stepan

i thought it was an actual shitpost at first, i would even upvote if not for the malicious link

earn money by looking into your phone's camera?

🍾🔥

cool!

It's pretty popular with GrapheneOS users because on GrapheneOS, you can install any app entirely without network permission, or disable the permission afterwards. It might be my favorite feature of GrapheneOS.

I personally use Lawnchair, and while I really like it, it has one big flaw - app drawer folders. It does have them, but you have to create and manage them in settings and it's really slow and annoying. I have around 260 apps, and sorting them this way would be almost impossible.

I was looking into other launchers, including Nova, but then I found JINA. It's an app drawer, not a launcher, and it has tons of features - nested folders, tags, filters... No in-app purchases or ads, even though it's not FOSS. It's ugly, but exactly what I needed.

And now the best part: Lawnchair has an option to open an app on the swipe up gesture instead of opening the drawer. That way I replaced it's drawer with JINA without switching to another launcher like Nova.

now*

The main problem I see is that earth is not infinite. You have finite resources that are "owned by everyone" by their nature, and capitalism's competitivness incentivizes their destruction.

World's countries are allowing companies to destroy the climate, forests, and oceans. They (mostly) know it's bad, but if they stopped, they would fall behind. And it doesn't really matter whether the countries are capitalist inside or not - they are competing against each other.

I don't see why it would be different if instead of countries it would be companies competing. If you have two giant companies fishing in ocean, how would you convince one of them to fish less so it doesn't destroy the whole fish population? Any fish it doesn't catch is a gift for the competing company. And sure, two companies can make an agreement, but what if there are hundreds of them? You would think it's logical for all of them to agree on limits so they don't kill all the fish - that would be the end every single fishing company. But how is that different from what's happening with climate change right now?

I've seen a video where someone asked a Czech anarcho-capitalist how would the law in ancap work. He responded that the international law is an ancap law. You don't have a Global State enforcing law on the world's countries. They do whatever they want on their own property (land), and they form coalitions by free agreement to maintain peace and order and to deal with stuff like climate change.

Well, when I look at the world right now, I feel like that's the ultimate argument against ancap. We don't have anything resembling forever global peace, like some people belived after the cold war. The planet is getting warmer and warmer, despite all the global organizations and agreements. Competion is a competition. I don't really see a way out other than a global state or global anarchy - the leftist kind of one.

And I don't want to start on why I think a global state is a terrible idea - that's not what you asked - but I'm obviously for the latter.

I should rewatch Tenet. I think I liked it, and I see criticism all over the internet recently.

Dark skinned people don't need sunscreen, thus don't steal it, white people need it but white people don't steal. (not my opinion oc, for ppl reading this out of context)

Use Revanced if you're on android

If you mean state censorship then not really, as the opinions of those in power are usually not the majority. One example would be climate change: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/22/spiral-of-silence-climate-action-very-popular-why-dont-people-realise

Another example from Czechia where I live - polls show the majority of people support marriage for all (gay marriage) and euthanasia, but the political landscape renders both quite impossible to be allowed in the foreseeable future.

Chaotic aur to the rescue