silent_water

yes, this is true. no, this isn't why wages haven't kept up with productivity growth or why you must work 40 hours to sustain yourself. you have to work because profit earned must increase and paying you even one iota more than you need to be able to show up to work again tomorrow is a loss of profit. if they could make you work 80 hours a week or 160, they would in heartbeat.

thankfully, this is outlawed because labor movements of the past fought to enshrine in law a limit on how much you can be forced to work and set a minimum bar for how much they can pay you. these laws are under fire - I explore why in the rest of this reply - and will be repealed eventually if labor does not resist collectively.

however, the rate of profit always decreases on a long enough timescale because of dead labor (technology, machines, etc), inter-capitalist competition - capitalists will steal profit from each other if there's more to be had - and because infinite growth is impossible so eventually externalities will always overcome the creation of new capital.

consequently, capital accumulates in the hands of the capital-owning class - an ever-shrinking group of them, at that - and this continues until you, the worker, make so little that you cannot actually show up to work the next day - the loss of social reproduction. reproduction here doesn't only refer to progeny but also feeding, clothing, housing, etc. yourself and your family, the meeting of the basic necessities that allow you to continue working, including your health - physical and mental. capital eternally strives to reduce what it must subsidize on your behalf as ensuring you can take better care of yourself reduces profits. a capitalist that makes more profit outcompetes and drives out of business all others who choose to make less profit, eventually.

this is also why capitalism has cyclical recessions, a fact predicted in the 1870s and termed crises of capitalism, when capital has accumulated in too few hands, profit can no longer be made, and workers struggle to feed themselves. you're just noticing Marx's second law - the law of capital accumulation.

idk, I just know that the old instance already have problems with power users and reifying that will make the problem worse.

I think this was always an intended feature (I've certainly been hearing about it for years as something people want/devs want to add), in addition to a user tagging system (i.e. users adding tags to their own usernames (e.g. pronoun tags). the main difference, though, was that it was something the poster or mods/admins could add and not something for the userbase at large to vote on. I think making it a voting system allows abuse. like consider a large group of transphobes adding tags to posts in trans comms, for instance.

a trusted user system is it's own can of worms.

no, we don't have downvotes on hexbear and this is what they looked like when we did. it means bad post.

nah, it was a politically conscious choice to set up something like reddit, outside the control of capital and the state. the devs have written about it.

nah, they're just good at posting. up your game.

unfortunately other data is not encouraging , the number of servers is both down since the exodus and in the recent month.

this is normal. we'll go through a lot of similar waves. people start servers, realize they're a lot of work, and then abandon them. servers that foster a healthy community will survive. hexbear's worst cycle involved losing the entire administrative team just weeks after a large percentage of the website left. don't sweat the growing pains - work together to learn, grow, and change.

lol the US security apparatus is bad but it's not that bad. you might get put on a watchlist though.

FOSS hacks the copyright system to build a software commons independent of corporation, guaranteeing the freedoms of users and developers - what part of that statement isn't political?

how can privacy ever be stripped of political content? it's inherently about social forces - ie politics.

1. those shares don't give you voting rights

2. those shares amount to a tiny fraction of the total value of the company

3. without the employees there would be no company

you try to square those three facts

a gift economy is also an exchange of goods but it's decidedly not capitalism - no one earns any profit and there's no flow converting money into capital and capital back into money.