TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Is Mastodon mainly for far left?

9 点作者 oldnet将近 2 年前
Hi, I have a different view on climate change than people from left. I&#x27;m trying to use arguments with links on wikipedia, some science articles etc.<p>However I end up with bans (2 servers so far) and reason is something like science denial.<p>So I would like to ask - is mastodon only for people from far left?<p>Btw I&#x27;m programmer with stock market hobby. So I&#x27;m analysing things.<p>Thanks

13 条评论

dekhn将近 2 年前
By the way, this is a terribly asked question. You embed a wide range of assumptions and made some noob mistakes as well.<p>You actually have a collection of different questions: 1) Where can I have a reasonable fact-based argument about climate change? 2) I&#x27;ve noticed I got banned, possibly due to ideology, can I avoid doing that? 3) Are opinions on climate change entirely associated with the ideological bent of people running the servers<p>Here&#x27;s what you got wrong: 1) Climage change isn&#x27;t a far left opinion. It&#x27;s actually fairly centrist, for example I am a democrat but not very progressive, much closer to Republicans than most democrats. So I&#x27;m as right of the far left folks as you can get. My ilk don&#x27;t question climate change, because a wide range of intelligent people have put together a good collection of resources to make a convincing argument. Even republicans are gradually coming around to the idea that climate change is real, it&#x27;s human caused, and we need to start making some hard policy decisions to deal with it.<p>2) you said you&#x27;re a programmer with a stock market hobby, so you&#x27;re analyzing things. So what? Analysis is fine, but you&#x27;re analyzing things far outside your normal expertise zone, and these are complicated problems with huge amounts of prior knowledge, being communicated mainly to experts in the field.<p>3) there are lots of people making weak, psuedoscientific arguments about climate change that are just believeable enough that quantitative people fall for them. THey sound right, they seem to add enough question to the issue, but they don&#x27;t really. It&#x27;s just far easier to make weak pseudoscientific arguments than it is to make strong scientific ones.
评论 #36951402 未加载
xbmcuser将近 2 年前
Because of US left&#x2F;right politics global warming has become a political topic rather than a scientific one. Most if not all science points to global warming being man made and getting worse. If you deny it then I understand why you are getting bans. Though from what I understand Mastodon was service that got traction from the US right not the US left so you getting banned from it mean you probably don&#x27;t understand the science at all.
评论 #36945425 未加载
评论 #36945403 未加载
评论 #36945396 未加载
allears将近 2 年前
Um, it&#x27;s not a &quot;different view,&quot; it&#x27;s denial of settled science and actual physical events occurring right now.<p>Do you claim not to believe what the overwhelming majority of climate scientists believe? Do you believe climate science is a hoax? Do you believe that current extreme weather events are just happening by chance?
评论 #36945309 未加载
评论 #36946074 未加载
评论 #36945653 未加载
评论 #36945477 未加载
liberabaci将近 2 年前
I agree citing scientific sources fortifies an argument, but I would advise you to take anything on Wikipedia as an unreliable source. Wikipedia is not a reputable source unfortunately.<p>Here are a few reliable sources you can look into for information about climate science and climate change:<p>Websites:<p><pre><code> NASA&#x27;s Climate Change and Global Warming website (https:&#x2F;&#x2F;climate.nasa.gov&#x2F;) offers an extensive collection of data, interactive features, and explanatory articles. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ipcc.ch&#x2F;) produces comprehensive reports about climate change. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration&#x27;s Climate.gov (https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.climate.gov&#x2F;) provides climate news, data, maps, and more. </code></pre> Books:<p><pre><code> &quot;The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming&quot; by David Wallace-Wells: This book offers an uncompromising look at the potential impacts of climate change if left unchecked. &quot;This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate&quot; by Naomi Klein: Klein makes a case for how addressing climate change requires major changes to our economic system. &quot;Climate Change: What Everyone Needs to Know&quot; by Joseph Romm: This is a clear, concise primer on the key aspects of climate change. &quot;The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History&quot; by Elizabeth Kolbert:This Pulitzer-winning, discussing the ongoing mass extinction driven by human activity, including climate change. &quot;Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming&quot; edited by Paul Hawken: This book compiles and evaluates solutions to climate change. </code></pre> It&#x27;s worth mentioning that understanding climate science also involves learning about related disciplines like chemistry, physics, and earth sciences, so exploring resources in those areas may be beneficial as well. Good luck!
mattl将近 2 年前
You can run your own server, but if you use someone else&#x27;s server you have to follow their rules, whatever they are.
评论 #36945424 未加载
beardyw将近 2 年前
You can have views about art. Climate change, whichever side you come from, is science. You can support one theory over another, but to do so you need to have done some research. A view about science is as hand wavy as having a theory about art. It serves no purpose.
评论 #36946375 未加载
explain将近 2 年前
So strange that those who fled Twitter in fear of free speech &amp; in protest of the political right being allowed back on Twitter, joined a platform which is (largely) resistant to deplatforming and censorship.
mikece将近 2 年前
I find it funny that there are &quot;block lists&quot; distributed to Mastodon admins listing reasons for why certain nodes should be blocked; my favorite is the &quot;free speech&quot; category of nodes to block. It would be one thing if nodes were blocked for hate speech, science denial, or spreading misinfo, but free speech? The epidemic of people blocking so many Mastodon instances&#x2F;enclaves is hurting the migration away from Twitter: why go to Mastodon if it&#x27;s more balkanized than federated? Just let individual users block others on the Fediverse -- like Twitter supports.
评论 #36956093 未加载
评论 #36945458 未加载
tamimio将近 2 年前
It’s federated, some instances will be run by far left, some will be by far right, some by libertarians, some by anime fans and so on. My only hope is these kind of dynamics to actually encourage debates and conflicts as obviously we should not all agree about the same thing, instead of the “if you don’t agree with X then you’re Y and should be banned!!” mindset.
dekhn将近 2 年前
No.
rajbot将近 2 年前
There are plenty of right-wing mastodon instances full of climate deniers. Trump’s TruthSocial is one, gab.com is another.
beanjuiceII将近 2 年前
yes
pessimizer将近 2 年前
No, it&#x27;s mainly tech guys and people with sexual fetishes. So Libertarians, other liberals, and political narcissists.<p>edit: this is an old view, though. I have to assume the proportion of fetishists rose sharply after the twitter media panic, because not all fetishists were aware of Mastodon before.