wulrus

I remember the “big movement” when Twitter turned into a right wing cesspool.

At first, the biggest problem was that there were TWO main alternatives: Mastodon and Bluesky. So those who left split into two groups, ending up with a dead timeline, missing out on news. (I and my “bubble” use it to keep up with Covid vaccines, politics, safety etc.)

I joined the Mastodon group, because it solves the problem of a single crazy billionaire potentially buying & enshittifying it. But I fully admit that it is not user friendly at all. People who are not in IT just want it to WORK, like Twitter used to. They don’t want to “educate themselves” about servers, fediverse and networks. The user experience clearly hasn’t even been a thing. It’s techies writing software for themselves. What it needs is a full analysis of the experience from the start: Who are you, user, why are you considering Mastodon, what are your expectations, what are the experiences in the first 30 seconds after entering “mastadon” (oh, you misspelled it?) or “twitter alternative” into a search engine, etc. “pick an instance” is already the passive-aggressive demand nobody wants to hear.

In the end, my instance was shut down without a fair warning, all the reconnected and new contacts lost, no option to move. Trying Bluesky now, but many stayed at Twitter (now X), moved to Mastodon with or without success (most onto my dead instance), or gave up on microblogging.

I think we need something simple again. I remember what SUSE did for Linux in the 90s. Linux users were all like: Only debian is even somewhat useable, but if you should really do LFS. Non-techies willing to switch for “political” or other reasons were hit in the face with “Pick a distro!!!”. SUSE has been called “the Windows among the Linux distros” by those people, but it did the right thing. It provided exactly the simplification we needed: “This is Linux, you simply buy it on CD in a retail store like your other software, you run the installer.” It was a good thing.

IRC is the one good old thing that still works great. When they tried to enshittify freenode, we just moved, collectively. Many non-IT channels & servers died after 2010, though.

In the 90s during the first "mild hype", I had Suse for quite a while, twice. Same problem with unavailable software though, I remember PGP Disc not being available back then. I remember the cool kids talking about Red Hat and Debian, you must have been one of them.

Probably going back now, since my 2011 hardware won't work with Windows 11.

• One important metric: m³ / (hour*$), so how much it can filter for how much money
• Also the volume on the setting that gives the filtration power needed. Often it is best to get a bigger one, run on middle or low level, especially for office or bedroom.
• How much m³ / hour overall? When it is against dust, allergens, pm2.5 etc., filtering your room volume once per hour is decent. To protect from viral infections, e. g. at a dentist or doctor, 6x the volume of the room is ideal. For private use, it's nice when it can do once per hour on a lower setting, and for occasional parties 6x of that on a high, loud setting to avoid spread of viruses.

Pretty good for your money is the Corsi-Rosenthal Box mentioned already. As for things that don't require assembly, Trotec beats all prices in Germany, e. g. the 250E or 350E: https://de.trotec.com/shop/design-luftreiniger-airgoclean-250-e.html That would provide more than you need for typical home use already. For a single room such as your bedroom, you can get something really decent for less than $250.

The ones that are below HEPA standard are not as bad as somebody mentioned, imo. Against many things, such as dust or allergens, they should be fine. I'm buying only HEPA filters myself, though; doesn't really save much otherwise.

I came to a very similar conclusion recently: https://lemmy.world/comment/11880279

Let's hope that Brazil creates a mass-movement that makes it easier to follow. Aren't they even like the world majority in Portuguese?

I remember the "big movement" when Twitter turned into a right wing cesspool.

At first, the biggest problem was that there were TWO main alternatives: Mastodon and Bluesky. So those who left split into two groups, ending up with a dead timeline, missing out on news. (I and my "bubble" use it to keep up with Covid vaccines, politics, safety etc.)

I joined the Mastodon group, because it solves the problem of a single crazy billionaire potentially buying & enshittifying it. But I fully admit that it is not user friendly at all. People who are not in IT just want it to WORK, like Twitter used to. They don't want to "educate themselves" about servers, fediverse and networks. The user experience clearly hasn't even been a thing. It's techies writing software for themselves. What it needs is a full analysis of the experience from the start: Who are you, user, why are you considering Mastodon, what are your expectations, what are the experiences in the first 30 seconds after entering "mastadon" (oh, you misspelled it?) or "twitter alternative" into a search engine, etc. "pick an instance" is already the passive-aggressive demand nobody wants to hear.

In the end, my instance was shut down without a fair warning, all the reconnected and new contacts lost, no option to move. Trying Bluesky now, but many stayed at Twitter (now X), moved to Mastodon with or without success (most onto my dead instance), or gave up on microblogging.

I think we need something simple again. I remember what SUSE did for Linux in the 90s. Linux users were all like: Only debian is even somewhat useable, but if you should really do LFS. Non-techies willing to switch for "political" or other reasons were hit in the face with "Pick a distro!!!". SUSE has been called "the Windows among the Linux distros" by those people, but it did the right thing. It provided exactly the simplification we needed: "This is Linux, you simply buy it on CD in a retail store like your other software, you run the installer." It was a good thing.

