mesamunefire@piefed.social
on 15 Jan 13:13
nextcollapse
On the plus side pixelfed seems to be popping off. And every time one of the big companies f up, we get a slow trickle of new users. Which is much more sustainable in the long run.
Alright. I’m finally hearing enough about pixelfed to start looking into it. Are there any good resources for jumping in?
I see it’s decentralized. Do I just go to pixelfed.org and create an account, or is this like the fediverse where you have to pick an instance to get started?
Edit: for anyone looking, the Pixelfed website has a list of instances, so you can try to find an instance that most appeals to you.
It’s part of the Fediverse, so if you’re on a Pixelfed instance you can see other servers running Mastodon, et al. Pick an instance that seems like it feels nice to you.
mesamunefire@piefed.social
on 15 Jan 21:17
collapse
Yeah it can be that easy. Pixelfed.social is the big one.
Or you can go with one of the others to share the load.
I personally spun my own instance up just to try it out a couple of days ago. It's neart and very perforant.
renard_roux@beehaw.org
on 15 Jan 14:00
nextcollapse
“… reports Chinese state propaganda branch, through western media …” 🙄
SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
on 15 Jan 18:53
nextcollapse
Don’t give a shit
recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee
on 16 Jan 17:51
collapse
He said to the empty room absolutely devoid of anyone who asked or wants to know what he cares about.
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de
on 15 Jan 19:26
nextcollapse
I mean, if TikTok US were more like TikTok China, with emphasis on educational content, there would never have been a problem.
Have you ever thought about why international TikTok is the way it is?
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de
on 16 Jan 21:35
collapse
The userbase and lack of content curation/moderation has everything to do with that. The Chinese version gets a whallop of censorship as well, but yeah, their motivation to help other countries educate the young or avoid brain-rot is well in the negatives.
spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org
on 15 Jan 19:59
nextcollapse
I’ve been very cynical about the TikTok ban, and assumed people would work around it by sideloading the APK on Android phones, after it was removed from the app stores (which, as I detailed in this comment, could theoretically get random users who share the APK with friends prosecuted by the federal government and charged with a $5000 per user fine)
but this is exceeding my wildest expectations
“oh, but it’s full of Chinese propaganda!!!” people will whine. cool. don’t care. Twitter and Facebook are full of American propaganda, no one seems to be falling over themselves to ban those apps from app stores.
if propaganda is the concern, have schools teach critical thinking and how to recognize propaganda techniques. they won’t do that, of course, because they want people to be susceptible to American propaganda.
haha class solidarity go brrr. the average American worker has more in common with the average Chinese worker than they do with an American oligarch. all of the American propaganda about how Chinese people are inherently untrustworthy and nefarious is gonna fall apart as people interact with actual Chinese people and realize “oh they’re pretty much just like me, other than the language barrier”.
and TikTok-style shortform video is very nearly the ideal medium for surmounting that language barrier. it was already commonplace to have captions in TikTok videos. start captioning videos on RedNote in both English and Chinese and bang, language differences don’t matter nearly as much anymore.
schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
on 15 Jan 20:22
nextcollapse
LoamImprovement@beehaw.org
on 15 Jan 22:07
collapse
You say that like any of the conservative controlled courts give a single flying fuck about precedent. They will embrace this ruling to foist religious doctrine on people who don’t want it and reject it to prohibit any other material they find unsavory, in the same breath, even. The rule of law has been dead for a long time in the states.
Not that I care about TikTok one way or another, but one of the best arguments I’ve seen against banning it dealt with supposed protection of Americans’ data. And I’m pretty sure that’s the approach that lawmakers have taken with this; it’s not that Chinese propaganda is bad, it’s that China shouldn’t have this much private info on Americans. I believe that’s the primary angle they’ve taken to get around First Amendment concerns.
Anyway, the argument is, “Oh, but it’s OK for US tech companies to harvest data? That’s it’s OK that we have weak privacy and data protection laws? As long as US companies are doing it, then it’s not a problem?” Because, remember the laws says that the company becomes “unavailable” in the US if not sold to an American company. Presumably, if TikTok were sold to a US company, then the app could continue with no issue, tracking and collecting tons of data on Americans to be packaged and sold to the highest bidders.
