10 ms·

The article is clearly a virtue signal. If the person developing the solution doesnt want to pay for the .io domain, then so be it. They don't have to get the m

• zogrodea 3y ago
  Why, if not for the person's morals, would they want to avoid the .io domain? What benefit would they have through that action?
  • otachack 3y ago
    Saving money is another good reason. IO domains are inflated due to popularity, at least last time I checked.
  • mym1990 3y ago
    TLDs can disappear under certain circumstances, so long term there is a small risk of that. Depending on the TLD, it can also be less recognizable or downright fishy to some. .io has become popularized by the tech scene, but without context it is not very descriptive.
• durkie 3y ago
  how is it a "virtue signal"? what are they signalling? i'm curious where morality fits in to anything in your worldview if telling the (well-documented) history of a forcible displacement of a people is "virtue signalling" and "getting the morality into it".
  • riffic 3y ago
    a signal of competence, by fundamentally understanding how domains work.
  • dijit 3y ago
    Virtue signaling is the expression of a conspicuous, self-righteous moral viewpoint with the intent of communicating good character. It doesn't actually have to be virtuous, it only needs to signal virtue to others. Virtue signalling usually does not genuinely solve anything anyway it's merely supposed to impress upon you that "this person is good", that's the entire goal. Whether it's meaningful or not doesn't enter into it.
    • Turing_Machine 3y ago
      A prime example: "Acknowledging that you're on Comanche (or whoever) land". This "acknowledgment" never seems to involve paying any rent to the Comanche for being on "their land", nor doing anything else that actually benefits the Comanche. Taking the 15 seconds to add this to your social media profile means you can signal to everyone what a Good Person you are without ever having to actually do anything.
      • pookha 3y ago
        I like your example. The Comanche were imperialists that almost exterminated the Apache....Raided a thousand miles into Mexico and into Tropical environments. Killed everything in sight. Wiped out thousands of naive white settlers. And when they killed it wasn't quick. Many accounts of them skinning people alive (some children). US was only able to get a handle on the Comanche by killing off their food supply, and that was deep into the 1870's. After they surrendered the war chief (who was psychotic) became a successful rancher and would go on hunts with US presidents. Which just goes to show how small the line between full blown raider and adjusted law abiding member of society is. And maybe that's why people feel the need to virtue signal. subconscious hedge.
      • pseudalopex 3y ago
        Some indigenous people believe land acknowledgements are a good 1st step. Some believe they are a waste of time. But the 2nd group don't claim the 1st group don't exist. Voluntary land tax programs exist.[1] They seem to benefit from land acknowledgements. [1] https://nativegov.org/news/voluntary-land-taxes/ https://nativegov.org/news/voluntary-land-taxes/
        • Turing_Machine 3y ago
          It doesn't matter what they "believe". They get little or no tangible benefit from someone posting that bullshit (and it is bullshit) on their Facebook or Twitter profile. > Voluntary land tax programs exist. I'm not seeing any actual dollar figures there, nor in any of the linked examples, except the Duwamish site which mentions some guy paying $18/month. The mean rent for a one bedroom apartment in Seattle is around $2,000/month. Paying a token amount like that doesn't make it any less virtue-signaling.
  • javajosh 3y ago
    I think you ably demonstrate the all or nothing fallacy that powers this type of bully advocacy. My way or the highway is used to get people on the same page at first. Then it's used to make more and more tenuous assertions about morality, assertions which coincidentally conform very specifically and in great detail to the needs wants desires and worldviews of the bully. The sooner the victim rejects the entire program, the better. Morality is not and has never been a simple issue easily resolved by dogma. In fact, I'd argue the the worst periods of human misery are dominated by dogmatic thinking and righteous bullying. It is bitterly ironic that people who enjoy the fruit of freedom willfully seek to undermine that progress. It is everyone's right to be stupid if they so choose but so too. Is it my right to judge them self-destructive and contemptible.
• Eumenes 3y ago
  exactly, the 'about' page, is all I needed to see
  • riffic 3y ago
    rad that only makes me like the author more.
  • bigstrat2003 3y ago
    I looked at the about page because of your comment, and wow you were right. I've rarely seen such a concentrated collection of "I'm a good person who believes good things" self-pats on the back. Really cringe.
    • raincole 3y ago
      It reads like a Twitter profile (for better or worse).
    • PhasmaFelis 3y ago
      Looking at the page, I assume you mean that she's queer and vaccinated? (And not concealing those things)
      • bigstrat2003 3y ago
        Mainly the vaccination thing. Your vaccine status is utterly irrelevant to a blog. There is zero reason anyone would state that unless they have a strong moral belief about vaccination and wish to make a public statement that they are doing the correct thing as they see it. It's really cringe, like I said. I don't conceal which vaccines I get - if it's relevant to the conversation I have no problem mentioning it. But neither do I proactively tell people so that they know I'm One Of The Good Ones. I didn't even see the queer thing you mentioned, but I also left the page pretty quickly once I realized it was just going to be the author patting herself on the back for social status.
        • PhasmaFelis 3y ago
• earthboundkid 3y ago
  And posting your comment is vice signaling.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]