I’ve been self-hosting it for about 10 years now. It’s a castle built on sand (PHP): It’s hard to install, hard to update, and becomes slower by the day, but once you have learned Docker, Apache, SSL and a bit of SQL, it works mostly reliable.

If you just want file syncronization you could just buy a hosted instance, and use Cryptomator for protecting your privacy. Then you can have Nextcloud in under 30mins.
If you want to store large amounts of data, or you also want to use Calendar, Collabora, Talk,… then self-hosting will be cheaper/more private. But it will require lot’s of learning, far more than the ordinary person can do.

Innovation and competition at it’s peak: You get to choose the color of your noose.

But (presumably) no cash or crypto because someone has to take a 3% cut.

Now it’s even more depressing because that means humans have been using children as a tool to create social security, knowing full well that most of them will suffer and die at an early age.

It’s a pyramid scheme played with (literally) innocent people at the expense of an insane amount of suffering and death.

The only thing Evil (aka. suffering, disease, war,…) needs to exist is that ‘good’ people continue to have children.

Not true. Humans always reproduced to the absolute limit (set by their agricultural technology and the bodies of women). The reason why this didn’t wreck the environment is because that limited population was too small to turn 50% of land into farmland, they didn’t know how to burn large amounts of coal and they didn’t have the technology to produce harmful chemicals.

But i agree that humanity (or any other species) has no value. Saying humanity has value is like saying the white race has value. It’s pure aestethics, it’s not worth it to make anyone suffer for that.

Good question. Where to put them, when the camps are full? How much money is it going to cost to imprison millions for life? Is there a more efficient solution?

Your brain right now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA_uJOnAnoQ&t=1456s

… i did not speak out because premature Nazi comparisons diminish the Nazi crimes and are antisemitic.

We’ll have to wait for at least 5 million gassed before we can think about Nazi comparisons.

/s just in case.

They’ll do when they realize that’s the only way to fit 30,000 immigrants into a torture camp that can hold < 1000 inmates.

By May 2003, the Guantanamo Bay detention camp had grown into a larger and more permanent facility that housed over 680 prisoners, the vast majority without formal charges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Yesterday, inspired by the news about mass depaorations, i watched a documentary on the Final Solution.

Among a lot of interesting things, one thing stood out to me: The original Nazis were afraid that the german people would not only reject genocide, but also reject the idea of jews (aka. their neighbors) being sent to brutal labor camps.
So they produced propaganda movies depicting the city Theresienstadt as a spa town. And then told the public that the jews would be sent there to be protected from the increasingly antisemitic public.

To lull victims into a false sense of security, the SS advertised Theresienstadt as a “spa town” where Jews could retire, and encouraged them to sign fraudulent home purchase contracts, pay “deposits” for rent and board, and surrender life insurance policies and other assets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theresienstadt_Ghetto

Nowadays, you can just tell the american people:

Hey, we are gonna send your neighbors to a torture camp. Great camp. Lovely camp. Most brutal camp of the world.

And they are like: Yessss, finally a solution to the migrant question.

I can also recommend Life Under Adolf Hitler: The First Years Of Nazi Germany.

Sadly election results prove every few years, that you are the only one seeking radical change.

~30-50% want extreme conservativism/capitalism. ~20-40% want everything as-is.
~30% want mild improvements like a really low UBI.
<5% want to get rid of oligarchs.
<.1% want to eliminate suffering.

We are going at 560,000 miles an hour trough the unrelenting darkness of space, and just decided to destroy our life support system.

Life is a cycle. I am suffering today so i can afford to suffer tomorrow. Makes sense.

Life is only worth living if you are a masochist.

Nothing will change as long as we are piloting decaying, constantly hurting meat-bags trough a world of artificially created horrors like war, hunger, poverty and natural horrors like disease, aging and drought.

Whenever you feel overwhelmed by life, lay down on your bed, close your eyes, and listen to this.

Should they live in the shame and horror of this person that they probably attempted to curb at some point.

No. Those relatives that have not enabled or supported a monsters actions are of course completely innocent.
And if they want, they can of course mourn the loss of the ability to ever have a nice conversation with that person again.
But a burial is not like mourning in your bed, crying yourself to sleep. There you can accept that you are sad about the loss, even tough the world is a better place without that person.

A bureal however is a public performance that, as you say, is for the living. Not for the dead. It is not useful for mourning, but a ritual to pay the last respects to the deceased person. Not only for their good side, but also for their evil side. And the bigger the burial, the greater the (implied) respect. This holds true in any western/materialistic society, and was practiced in ancient times, where pyramids were built to honor kings, and a bigger pyramid implied a better king.

Therefore holding a large burial for a horrific person signals to the living that you not only miss that person as a friend, but also support their actions and choices in life.

Ideally: No.

But i live in a materialistic society where status is expressed trough expensive houses/cars/brands and products.
If you buy a expensive gift (for a living person), you show to them that you are willing to go to great lengths to make them happy.

This is the societal norm in (probably) all western countries. And therefore, making a extravagant bureal for a horrific person implies approval for them and their actions.

So if you are not a materialistic person you can give a small burial to a person without disrespecting them, but there will definitely be some people that will then assume that you did not like that person. They will simply assume it without proof, as it is a custom, unless they know that you are a anti-materialistic person.

A burial is a ceremony where the living show their respect to the deceased. The larger/more extravagant the bureal, the greater the (financial) sacrifice, the greater the respect for the person and their actions.

Everyone who thinks Hitler should have received a state burial (whether by the allies or by his supprters) is definitely a nazi.

Only those that understand a problem even have a chance to solve it. Those who refuse to understand a problem (often for comfort) are not helpful at best, but usually actively harmful.

The problem of suffering runs far deeper than “Rich vs Poor”. We are all trapped inside constantly decaying bodies that are barely capable of survival. This constant decay leads to almost constant pain even billionaires can not avoid. And then there is our anxious brain worrying about all sorts of things that might or might not happen. Yes, all of this is more bearable inside a villa than inside a tent, but it is still abhorrent. This does not mean the “Rich vs Poor” struggle is not worth while. It is, because there is tremendous preventable suffering within this struggle. This struggle, however, is just a tiny fraction of the problem that is called the human condition.

To those who seek to understand the problem of suffering, i can recommend this video. It eases you into the horror of being alive.