I will admit, I was somewhat more pro-ban before hearing that argument. But now I’m more neutral. I don’t use it, so I’m not/shouldn’t be affected. But the government trying to hide behind data privacy and protection to ban TikTok does feel rather empty.
spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org
on 16 Jan 17:23
collapse
And I’m pretty sure that’s the approach that lawmakers have taken with this
well, sometimes…I linked in this comment to some statements made by the Republican congressman who sponsored the original bill. he was pretty clear that he wanted the ban because he thinks TikTok is pushing propaganda, not just from the Chinese, but the Chinese Communist Party (which has been a long-standing right-wing bogeyman - that congressman was even the chair of the “House Select Committee on the CCP”)
I believe that’s the primary angle they’ve taken to get around First Amendment concerns.
this is true, in the same way that Trump in his first campaign promised a “Muslim ban” and then when they tried to actually implement it they realized they needed to frame it as a “travel ban…applying to countries that happen to have a lot of Muslims…oh and also North Korea because look at us, we’re definitely not discriminating against people based solely on religion”
everyone (except the right-wing hacks on the Supreme Court) saw through the “travel ban” facade pretty easily. it’s been disappointing to see how many people uncritically repeat “well, there’s a data privacy angle to it too…” as if it’s a legitimate justification and not just another facade.
the average American worker has more in common with the average Chinese worker than they do with an American oligarch
The average American worker has also more in common with the average Chinese worker than they do with an American oligarch Chinese oligarch and Chinese dictator. So your argument is not very valid.
all of the American propaganda about how Chinese people are inherently untrustworthy and nefarious is gonna fall apart as people interact with actual Chinese people and realize “oh they’re pretty much just like me, other than the language barrier”.
No one says that Chinese people are worse or better than Americans or any other people on this planet. We’re all the same. The problem here is the dictatorship in China that collects data of Americans and other people around the globe as others in this thread already have said. The Chinese people are fine, the Chinese government is not.
It’s an upside down world where one thinks banning Tiktok isn’t censorship and government overreach; but having the freedom to chose what social media to participate in, is.
A yes, like the freedom to buy a Windows licence to run basic software, or the freedom to have a TV that updates to include unremovable banner ads. The freedom to give all your freedom away, so essential for innovation. /s
You’re argument is basically that you should have the right to to ruin yourself. Look, that normally has merit, because people know what’s best for them. But, I think it’s pretty clear that when it comes to tech people don’t know what’s best for them.
Meanwhile, within TikTok, it’s pretty clear that censorship is openly endorsed. You can’t even say “gun” on TikTok, and god knows how much user information they have to “play around” with.
You’re argument is basically that you should have the right to to ruin yourself.
Look, I agree with you that TikTok is bad, but… YES, freedom means the ability to choose, good or bad.
If you want someone to blame for this, blame the US government for allowing US tech companies to become so predatory and gross that young people literally prefer a foreign product that may be profiling them. It’s not like data collection and censorship isn’t rife on Xitter or FB, and the reality for most Americans is that the US government has more ability to use their data to directly harm them than the CCP does. No one is worried that the Chinese government is going to show up in Alabama with CPS in tow because a teen revealed they’re trans online.
I don’t believe for a second people use TikTok because they have objections to the data collecting practices of Reels or whatever. They do it because it managed to be super addictive, and got the network effect going before others could catch up.
That is an interesting phenomenon. I suspect it’s just out of spite, because people not understanding the technology is almost like a new law of the internet, and that it’ll blow over eventually.
If it doesn’t, WTF, basically. People are already getting kicked off of Xiaohongshu for being openly gay.
Man, if any of that youth passion had shown up at the polls we (yes, including us in the rest of the world) wouldn’t have this problem in the first place. Somehow, the fervour never translates away from from the soft keyboard, though - probably because it’s mostly fake. God, we’re a D-tier species.
Passion isn’t felt towards everything equally, it’s specific, and Democrats can’t figure out how to make people passionate about their candidates without compromising on their leaders’ neoliberal economic policies and their so-called “rules based order” of American hegemony, so they keep losing. Obama ran as a populist candidate, and he blew away previous numbers even though he turned out to be a staunch neoliberal. Biden barely managed to eke out a win in 2020 (“Despite his relatively comfortable 74 vote margin in the Electoral College, Biden only won the decisive states of Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona by a combined 43,000 votes.”), and it was only because he was coming straight out of Trump’s term. Harris had 2 months to try to turn around Biden’s dumpster fire of a campaign, and she made too many missteps.
Ultimately, candidates have to earn votes, and the DNC’s anti-populism and pro-neoliberalism clearly aren’t doing it for people. Maybe in the '90s when people’s salaries were booming, Clinton was able to win on it, but we’re not in that economy, and most Millennials and younger have only seen recessions and stagnation. Even after Trump, we’re in for more losses if Democrats only allow for Progressive social policies, and not economic or political ones.
There’s a few things there. Young people have always had low turnout, it’s not anything the politicians are doing. We’ve actually had a bull market for a decade or so, with a pretty momentary pause for COVID. Apathy happens in other countries like mine too, so it’s not just the Democrats.
As per usual, people primarily care about their own life, and just aren’t motivated by big abstract concepts. Here people’s toys got broken, so they’re mad, simple as. All the discussion about climate change and gun violence or whatever is just a smokescreen for that. If it wasn’t they could have fixed those problems all along. That goes for the geezers too, BTW - they just found out in '83 or whatever that voting is easy and doesn’t require knowing what you’re voting for.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy on the ground has not been bullish. The US stock market doing well benefits the wealth-holders, not workers.
people primarily care about their own life, and just aren’t motivated by big abstract concepts
I agree, which is why the DNC’s attempt to allow a leftward shift only in its social policies has fallen largely flat with connecting with voters. It’s a sort of Rainbow-Politics, if you will. Voters see that they’re not actually moving Leftwards on economic policies that would help their own lives.
Sadly, it seems the DNC is taking this as a message that the Leftward shift on social issues was the problem, rather than the lack of economic change. Sanders has been talking about exactly this ever since election day, but the DNC leadership is already signaling they don’t believe that or care. I am worried we’re in for several Presidential election losses before they all die out or get the message.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy on the ground has not been bullish. The US stock market doing well benefits the wealth-holders, not workers.
So what are you referring to, then? Inflation-adjusted wage growth? That was shit in the 90’s too. The tipping point was the 70’s or early 80’s based on what I’ve seen.
Voters see that they’re not actually moving Leftwards on economic policies that would help their own lives.
You’re ascribing way too much rationality to the average voter here. The politicians themselves don’t - if you’re inside a campaign one day, a rational defense of policies is not how the strategy ever works.
I am worried we’re in for several Presidential election losses before they all die out or get the message.
Bold of you to assume there’s more to come, in light of recent events.
So what are you referring to, then? Inflation-adjusted wage growth?
Purchasing power, which was not shit in the 90s compared to today. That’s what really matters; what can you get with the money you have.
You’re ascribing way too much rationality to the average voter here.
I think you’re ascribing too little. The average voter is not a political philosopher, but they’re also not comatose. They understand simple economic principles like tax cuts being given to others and not to them, or subsidies for certain industries and not others, or the lack of government action to curb rising prices, etc. They may not have all the proper labels to describe what they’re seeing vs what they want to see (and indeed, the US has spent so long demonizing Socialism and propagandizing Capitalism that most can’t describe either properly), but polling proves that most Americans (hilariously, even most Republicans) don’t want cutthroat neoliberal everyone-for-themselves economic policies.
Bold of you to assume there’s more to come, in light of recent events.
I think that Trump would love to install himself as a dictator, and maybe he will, but even dictators keep controlled elections going for the appearance of legitimacy. He’s already 78, and no other Republicans have managed to replicate his popularity among GOP voters. One way or another (unless the US government literally dissolves, which is my preference tbh) we’ll be dealing with a post-Trump US government sooner or later.
but polling proves that most Americans (hilariously, even most Republicans) don’t want cutthroat neoliberal everyone-for-themselves economic policies.
Yes, but what if you repackage austerity as “patriotic manly tax cuts”?
Look, sales so isn’t my department, but I’ve been far enough down this path to know bullshit dominates politics because bullshit works. And yeah, it’s fueled by apathy much more than actual stupidity, but comatose isn’t far off of what the average door knock feels like.
I think that Trump would love to install himself as a dictator, and maybe he will, but even dictators keep controlled elections going for the appearance of legitimacy. He’s already 78, and no other Republicans have managed to replicate his popularity among GOP voters. One way or another (unless the US government literally dissolves, which is my preference tbh) we’ll be dealing with a post-Trump US government sooner or later.
Yes, post-Trump will be “interesting” for sure. I’d be mildly surprised if everything went back to normal, though, because it was just so broken before, and there’s so many alternative trajectories available.
threaded - newest
Good.
There is already a thread here: beehaw.org/post/18010336
sorry, I probably should have checked, I have no objection to mods deleting this thread if this violates the rules here
I am not a mod, but I guess this happens sometimes. No stress I would say.
No big deal, you’re good.
.
.
.
On the plus side pixelfed seems to be popping off. And every time one of the big companies f up, we get a slow trickle of new users. Which is much more sustainable in the long run.
Alright. I’m finally hearing enough about pixelfed to start looking into it. Are there any good resources for jumping in?
I see it’s decentralized. Do I just go to pixelfed.org and create an account, or is this like the fediverse where you have to pick an instance to get started?
Edit: for anyone looking, the Pixelfed website has a list of instances, so you can try to find an instance that most appeals to you.
It’s part of the Fediverse, so if you’re on a Pixelfed instance you can see other servers running Mastodon, et al. Pick an instance that seems like it feels nice to you.
Yeah it can be that easy. Pixelfed.social is the big one.
Or you can go with one of the others to share the load.
I personally spun my own instance up just to try it out a couple of days ago. It's neart and very perforant.
“… reports Chinese state propaganda branch, through western media …” 🙄
Don’t give a shit
He said to the empty room absolutely devoid of anyone who asked or wants to know what he cares about.
I mean, if TikTok US were more like TikTok China, with emphasis on educational content, there would never have been a problem.
Have you ever thought about why international TikTok is the way it is?
The userbase and lack of content curation/moderation has everything to do with that. The Chinese version gets a whallop of censorship as well, but yeah, their motivation to help other countries educate the young or avoid brain-rot is well in the negatives.
I’ve been very cynical about the TikTok ban, and assumed people would work around it by sideloading the APK on Android phones, after it was removed from the app stores (which, as I detailed in this comment, could theoretically get random users who share the APK with friends prosecuted by the federal government and charged with a $5000 per user fine)
but this is exceeding my wildest expectations
“oh, but it’s full of Chinese propaganda!!!” people will whine. cool. don’t care. Twitter and Facebook are full of American propaganda, no one seems to be falling over themselves to ban those apps from app stores.
if propaganda is the concern, have schools teach critical thinking and how to recognize propaganda techniques. they won’t do that, of course, because they want people to be susceptible to American propaganda.
haha class solidarity go brrr. the average American worker has more in common with the average Chinese worker than they do with an American oligarch. all of the American propaganda about how Chinese people are inherently untrustworthy and nefarious is gonna fall apart as people interact with actual Chinese people and realize “oh they’re pretty much just like me, other than the language barrier”.
and TikTok-style shortform video is very nearly the ideal medium for surmounting that language barrier. it was already commonplace to have captions in TikTok videos. start captioning videos on RedNote in both English and Chinese and bang, language differences don’t matter nearly as much anymore.
Of course, Americans have a constitutional right to receive Chinese propaganda.
You say that like any of the conservative controlled courts give a single flying fuck about precedent. They will embrace this ruling to foist religious doctrine on people who don’t want it and reject it to prohibit any other material they find unsavory, in the same breath, even. The rule of law has been dead for a long time in the states.
Not that I care about TikTok one way or another, but one of the best arguments I’ve seen against banning it dealt with supposed protection of Americans’ data. And I’m pretty sure that’s the approach that lawmakers have taken with this; it’s not that Chinese propaganda is bad, it’s that China shouldn’t have this much private info on Americans. I believe that’s the primary angle they’ve taken to get around First Amendment concerns.
Anyway, the argument is, “Oh, but it’s OK for US tech companies to harvest data? That’s it’s OK that we have weak privacy and data protection laws? As long as US companies are doing it, then it’s not a problem?” Because, remember the laws says that the company becomes “unavailable” in the US if not sold to an American company. Presumably, if TikTok were sold to a US company, then the app could continue with no issue, tracking and collecting tons of data on Americans to be packaged and sold to the highest bidders.