IRC is the one good old thing that still works great. When they tried to enshittify freenode, we just moved, collectively. Many non-IT channels & servers died after 2010, though.

Just my last two orders:

• expensive quality Covid test -> get the cheapest, which stopped working properly at Alpha / Beta
• 3M respirators for $ 4 a piece -> a literal fake, hard to see, but it breaks already when putting on. 1 hour in support chat to convince them that something is wrong, but only got my money back, no investigation into the seller or product

I will stay there for now though, because it's still a great software, easy to use

Covid has already been proven to be a contributor as well: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16966

Das war eigentlich eine relativ einfache Zeit; Anträge wie die von OP sind meist direkt, selten mit einer freundlichen Nachfrage durchgegangen. Wahrscheinlich waren "red flags" in der Begründung, von denen es leider dutzende gab, z. B. früheres Interesse an Zeitsoldat, auf das nicht eingegangen wurde. Bei einigen ist auch der Haken in "Bereitschaft zu Auslandseinsätzen" irgendwie in das Formular bei der Musterung geraten, z. B. indirekt durch "wenn es unbedingt sein müsste, dann Marine" oder ähnliche Bemerkungen. Das war alles kein Problem, solange es erklärt wird und nicht widersprüchlich begründet wird, dass man schon Jahre vor der Musterung total dagegen war. Mit Rechtsmitteln wäre es nach erster Ablehnung sicher durchgegangen.

Es war deutlich schwerer, wenn die Einberufung zum Wehrdienst schon da war; dann immer nur mit Vorladung zur mündlichen Verhandlung, was aber auch mit guter Beratung geklappt hat.

Ich kenne aber auch Leute, die sich geweigert haben, die Begründung an die Rechtslage anzupassen und unbedingt ehrlich bleiben wollten. Verständlich, aber bei bestimmten Gründen dann garantierte Ablehnung. Auch in der einfachen Zeit musste erkennbar sein, dass aus Gewissensgründen bewaffnete Auseinandersetzungen zwischen Staaten immer und grundsätzlich abgelehnt werden, wie bei OP.

Siehe auch meine Antwort auf OP.

Juristisch nicht perfekt wasserdicht, aber ist ziemlich sicher ohne Nachfragen durchgegangen, oder?

• "Gewissen" explizit drin zu haben ist essentiell , weil das Grundrecht so formuliert ist. Sehr gut!
• Grundsätzlich bewaffnete Auseinandersetzungen zwischen Staaten abzulehnen und die Einsicht, die dazu führt, sind ein großer Pluspunkt. Genau so ist es in einschlägigen Urteilen gefordert. Rechtskräftige Ablehnungen gab es oft, wenn nicht grundsätzlich jeder Krieg abgelehnt wird, oder wenn man sagt "nichts für mich, aber sollten andere machen, die es mögen".
• Die fast-politische lange Ausführung ist nicht notwendig, aber gut gemacht; mit "wirtschaftlichen Interessen" und der "finanziell starken Oberschicht" wird es etwas zu politisch, wenn man es ganz rechtssicher machen müsste.
• Ein persönliches Erlebnis, durch das die gut dargelegte hypotetische Möglichkeit des Schießens auf einen Freund oder jemanden, der es sein könnte, gestützt würde, wäre sehr hilfreich. Z. B. Tod eines Angehörigen - muss nicht mit Gewalt sein, denn die Brücke zum Krieg ist ja ausgeführt. Rein hypothetische logische Schlussfolgerungen ohne persönlichen Bezug wurden nicht so gern gesehen.
• Damit würde es auch auf die in etwa erwartete Länge kommen. Das ist reichlich kurz, aber zum Glück fehlt nichts Essentielles.
• Es ist sehr schön konkret - kein allgemeines "gegen Gewalt" o. ä.
• Wenn es keinen separaten Antrag gab (z. B. bei Musterung), könnte der erste als Antrag zu verstehende Satz mit mehr Rechtssicherheit sein. Z. B. "Hiermit beantrage ich meine Anerkennung als Kriegsdienstverweiterer gemäß Art. 4 Abs. 3 GG". Sehe aber andererseits nicht, wie man selbst mit Böswilligkeit einem Laien unterstellen könnte, dass das anders gemeint ist.
• Vorzüge des Zivildienstes sind ein Fettnäpfchen, das hier knapp - aber immerhin - umschifft wird. Am sichersten war, Zivildienst gar nicht zu erwähnen. Ganz falsch wäre, in die Richtung zu argumentieren "Wehrdienst gut, Zivildienst (für mich) besser, weil ...". Ist hier aber nicht passiert.

Gut gemacht!