the lock-in that nonfree software creates with many different practices, and it is really spooky. In this article, I will further elaborate on this spook, and how to counteract it with free and freedom-respecting software.

“I Need It!”

If you advocate for free software, you will hear this sentence a lot from the very end users you are trying to reach. And it will frustrate and enrage you. People saying that they need a certain piece of nonfree software shows you how bad and widespread the problem actually is.

The fact is that nonfree software is designed to make you dependent. With its sleek designs and beautiful interfaces, it tries to create a feeling of trustworthiness within the user. And this is the main aesthetic reason why people think they need the software. But there is another.

Closed Standards

Another way to lock your users inside your software is closed standards. File types that you can only use within your software, and nowhere else, for instance. This creates an artificial dependency, which could be resolved by actually opening those standards to other programmers, so that competition can flourish. But these companies want to be the sole providers of their type of software, so they lock the user within their harmful systems, and disallow the use of their proprietary standards by their competition. And since most of these companies have already established their market dominance, they have essentially created a monopoly.

What That Means for Free Software

This in turn means that the companies try to discourage the use of free software, especially software that directly competes with theirs, implicitly marking it as “unsafe”, and telling the user to trust them. This of course only further damages the good reputation of free software, and ensures the enslavement of the end user.

How to Counteract It

You can stop this by starting to use freedom-respecting standards for all your work. Another thing you can do is to gradually phase out all the nonfree software in your life, either starting with your operating system or your utilities. Push your peers to use open standards, reason with the argument of freedom. That way you can ensure that nobody in your environment tries to force their nonfree standards upon you.

Conclusion

Standards are a delicate thing. And they are important to any scientific or technological work. That also means that it is of the essence to start pushing for free and freedom-respecting standards as soon as possible.

Ethical Software Is A Spook

Marko Mirceski — Mon, 21 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Coraline Ada Ehmke. As a free software activist, this name only means one thing: Trouble. But what do I mean by that? I mean that the self-proclaimed “open-source troublemaker” could be the greatest threat to free software¹ as we know it. And you’ll see why it is as dramatic as I make it out to be.

“The Hippocratic License”

But what does a single programmer have to do with the death of free software? Well, she is the original creator of the Hippocratic License, a so-called “open-source”² license, that, in short, only allows the use of software for “ethical purposes”. Now, the problem with ethical software is that it is non-free in its nature, since the use of software for unethical purposes is prohibited under this license. Another problem arises when we try to determine ethics in conjunction with software. What even is “ethical”? Is it some form of law? Or are you appealing to common sense? Or do you want to go the “liberal” route and say that it’s only ethical as long as it agrees with your agenda? Now, what I want to say is that the definition of ethics is muddy at best.

Why It Affects Free Software

But how does this threaten free software? Well, for starters, ethical software gives opponents of free software a base upon which they can build an argument without being called out for their use of proprietary software, since it’s sold as “open-source”². Then, for example, people can argue that free software is bad because you can use it for unethical purposes. Another group that benefits from this are big companies bent on controlling people’s lives. They can say their use of the software is entirely ethical while also collecting data, selling it, and generally making a profit off of its customers just living their lives.

Conclusion

Free software prevents all of this, by respecting the user’s freedoms at all times. But “ethical software” and its proponents want to take that away, and control your use-cases with their restrictive license. You, the user, must prevent this at all costs, if you want your freedoms to survive.

The four essential freedoms

The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).

The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

— The Free Software Foundation: What is Free Software?

Free as in freedom, not free beer. Libre software would be another way to say it. ↩︎
Though not recognized as “open-source” by the Open Source Initiative and classified as non-free by the Free Software Foundation. ↩︎ ↩︎

Why Nonfree Software is Bad

Marko Mirceski — Sat, 19 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Nonfree software is everywhere. And it really shows. At this point in time, I’d argue that there is more nonfree software in the wild than there is free software. This raises some important questions. First of all, why all the fuss about it? Shouldn’t we just let nonfree software exist? And secondly, why advocate for free software, when the most popular products based on proprietary licenses make up the bulk of the so-called industry standards? In this article, we will go through the pitfalls of nonfree software, and why it is bad for you, the end user.