I will admit, I was somewhat more pro-ban before hearing that argument. But now I’m more neutral. I don’t use it, so I’m not/shouldn’t be affected. But the government trying to hide behind data privacy and protection to ban TikTok does feel rather empty.
well, sometimes…I linked in this comment to some statements made by the Republican congressman who sponsored the original bill. he was pretty clear that he wanted the ban because he thinks TikTok is pushing propaganda, not just from the Chinese, but the Chinese Communist Party (which has been a long-standing right-wing bogeyman - that congressman was even the chair of the “House Select Committee on the CCP”)
this is true, in the same way that Trump in his first campaign promised a “Muslim ban” and then when they tried to actually implement it they realized they needed to frame it as a “travel ban…applying to countries that happen to have a lot of Muslims…oh and also North Korea because look at us, we’re definitely not discriminating against people based solely on religion”
everyone (except the right-wing hacks on the Supreme Court) saw through the “travel ban” facade pretty easily. it’s been disappointing to see how many people uncritically repeat “well, there’s a data privacy angle to it too…” as if it’s a legitimate justification and not just another facade.
I see the Whataboutism Olympics are off to a good start this year.
Why is this always the only defense people have when they bend over backwards to write apologia for dictatorships like China and Russia?
And you think Xiaohongshu is run by the Chinese workers? Lol no. This is idiots digging themselves deeper into an even more walled garden.
An actual FOSS platform like the one we’re on would get banned over there very quickly.
oh yes daddy, harder. shove those words right into my mouth.
Ah yes, because “it was just a joke” would be too obvious.
@spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org
The average American worker has also more in common with the average Chinese worker than they do with an
American oligarchChinese oligarch and Chinese dictator. So your argument is not very valid.No one says that Chinese people are worse or better than Americans or any other people on this planet. We’re all the same. The problem here is the dictatorship in China that collects data of Americans and other people around the globe as others in this thread already have said. The Chinese people are fine, the Chinese government is not.
Remember when the youth hated censorship and overreach from the man? I 'member.
C’mon, what do we have to do to stop zoomers from bending right over.
I still do, but I’m not very young anymore, most people who regularly use TikTok are probably younger than me.
It’s an upside down world where one thinks banning Tiktok isn’t censorship and government overreach; but having the freedom to chose what social media to participate in, is.
A yes, like the freedom to buy a Windows licence to run basic software, or the freedom to have a TV that updates to include unremovable banner ads. The freedom to give all your freedom away, so essential for innovation. /s
You’re argument is basically that you should have the right to to ruin yourself. Look, that normally has merit, because people know what’s best for them. But, I think it’s pretty clear that when it comes to tech people don’t know what’s best for them.
Meanwhile, within TikTok, it’s pretty clear that censorship is openly endorsed. You can’t even say “gun” on TikTok, and god knows how much user information they have to “play around” with.
Look, I agree with you that TikTok is bad, but… YES, freedom means the ability to choose, good or bad.
If you want someone to blame for this, blame the US government for allowing US tech companies to become so predatory and gross that young people literally prefer a foreign product that may be profiling them. It’s not like data collection and censorship isn’t rife on Xitter or FB, and the reality for most Americans is that the US government has more ability to use their data to directly harm them than the CCP does. No one is worried that the Chinese government is going to show up in Alabama with CPS in tow because a teen revealed they’re trans online.
I don’t believe for a second people use TikTok because they have objections to the data collecting practices of Reels or whatever. They do it because it managed to be super addictive, and got the network effect going before others could catch up.
In the beginning, sure. But all the TikTok users actively choosing Chinese alternatives would seem to disagree with that, now.
That is an interesting phenomenon. I suspect it’s just out of spite, because people not understanding the technology is almost like a new law of the internet, and that it’ll blow over eventually.
If it doesn’t, WTF, basically. People are already getting kicked off of Xiaohongshu for being openly gay.
I hate to link to Reddit (and I’m too old to know how to get to the original video), but this also seems pretty relevant: reddit.com/…/if_tiktok_being_banned_doesnt_radica…
Man, if any of that youth passion had shown up at the polls we (yes, including us in the rest of the world) wouldn’t have this problem in the first place. Somehow, the fervour never translates away from from the soft keyboard, though - probably because it’s mostly fake. God, we’re a D-tier species.
