1x48: Say You Want A Revolution

Thatā€™s pretty hot off the press!

Iā€™ll give it a go.

1 Like

When I was in middle school, people at my school, for some reason, almost all used Google+, possibly more than they used Facebook, so Iā€™d say that it did catch on in some smaller communities. However, towards the end of middle school and the beginning of high school, activity started moving over to Facebook, and at this point I use Google+ basically only for tech stuff, and Facebook for everything else, not out of preference but because thatā€™s where people are.

Not sure I know anyone who isnā€™t a tech person. :slight_smile:

Iā€™m still a user of G+. Itā€™s a rare signal in the noisy sea of social media. As @sil pointed out to me, @bryanlunduke is not on G+ at the moment so Iā€™m pinging him here to say Iā€™ve not got a box oā€™crap yet :). If youā€™ve sent a second one, you might want to double check with the other yank^Wfolks from the land of freedom and peace what form of words they used to address it.

1 Like

Yo! @bryanlunduke! Your integrity is being challenged. Step up.

Good show. I was a little surprised, in all the discussion of nutcase politicians and public disenchantment, that @sil didnā€™t draw any comparisons between UKIP and The Trump. Though I guess I just did :smile:

Mainly 'cos Iā€™d have had to explain Ukip to @jeremy and @bryanlunduke, which is more effort purveying their story than I really want to put in :smile:

1 Like

Isnā€™t that redundant?

The comment, made by @jeremy I think, about the low approval rate of congress made me think of a few things.

  1. The incident of the robot in Douglas Adamā€™s Hitchikerā€™s series. http://dotlizard.com/posts/2002/10/douglas-adams-on-democracy/

  2. A commentator I listened to remarked how Americans must be a bunch of self-loathers because, while they strongly disapprove of congress, over 90% of incumbents are re-elected. Which points to the Adamā€™s commentary above.

  3. I strongly suspect that there must be something fundamentally wrong with anyone wanting to get into politics, and yet they get votes.

  4. So, the whole circus makes me think of Einsteinā€™s definition of insanity.

Greg, I donā€™t think politicians are nut cases, many of them are intelligent, but people make the assumption that they are there to work for us. Given the vested interests and the amount of money in the political system it is generally not in the personal interests of politicians to help the general public. There are lucrative side lines in terms of promised future directorships, inside information or plain and simple cash to make it all too easy for them help themselves and expletive deleted the rest of us. We are often reduced to picking the lesser of two evils and for many the difference between the two is too small to be significant which explains why may of us feel disenfranchised.

Because of this we offered a limited choice at the election and most of the choices we can immediately rule out because even if a party is offering exactly what we want there is little point in voting for a minority party because unless they get a majority, which they wonā€™t, they have no chance of implementing their policies.

This can, and has in both the US and UK, lead to what is in effect a two party system. Any other party being largely politically impotent, they are able to help expand the debate but are unable to wield any political power. In effect they are reduced to shouting from the margins.

We need real change and that change is not in the interests of those who currently hold the power. This explains why Jeremy Corbyn is being attacked by the media and the establishment, including most of the parliamentary party in spite of being loved by many traditional Labour voters.

We are often reduced to picking the lesser of two evils and for many the difference between the two is too small to be significant which explains why may of us feel disenfranchised.

Yes. I approve of this statement. On the other hand, two things play into the discussion we had, both of which may indicate that so-called heroes have feet of clay.

Corbyn: http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/6196/full
Trump: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/donald-trump-just-stopped-being-funny-20150821

On Google+ only being for Open Source techie types thatā€™s because those are the people youā€™re following.
I searched for some other non-technical Communities and theyā€™re out there.
Knitting - 6,000+ members
Painting - 29,400+ member
Photography - 129,000+ members
Basketball - 8,000+ members
Book Club 16,000+ members

A person could be interested in multiple topics and so be a member of multiple communities which is a great way to filter out the baby pictures and food pictures unless youā€™re a member of Food Photography with nearly 200,000 members.

I have a simple way of describing the 3 main social networks.
Facebook - where you go to see what your friends and family are doing.
Twitter - where you go to see whatā€™s happening now
Google+ - where you go to connect with people who are into the same things as you even if they are on the other side of the world.

1 Like

I rather like your description!

To go even more away from Open Source on Google+

Skin Care (Community) - 45,000+ members
Brtiney Spears (Person) - over 360 million views
BBC News (Page) - 8.2+ million followers and nearly 600 million views
Bollywood (Community) - there are 2, 1 has 90,000+ members and the other 44,000+ members

G+ works great the way it is setup. You get to be part of the communities you like and can ignore the rest.
It it was called HobbyHub.com then it would make more sense other than being a terrible name held by a squatter.

Finally - these days I just follow people and stick them in a Circle, but I never view G+ using the Circles. Itā€™s just a handy reminder as to why Iā€™m following them rather than because I want to only see their posts when Iā€™m interested in that circle. I enjoy the mixed up posts. All my interests in one place.

I simply donā€™t click on ā€˜circlesā€™ anymore.
The only time I setup someone to follow is when I come into that realm.

In the UK the difference may be too small to be significant, Labor and the Tories are after all left of center if measured against the US political spectrum. However, I believe anybody who thinks that the Democratic party is the same as the Republican party here in the US is a either given to hyperbole or a complete nutter. Yes, they are both craven groups which pander to the moneyed class. However, if you think that if weā€™d had a Republican president for the last 7 years (rather than Obama who I agree is a disappointment) we would have :

  • a form of universal health care (albeit rather shitty) , or
  • that womenā€™s reproductive choice would be less constrained than it is now,
  • that we would have come to an at least half-assed agreement not to find an excuse to bomb Iran, or
  • that gays would be treated as equal under the (federal) law (or almost, not quite yet due to the knuckle draggers in the House),

then you sir or madam have a screw loose.

  • kg

ā€œI want a revolution.ā€

there, said it.

1 Like

Dammit. I blame Jono. (Not sure WHY I blame Jono yetā€¦ but I totally do.)

Luckily I just moved. Which means I have boxes of random crap Iā€™m about to throw out. Now I know where to send it!

1 Like

Are mismatched socks, orphaned individuals from the laundry, all the rage these days? :smile:

1 Like

I over-heard you can graph that now :zzz: