UniversalMonk

joined 6 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It's so strange to me that I'm fairly hated and some people permaban me on sight, but then I see comments like, "Fuck you stupid alcoholic vodka baby. I bet you’re a russian troll, they love Vodka over there. Also quit pretending to be a woman no one buys this sympathy act that you’re “transgender” by a now just-banned member, @SlipperySlime838585@sh.itjust.works.

I'm floored. Who in their right mind makes fun of recovering alcoholics and mixes it with transphobia in the same fucking comment?

People act like I’m destroying Lemmy just because I post links to news articles they don’t like, meanwhile, there’s garbage like that being said all over the place?

Compared to the homophobic, transphobic, and flat-out hateful words I’ve seen on Lemmy lately, my posts are like reading preschool stories in a padded nursery while the rest of the site sets itself on fire and screams the most hateful slurs ever through a bullhorn.

This place is going down fast.

So yeah, I need to stay in your bubble. I thought I was doing that, but I gotta try harder.

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I must be living in some bubble where people can have sane reasonable discussion even if they disagree.

Where is this bubble? I wanna be in that bubble!

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

and make fun of me for being a recovering alcoholic

Before I say anything else, I wanna say sorry that happened to you. I've personally seen people struggle with alcohol addictions in my inner circle, and the fact that someone would use that to attack you, makes me sick. This pisses me off way more than all the other random shit I see on Lemmy combined.

Please stay strong, and don't give those fuckers a chance to knock you down bully you out of here.

I support you in your modding efforts as well, brother. You're appreciated here.

I mean that. I'm not saying it as Universal Monk, I'm saying it as a person. I appreciate that you are here.

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Even tho I disagree with most here and think we should defed them, the fact that there is a vote and that you all listen to the vote, is what makes this instance so freakin' amazing!

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Holy shit, this thread. What the fuck is happening to Lemmy?! Shit is getting crazy. Now we even have extremist anti-AI people. Are they just looking for shit to be angry and extreme about?! What shit are they gonna be mad about, tomorrow?

I love AI. I get that some people don't, but some of them are starting to become the fuckin Unabomber about it. lol

AI has made my life better and way more fun.

Stay mad, Luddites.

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Wow, besides being a whiny asshole, you're also transphobic. Fuck you.

Edit: Glad you're banned.

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Agreed. Not only that, but any 'investigation' would be everything we already know. "Oh, Universal Monk posts a fuckton and some of his links are to news articles that annoy people. And he refuses to change his mind about shit. The fucker."

Ok, cool!

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

I also posted socialist anarchist content in the past. And to copypasta what I said elsewhere in this thread: Using the logic a lot of people on Lemmy seem to apply: if I'm “conservative” just because I’ve posted links to conservative articles… then, by that same logic, shouldn’t I also be considered socialist and anarchist because I post so much socialist and anarchist content?

Not to mention I have posted way more socialist/anarchist content than links to conservative news articles.

The truth is, I'm not a fascist; I'm a narcissist. If I read something and think it's interesting, I rush to Lemmy and post it, no matter the quality. :)

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

And I still don’t see what all the controversy is about. I post just about anything I read that I find interesting. Funny how everyone overlooks the hundreds of posts I’ve made about science, socialism, anarchism, third parties, college, education, math, and more. I’ve started conservative communities, mixed-politics communities, socialist communities, anarchist communities, death cult communities, writing communities—you name it. My other main account is @UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works.

Now, using the logic a lot of people on Lemmy seem to apply: if Universal Monk is “conservative” just because I've posted links to conservative articles... then, by that same logic, shouldn’t I also be considered socialist and anarchist because I post so much socialist and anarchist content?

Also, if I were seriously trying to "ban evade," would I really use my well-known and widely disliked username? Obviously not. I usually get banned right away anyway, as my history shows.

Posting links to news articles from across the political spectrum is not a good enough reason for the chaos my name seems to cause.

I’d love to see someone make a pie chart showing the ratio of my socialist, anarchist, and libertarian posts versus anything remotely conservative. You know why that’s hard? Because I’ve posted so much, and it covers so many topics, because I’m a human being with nuance.