Passion isn’t felt towards everything equally, it’s specific, and Democrats can’t figure out how to make people passionate about their candidates without compromising on their leaders’ neoliberal economic policies and their so-called “rules based order” of American hegemony, so they keep losing. Obama ran as a populist candidate, and he blew away previous numbers even though he turned out to be a staunch neoliberal. Biden barely managed to eke out a win in 2020 (“Despite his relatively comfortable 74 vote margin in the Electoral College, Biden only won the decisive states of Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona by a combined 43,000 votes.”), and it was only because he was coming straight out of Trump’s term. Harris had 2 months to try to turn around Biden’s dumpster fire of a campaign, and she made too many missteps.
Ultimately, candidates have to earn votes, and the DNC’s anti-populism and pro-neoliberalism clearly aren’t doing it for people. Maybe in the '90s when people’s salaries were booming, Clinton was able to win on it, but we’re not in that economy, and most Millennials and younger have only seen recessions and stagnation. Even after Trump, we’re in for more losses if Democrats only allow for Progressive social policies, and not economic or political ones.
There’s a few things there. Young people have always had low turnout, it’s not anything the politicians are doing. We’ve actually had a bull market for a decade or so, with a pretty momentary pause for COVID. Apathy happens in other countries like mine too, so it’s not just the Democrats.
As per usual, people primarily care about their own life, and just aren’t motivated by big abstract concepts. Here people’s toys got broken, so they’re mad, simple as. All the discussion about climate change and gun violence or whatever is just a smokescreen for that. If it wasn’t they could have fixed those problems all along. That goes for the geezers too, BTW - they just found out in '83 or whatever that voting is easy and doesn’t require knowing what you’re voting for.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy on the ground has not been bullish. The US stock market doing well benefits the wealth-holders, not workers.
I agree, which is why the DNC’s attempt to allow a leftward shift only in its social policies has fallen largely flat with connecting with voters. It’s a sort of Rainbow-Politics, if you will. Voters see that they’re not actually moving Leftwards on economic policies that would help their own lives.
Sadly, it seems the DNC is taking this as a message that the Leftward shift on social issues was the problem, rather than the lack of economic change. Sanders has been talking about exactly this ever since election day, but the DNC leadership is already signaling they don’t believe that or care. I am worried we’re in for several Presidential election losses before they all die out or get the message.
So what are you referring to, then? Inflation-adjusted wage growth? That was shit in the 90’s too. The tipping point was the 70’s or early 80’s based on what I’ve seen.
You’re ascribing way too much rationality to the average voter here. The politicians themselves don’t - if you’re inside a campaign one day, a rational defense of policies is not how the strategy ever works.
Bold of you to assume there’s more to come, in light of recent events.
Purchasing power, which was not shit in the 90s compared to today. That’s what really matters; what can you get with the money you have.
I think you’re ascribing too little. The average voter is not a political philosopher, but they’re also not comatose. They understand simple economic principles like tax cuts being given to others and not to them, or subsidies for certain industries and not others, or the lack of government action to curb rising prices, etc. They may not have all the proper labels to describe what they’re seeing vs what they want to see (and indeed, the US has spent so long demonizing Socialism and propagandizing Capitalism that most can’t describe either properly), but polling proves that most Americans (hilariously, even most Republicans) don’t want cutthroat neoliberal everyone-for-themselves economic policies.
I think that Trump would love to install himself as a dictator, and maybe he will, but even dictators keep controlled elections going for the appearance of legitimacy. He’s already 78, and no other Republicans have managed to replicate his popularity among GOP voters. One way or another (unless the US government literally dissolves, which is my preference tbh) we’ll be dealing with a post-Trump US government sooner or later.
Yes, but what if you repackage austerity as “patriotic manly tax cuts”?
Look, sales so isn’t my department, but I’ve been far enough down this path to know bullshit dominates politics because bullshit works. And yeah, it’s fueled by apathy much more than actual stupidity, but comatose isn’t far off of what the average door knock feels like.
Yes, post-Trump will be “interesting” for sure. I’d be mildly surprised if everything went back to normal, though, because it was just so broken before, and there’s so many alternative trajectories available.