What is Nonfree Software?

Well, there are many different definitions of what you could consider nonfree software. But for simplicity’s sake we’ll go by the definition that Richard Stallman set for nonfree software. A piece of software is to be considered nonfree when it doesn’t respect all four fundamental freedoms, meaning that if at least one freedom is disregarded, the software cannot be called free. These four essential freedoms are:

The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).

The freedom to study the program (source code) and how it works, and change it, so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1)

The freedom to share copies of the software to help others (freedom 2)

The freedom to distribute altered copies of the software, so everyone can benefit from your changes (freedom 3)

— The Free Software Foundation: What is Free Software?

This proprietary software is typically closed source, meaning the user cannot view the source code and only receives a pre-compiled binary, with the sources themselves only being visible to those considered “authorized”.

Why It is Harmful

This in turn brings along many concepts that harm users and developers alike. Examples include “security through obscurity”, forced updates, potential backdoors that allows certain people covert access to your system, pre-installed bloatware, and spyware that collects your data, among others. These ideas not only promote disinterest in the inner workings of your system, but also blatant ignorance of what these companies are doing in the background. At this point, thanks to very creative marketing schemes, people unironically use the word “magic” to describe technology. This kind of language disregards all the hard work that has been invested into bringing computing to the level at which it is today. Also, nonfree software harms its users by not respecting their freedoms, therefore taking ownership of the users’ computers, in the case of operating systems, and the users’ data when we include desktop and web programs.

Conclusion

As it stands right now, we’re at a delicate place, where nonfree software providers and free software activists stand face to face, about to fight the battle of a lifetime. This battle will not be fought with weapons, and it won’t consist of violence in its traditional sense. But it will be important. And it will decide the future of computing as we know it.

Consoom.Soy

A New Year, a New World of Thoughts

Recognizing Truth

The Malleability of Truth

The Boundaries of Truth

Conclusion

Human Wolves

Of Men and Wolves

Dog Eat Dog

Our Best Selves

Envious Eyes and Prideful Stance

Overkill

Pack of Wolves

Conclusion

Further Reading

Wars

Extinction

Crime

Miscellaneous

Politics in Movies

What Do You Mean by Politics?

Modern Indoctrination

Red-Blooded Americans

How to Do It Properly

Conclusion

Weak Leaders

Old, White Men

Money, Money, Money

Divide et Impera

#StandWithOurLeaders

Hopes for the Future

Conclusion

The Eye of the Beholder

See the Same Rock Twice

I’d Like 2 Pounds of Silicone!

Mother Nature, the Best Artist of Them All

It’s All About the Mindset

Conclusion

“Nice Guys”...?

Introduction

Clearing Out Misconceptions

Basic Human Decency

Born of Hatred

Conclusion

In Defense of GNOME

Introduction

The Basics

The Philosophy

Why People Hate on GNOME

Why You Should Give It a Chance

Conclusion

Linux Is About the Journey

Introduction

The “Linux Lifestyle”

The Linux Community

Learning

The Journey

Conclusion

Non-Free JavaScript: The Gateway to Internet Enslavement

Introduction

Digital Slavery

How to Circumvent This

Conclusion

The Internet Before 2015 and What It Means for Us

Introduction

A “Short” History of the Internet

“Before 2015”: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

“After 2015”: Old Frontiers, New Times

The Rise of Surveillance

How Not to Give Up Hope

Conclusion

Self-Improvement

The Two Pills

Be Independent

Brotherhood and Community

Jeffrey versus Adonis

Do the hard work…

…especially when you don’t feel like it

Conclusion

How Nonfree Software Makes You Dependent