Erikatharsis

• The right to solidarity, i.e. all should be allowed to partake in solidary action during a strike.
• The right of initiative and right to recall.
• The right to free software, or freedom from proprietary software.
• The right to a third place, i.e. ready access to physical spaces that allow for socializing with strangers.
• Freedom from eviction (mainly wrt rent strikes and squatting.)
• The right to democratic education.
• The right to cross borders.
• The right to be forgotten.
• The right to purpose, or freedom from meaningless labor. This includes the right to an employee fund.

And there are of course other things. I just think that under the world's current paradigm, these, at least individually, seem relatively attainable without a literal revolution.

♫ Which side are you on, which side are you on? ♫

My friend, I'm planning on switching to desktop Linux, and you sincerely expect me to make rational, informed decisions? /j

/srs It's because I'm an idiot, Jim.

Oracle are the VirtualBox people, right? I just installed that program today to try desktop Linux for the first time. I'm inferring from the comments under this post that Oracle apparently has some sort of negative reputation in the Linux community...? Frankly, I feel like a real troy-returning-with-pizza.jpeg right now.

That's the more common variant, but "embrace, extend, exterminate" is also used.

Honestly, I don't see why Threads couldn't be intended to destroy both Twitter foremost, and also the fediverse before it's big enough to pose any real threat: Mastodon has some two million monthly active users right now, which is tiny compared to Twitter/Threads, yes, but it's also not nothing, especially for what Mastodon is and how quickly it managed to reach that level of usage.

So I don't doubt that Threads has ill intentions for both the underdog and overdog. I just don't think that the fediverse can be killed that easily.

Are people really saying "the fediverse is doomed"?

To be frank, I still don't get it, but I also hardly qualify as a human to begin with.

I get the others, but why that last one?

Alright, to play the devil's advocate: the vast, vast majority of eggs that are sold are unfertilized, candled, and taken before there's any real chance of a visible embryo forming, even if they have been fertilized; and I don't think that even for the few fertilized eggs that do get sold and eaten, that an unnoticeably tiny bunch of stem cells could properly be called "meat", anyways.