Fair.

It does make for a much more compelling allegory for society, as much like prison, it’s really hard to “exit” society.

While opting out of moderated social media is not difficult at all.

Right. Then I’ll just open up your banking history here on lemmy…

Oh wait.

And words have meaning. You can’t just point to their etymology and claim they can be used to refer to everything you consider slightly related.

The fact is, the word panopticon has very specific meaning, and specifically refers to prisons. And you didn’t even get it right. The original concept doesn’t involve constant surveillance, but the possibility of constant surveillance.

Otherwise every single room with someone wearing sunglasses in it, would be one, because you can’t tell whether that person might be looking at you at any given moment.

No. It’s a prison.

Moderated social media is not a prison. Lemmy does not make your financial history public. It does not make your whatsapp, telegram or signal messages public. It does not point a camera at your physical body for all to view at all times.

A panopticon is a prison model where surveillance is possible at all times, and nothing is private.

Moderated social media, is not a prison, and is not mutually exclusive with 100% private conversation outside any given platform, between any two individuals, or within any given group of individuals.

The reason PUBLIC forums need to be moderated is that otherwise they devolve instead of develop conversation.

In the private sphere, the equivalent action taken to mediate conversation is the ability for you to simply stop conversing with a given individual, or for a group to ostracize individuals that sabotage discourse.

Once you reach a group of large enough size, ostracizing no longer works, and you individually blocking someone does not prevent them from derailing topics for everyone else.

Are you sure you’re not just getting back what you’re putting in?

My experience has been so completely opposite, I simply have to assume we are using the platform in some fundamentally different way.

What communities are you frequenting?

The ones I sub and post to have been nice.

We sure did, others have already commented.

Why would you not condone it? A 17-year-old, is a “kid” to anyone about a decade older than that, but they also don’t just magically stop being “a kid” on their 18th birthday.

Most people enjoy sex, and most teenagers have an intense drive to explore it. What’s wrong with that?

Tell em how to be safe, maybe throw in some guidelines on place and time, and how to not disturb others with it, and let em.

But why would you not condone it, unless one of or both of the people involved are abusive or being taken advantage of?

That the adults related to the teenagers, feel it’s icky, has nothing to do with anything.

Most of my irl friends know my lemmy handle.

I’ve never considered that a limitation.

You only need one other person in addition to yourself, for a good discussion.

If anything, here I’m finding I actually get replies, because my comment didn’t drown among a hundred others.

In Finland, if you ask “miten menee” (how is it going) you’ll either get to hear someone’s life story, or a single word reply “menee” (it’s going) which amounts to “I don’t want to talk about it”. But the assumption is that the person asking is up to exchange a few genuine sentences.

Or, if someone is having a genuinely good day, you might get a few sentences explaining why things are looking up.

Hence, most people will go with literally neutral statements. An example, my go-to farewell is “päivänjatkoa” which is literally just “may the day continue”.

Most modern exchange services are semi-scams.

Most banks will let you use your card in other currencies, directly, and just do the exchange on their end.

And it’s usually really favorable too. If you’ve used your card abroad “like normal” for stuff like a restaurant meal, then you’ve used your banks currency exchange service.

It’ll still add up if you make a ton of small purchases, and it would be good to check what your particular bank actually charges for exchanges.

But, lots of places will pretend to offer to do the exchange for you, at sky-high rates, when really you can just charge your card directly, and get a much better rate via your bank.

Once saved a friend like 50 bucks when she bought a leather jacket on the expensive side during a cruise. The shop offered to do the exchange for her, as if that was necessary. I saw the rate and immediately told her to refuse, knowing our bank charges almost nothing for foreign currency charges. She would have fallen for it.

The guy you’re replying to, is saying the opposite.

Using an ATM usually gets you your banks exchanging rate, which depending on your bank, can be damn near free. (If the ATM tries to do the exchange for you, refuse, let your bank do it).

Same goes online. Paying with paypal, I never ever use their exchange service. Charging my card directly with the foreign currency is ALWAYS a better deal due to how good the exchange rate provided by my bank is.

Probably gonna need a second GPU tho? One for the game, one or this thing.

New video games.

Nono. Not bolts.

A. Bolt.

Most people have internal monologues.

It’s how we think things through, and usually the voice we hear, is our own. Which makes sense, because we can make it say whatever we like simply by thinking it.

But we often hear other peoples voices, too. Most common is probably the voice of a parent. You might imagine how they’ll sound when they scold you, if you think about doing something they won’t like.

It’s really not that weird that religious people claim to “hear” god. In the exact same way most people imagine what others would say in response to something they might say or do, the religious imagine how god or jesus might react.

But really, they’re just hearing their own mind frame their own thoughts in the way they picture that their religious icons might react to their thoughts and actions.

It’s not really a higher power speaking to them. They’re just interpreting the way the human mind works as supernatural, because their upbringing and belief system has them constantly asking themselves “what would god have me do” the same way we all ask “what would my friends and family have me do”.

There’s really no way to dispel this illusion, except by explaining internal monologues, and giving them time to think about it. You might also have the religious compare notes on what “god” is telling them, untill they dee how each of them hear whatever they would themselves imagine god would say. But this is something they really don’t like doing.

Quick tip for anyone in this situation.

Start by using search to clear everything in your inbox from a particular sender you know wont have sent anything important.

Don’t catch up by going one mail at a time, catch up going one sender at a time. You’ll be done within a day.

Now you’re just being deliberately obtuse. That’s not what the word “conscription” means, and I’m pretty sure you know that.

You’re just being an ass because a year of mandatory service is what the law uses conscription for in Finland, DURING PEACETIME.

In wartime, being unable to leave the country, forced to fight on the front lines, is also conscription.

Conscription, also known as the draft in American English, is the practice in which the compulsory enlistment in a national service, mainly a military service, is enforced by law.

“you cannot leave the country and will be kidnapped and forced to die a horrible death on the front lines”

When done by a state, that is literally still within the definition.

Good? No.

Normal? Absolutely not.

Justifiable? Arguably.

The way it’s actually happening? I don’t even know. You didn’t initially comment on that or the posted article, you commented on the general ability of a leader being able to send citizens to fight.

As horrifying as it is, and as someone who lives in a country where that question could become very relevant very suddenly, I think you’re wrong. The conclusion I came to, is that the ability for a nations government to “trade in” the few to save the many, is not optional, if continued long-term existence is desired.

You’re free to disagree on where the line for where that price is too great to pay in comparison to surrender, and you surely know better than I do where it is for Ukraine.

But it does exist. Countries the world over give their leaders the power to wield their human populations as a shield against threats. There is absolutely nothing unusual about that gruesome reality.

As for what I’m suggesting you look into, that would be the stuff you don’t get to see from a first-hand perspective. Statistics, large scale policy, international relations, industry and economic trends.

You’re presenting a distinction without a difference.

Both are effectively the same thing, a citizen pressed into service, against their will.

Jail-time is the best case scenario, and in no way intrinsic to the concept.