Anyone who actually looks at my posting history would see that I lean libertarian-socialist, just like I’ve always said. The real issue is that Lemmy doesn’t like that I’ve never supported the two-party system. Not before the election or now. I never have, and I never will. I still stand by what I’ve said: Trump getting elected was the Democrats’ fault. They dropped the ball, and they deserved to lose. That’s been my view from the very beginning, and it hasn’t changed.

And if anyone has a problem with me posting a lot, or having more than one account on lemmy, then I invite them to check out:

@Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

@Blaze@sopuli.xyz

@Blaze@lemmy.zip

@Blaze@feddit.org

@Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

@Blaze@discuss.tchncs.de

I regret nothing and I won't change my posting habits. Thanks, friend!

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Once we have our own piefed, that's gonna be my new perma home! Can't wait!

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Most usually would usually note that with a generic "ban evasion," which is often times incorrect as well, but that wasn't used in this case. And would have taken the same amount of time to type as "Universal Monk."

I'm working on transferring all my fiction writing to piefed, and since piefed.social doesn't like me, I've started putting my writing on Feddit.online now. The admin there, @Jerry@feddit.online is awesome! I talked to him about me being there to make sure it was ok. He's been super cool about everything. Great piefed instance and great admin. So at the end of the day, I'm fine with his piefed being the only piefed instance I'm on.

I just wish there were a way to transfer all my writing to my community on there without having to repost them, and bore Lemmy with seeing my stuff be posted all over again. :/

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Good points. Mods, I give a little more leeway to. I expect a bit more informative reasons from admins giving instance bans. It makes me think that the admin just assumed bad stuff because of my rep without any actual proof or research. Especially since I posted nothing controversial on his instance.

402
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
 

I removed the link to the article, since the article is on Medium, and Medium is becoming a shithole too. So here is the article. It was written by JA Westenberg and she's at https://www.joanwestenberg.com/

Subscription payments are the best thing that ever happened to software companies. And they’re arguably the worst thing that ever happened to their customers.

When I started as an aspiring digital artist in the early 2000s, saving up to purchase software like Adobe Photoshop felt like an investment — once bought, it was mine to use indefinitely. I remember putting away dollars from my paper route to buy my first copy as a kid, already dreaming about my future as a creator.

Later, as a teenager working at McDonald’s, I repeated the ritual of patient saving until I could finally purchase music production software such as Ableton Live. Owning those tools outright meant using them freely without worrying about ongoing costs. My creative output wasn’t bound to what I could afford month-to-month.

Now, companies like Adobe solely offer subscriptions — monthly fees and essentially renting in perpetuity. We no longer own our software; we pay a licensing fee.

This gives us access to regular updates, but it also means the sword of Damocles hangs over creatives — miss a payment, lose access. The freedom of creation I once relished has been supplanted by nagging financial anxiety. I miss the days when the tools felt like mine, not someone else’s borrowed goods, and when I didn’t open up a tool and wonder how much longer I’d be able to keep using it.

The Drawbacks for Customers Here’s the drawback. If I live as long as I want, paying for Photoshop every month will be very, very bloody expensive.

Yes, subscriptions provide convenience and access to varied services and products. But convenience just isn’t enough.

Psychologically, subscriptions drive overconsumption. Our paychecks are eaten away in advance before we realise how many 30-day free trials and monthly tithes we’ve committed ourselves to. And while the subscriptions seem small enough on paper, their cumulative cost is straining the budget for consumers and creatives.

We’re told repeatedly that it’s just the price of one coffee a month, but the combined cost of every single tool, service, app and game demanding one coffee a month becomes the equivalent of paying for enough caffeine to poison even the strongest constitution.

The proliferation of subscription services has led to increasing fragmentation of content. As platforms vie for customer attention, consumers confront myriad fragmented options, each requiring an individual subscription. This results in higher costs for accessing content and a disempowering user experience of juggling multiple platforms and subscriptions. The promised convenience of subscriptions is eroded, leaving customers questioning the true benefits.

