Substack is your answer. We can have respectful discussion and disagreements on here, which is surely the point? Twitter just creates echo-chambers - you can see how you are being pushed into an echo chamber just by using it. That is not going to change no matter who runs it.
4Chan is great but it's too ephemeral, which is entirely the point of 4Chan.
Substack is your answer. We can have respectful discussion and disagreements on here, which is surely the point? Twitter just creates echo-chambers - you can see how you are being pushed into an echo chamber just by using it. That is not going to change no matter who runs it.
4Chan is great but it's too ephemeral, which is entirely the point of 4Chan.
In all honesty, substack is also an echo chamber. No normie is using it and while we have disagreements on the technicalities of how the distopian nightmare wil come to be - see the discussions around your point about musk, on which, btw, I agree with you completely - by now here we all agree that covid was a scam and it's being used to usher in the great reset.
The problem is that online communication is inherently prone to end up in echo chambers, especially if censorship (deleting comments) is involved. While substack is clearly superior to Twitter, it's not a solution unless normies will be willing to actually properly listen to our point of view. Before that happens, substack might be bought, taken down, or you'll need a digital id to access the internet.
Eventually I see Twitter as a kind of bridge with Substack. Many Substack articles are referenced and hyperlinked there and get brief descriptions. It will be short form extending to long form. I am optimistic.
How many minds have been changed from exchanging comments with random strangers online? Online communication has its limitations and "echo chambers" may be a good thing. I've been on FB and there was lots of nastiness because there's no face or voice to humanize the individual you disagreed with.
Why are dictionaries so neglected? Their going woke (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/woke ) seems a fairly recent phenomenon. Are you a so-called "reporter" (even if specializing in physics)? For decades I've complained about dictionaries apparently being banned from newsrooms.
I first heard this term normie from esoteric futurist and bot researcher Clif High. His statistical searching and data mining over many years of cyberspace identifies trends and subsets of populations and investigates what is on their minds and to some extent tries to estimate a future set of events that might erupt.
A group of normies always clusters out as with the blue pill metaphor. So normie even exists as a statistical cluster with loadings on a lot of interesting variables.
Reporters usually get things wrong. The more you know about something the easier it is to see where they mess up. It's never a good idea to bet the farm on something you read in "the news".
As for running to a dictionary to hunt down neologisms, only if it matters. "Normie" smells like "boogie", just a trendy brush to paint whole swaths of people in one stroke, ultimately meaningless.
"Normie" should have been so obvious as to not require a dictionary. The term obviously implies conformist. I didn't look it up until you demanded a definition, whereas I did have to look up zeta potential. (A Midwestern Doctor uses that term a lot.)
Substack is your answer. We can have respectful discussion and disagreements on here, which is surely the point? Twitter just creates echo-chambers - you can see how you are being pushed into an echo chamber just by using it. That is not going to change no matter who runs it.
4Chan is great but it's too ephemeral, which is entirely the point of 4Chan.
In all honesty, substack is also an echo chamber. No normie is using it and while we have disagreements on the technicalities of how the distopian nightmare wil come to be - see the discussions around your point about musk, on which, btw, I agree with you completely - by now here we all agree that covid was a scam and it's being used to usher in the great reset.
The problem is that online communication is inherently prone to end up in echo chambers, especially if censorship (deleting comments) is involved. While substack is clearly superior to Twitter, it's not a solution unless normies will be willing to actually properly listen to our point of view. Before that happens, substack might be bought, taken down, or you'll need a digital id to access the internet.
Normies are welcome to their boosters, and mine, too.
Eventually I see Twitter as a kind of bridge with Substack. Many Substack articles are referenced and hyperlinked there and get brief descriptions. It will be short form extending to long form. I am optimistic.
How many minds have been changed from exchanging comments with random strangers online? Online communication has its limitations and "echo chambers" may be a good thing. I've been on FB and there was lots of nastiness because there's no face or voice to humanize the individual you disagreed with.
I don't know who a "normie" is. Like "the masses"..a blanket term but what does it mean?
Didn't even have to go to urban dictionary: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/normie
Why are dictionaries so neglected? Their going woke (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/woke ) seems a fairly recent phenomenon. Are you a so-called "reporter" (even if specializing in physics)? For decades I've complained about dictionaries apparently being banned from newsrooms.
I'm not a reporter. Just a physicist.
More like a bot.
I first heard this term normie from esoteric futurist and bot researcher Clif High. His statistical searching and data mining over many years of cyberspace identifies trends and subsets of populations and investigates what is on their minds and to some extent tries to estimate a future set of events that might erupt.
A group of normies always clusters out as with the blue pill metaphor. So normie even exists as a statistical cluster with loadings on a lot of interesting variables.
All the better! My dad was a physicist, and I considered a double major with physics. They use reference books extensively (even more so than do chemists). Though dictionary.com claim it be "An Americanism dating back to 1950–55", I checked a treeware dictionary; Webster's Third New International, Unabridged ©1966. Sad to say, it goes straight from normergy to normo-. Still, since you're at Substack, you should have access to online dictionaries. University professor physicists have a lot of interactions with reporters and see how badly they do it. Has this spared you?
Reporters usually get things wrong. The more you know about something the easier it is to see where they mess up. It's never a good idea to bet the farm on something you read in "the news".
As for running to a dictionary to hunt down neologisms, only if it matters. "Normie" smells like "boogie", just a trendy brush to paint whole swaths of people in one stroke, ultimately meaningless.
You're missing the point. "Normies" are those who buy the propaganda campaign and do its boogie-woogie (get the "covid", meaning dybbuk spelled backwards, https://astutenews.com/2020/06/on-the-occult-meaning-of-the-term-covid/ shots), while disparaging Substack.
"Normie" should have been so obvious as to not require a dictionary. The term obviously implies conformist. I didn't look it up until you demanded a definition, whereas I did have to look up zeta potential. (A Midwestern Doctor uses that term a lot.)
It's a broad term that means nothing.
Tiresome. Publish your own dictionary, or go mute.
I'd disagree that substack allows disagreement but i don't want to get banned for disagreeing that substack allows for disagreement.
Ok that sounded funnier in my head.
Bonus points for mentioning 4 chan.