It’s easy to understand why company after company is shifting their model. The allure of stability is compelling, and subscription payment models provide just that for businesses. Rather than relying on sporadic one-time purchases, companies can enjoy consistent, predictable revenue streams month after month thanks to loyal subscribers. This stable financial base allows businesses to plan for and invest in future growth, pleasing investors and looking good on paper. But that stability is hardly a victory for users who just want good software and aren’t particularly interested in quarterly earnings reports.

Customer loyalty is the holy grail for companies, and in theory, subscriptions foster (aka coerce) enduring relationships with customers, reducing the risk of losing them to competitors. This is achieved through the “lock-in effect,” where the convenience and perceived value of continuing a subscription discourages customers from seeking alternatives.

But instead of using the foundation of a subscription to cultivate long-term relationships and capitalize on increased customer lifetime value, companies treat users like a Sure Thing, taking them for granted and adding little in terms of value to justify the monthly fee.

There’s a popular argument that subscription payment models championed entrepreneurs and startups, levelling the playing field in an industry historically dominated by major players. It allows smaller companies to enter the marketplace with minimal upfront costs and directly compete with industry giants. But when all these startups want to do is sell more subscription services, it starts to seem at least a little Ponzi-esque.

And then there’s the unfortunate reality that when the economy is tanking, rents are going up, housing is unattainable, food is an arm and a leg, and it’s too expensive to put petrol in the car, more than a few users are going to look at the laundry list of adorably vowel-averse SaaS startups they keep throwing their money at and ask whether they actually need them. There’s a perfectly good email app that comes pre-installed on their phones. The same goes for the To-Do list and Notes apps. At some point, the subscription creep stops making sense.

The ongoing commitment of subscriptions is a massive burden, limiting our flexibility to adapt our spending as needs change. This financial load becomes a significant barrier to achieving financial well-being. We’re stuck in a subscription payment hamster wheel. And something is going to have to give.

Companies recognizing the potential drawbacks of subscriptions have started innovating within the model. Some offer flexible subscription options, allowing customers to pay for services or products on a usage basis. Others are exploring bundled subscriptions, providing diverse content or services at a reduced cost. These approaches address customer concerns while maintaining business benefits by prioritising customer value and flexibility.

But they’re still dodging around one simple fact. The best way for consumers to access software is to buy an app that does what they need and then choose whether or not to upgrade to the next version later. It’s a model that doesn’t require a spreadsheet of monthly expenses to wrangle alongside gas, electricity and medical bills. Although I’m sure there’s a subscription-based app to make it all easier. Roughly the cost of a coffee a month?

 

The Lantern (Written by Universal Monk)

Fog hushed the marsh as Josiah trudged through knee-high reeds. Somewhere ahead, a bell rang slow and distant.

Then she appeared. Barefoot. Dress torn. Eyes sad.

She held up a lantern.

“You dropped this,” she called out.

He raised his own. Still in hand. Still lit.

The girl stepped closer. “You dropped it when you drowned.”

The flame inside her lantern turned red. Josiah looked down. His boots were gone. Water up to his chest. Breath shallow.

Behind the glass of her lantern, a tiny version of him pounded and screamed.

The girl smiled. “I’ll take good care of you.”

END

 

This is an article on sci-hub, but I'd be happy to put it somewhere else more fediverse-ish if you all have any ideas where to do that.

Kopimism is a modern parody-religion Piracy Movement that treats information as sacred and believes copying and sharing it is a duty.

It began in Sweden and blends digital rights activism with a unique moral system built around creativity, collaboration, and freedom.

Kopimists don’t worship a "god" but follow principles like respecting privacy and remixing knowledge to improve the world.

 

In the early 2000s, the concept of “One Laptop Per Child” (OLPC) captured the imagination of the world. The ambitious project aimed to provide every child in the world with a low-cost, rugged, and connected laptop, revolutionizing education and bridging the digital divide. It didn't happen.

view more: ‹ prev next ›