That is highly dependent on your University / program. I went to a German Uni where you can often show Professors your transcript of classes and they can acknowledge them for the program.
It helped that both Masters were at the same department and many courses / Professors overlapped.
One was in general Comp Sci., the other focused on Statistics and Data Science, which was a brand new (basically unknown) field at the time. Good thing was, I was able to transfer more than half my credits to this program, so I only had to do the few math/statistics focused ones (and a second thesis).
I went for Comp Sci. (B.Sc, two M.Sc. and a PhD). The most important part ist finding your own personal learning type. Theres a distinction between those who learn best listening to lectures, reading textbooks, explaining a topic to others, etc. Start by finding what suits you best.
Here are the things that helped me most (after years of trial and error):
In which context?
Good points! I have to admit, I rarely consider the “inner workings” of a platform like lemmy from a moderator point of view, but this is an important aspect to be thought of.
I would still disagree on subjective votes as a good thing on a social network. All the “echo chamber” effects, that already have been discussed to death, come to mind and I am personally not a big fan of metrics that, in a worst case, stem from pure ideological or current-trend driven opinions of people. People may also never really fathom why they are being down voted, because of the features anonymous nature.
Your argument that “Votes still leave the content in place”, also sounds questionable, considering how often posts on big platforms get “down voted to oblivion” and completely disappear from the first few pages (Not saying this happens here, but the example of the mechanism applies, imho). Sure the content is technically still existing, but will the information reach the people that request it?
I personally think, old timey internet forums and even certain imageboards feel much more objective content-wise, even if they are more chaotic moderation-wise.
No technical solution can prevent bad human behavior… Still wish mechanisms like up-/down-voting would be avoided, though.
I feel like there’s a lot to unpack here. This impending sense of doom can be a very powerful emotion and has the nasty property of distorting our sense of reality so it can present itself as an objective state of the world/truth.
We all have certain emotional biases depending on our environment (like the social media, discussed in OP), the people we interact with the most, how we were raised, our genetics of course and probably a dozen other factors. All this things influence our perception of the world, none of them are objectively true. Looking at the same situation, from another perspective, could paint a completely different picture which is just as valid.
I completely agree with you on focusing on the causes, not on the effects. This is something that is done way too little, these days. But how we deal with the causes we found, is now entirely dependent on our
perception of the world. Many people feel helpless/depressed when opposed to “big” abstract ideas like you listed: Capitalism, Fascism, Climate Change [we need to differ between the term itself and the concrete effects], etc., because they perceive them as ubiquitous and omnipresent. But taking “a step back”, putting these things in another (maybe historic) perspective or breaking them down into small solvable problems, can help to form practical solutions, even when they are on a small scale, and escape this emotion of helplessness.
On a side note: My father was a historian with the early 20th century as his field of interest. Growing up, he often read to me from his textbooks, showed me the pictures from that time and visited with me museums and historic places all over Europe. All the hardships from just a hundred years ago, the wars, the Spanish Flu, the Great Depression, the political uncertainty, are completely incomprehensible in our modern times. I often try to compare our problems today with the problems people had back then and I wouldn’t trade.
A lot of people seem very pessimistic about the future in general, because they are bombarded with negative posts, news, messages, etc. 24/7. This is imho one of the most devastating effects modern technology (i.e. internet, smartphones, social media) has on our culture today. This technology is so effective, because it exploits the fundamental mechanism of our psychology and neurology. Until we collectively decide to reduce the use of those technologies (some would even say we destroy them completely) and start opposing this trend, we will always be negatively affected by them.
This short video may be relevant in this context: Why social media preys on negativity
Here’s the thing:
We don’t live in the end times, with the doomsday clock just about to hit twelve! In fact, we may even never lived in better times, depending which metric you apply, and we still have much better times ahead, if we don’t dwell too much on negativity, but keep our optimism and start working towards a better future.
Very good comic, but what are we gonna do?
Using (FOSS) alternatives* for OS, services or browsers on personal basis only seem to work for a small group of tech enthusiast/nerds while Big Tech keeps increasing its market share.
* assuming the alternatives are actually better in a privacy sense, which isn’t always the case.
I’m honestly curious how one can sincerely frame any form of humanitarian aid as racism.
Coming soon to your country too…
Back then, when I was still in academia, I actually put every paper I wrote and the corresponding data/code on my academic website for everyone to download. I can’t understand why this isn’t required for every (publicly funded) researcher!
If you want to (constructively) participate in a technical community and are held off by a decades old chat protocol with literally hundreds of tutorials and step-by-step guides online, maybe this barrier of entry is exactly for your kind…
Despite the common opinion (mainly prevalent in IT), not everyone should be given an equal platform just because he has something to say. The opinion of a conspiracy nutjob on vaccines is not equal to that of an epidemiologist with a PhD, the opinion of a DIY tinkerer on wiring a house is not equal to that of a trained electrician, etc. For all those fields, gatekeepers are common and far greater than simply the ability to install a freaking IRC client.
It‘s marketing. You would have to be a fool to really think apple (or any big company for that matter) actually gives a flying f*ck about minority representation. It‘s an advertising ploy to provoke an emotional reaction in it‘s viewers - be it good or bad - which helps with the distribution of their corporate brand.
And obviously it was successful…
I feel old even writing this, but I miss the „good old days“ where sending a smile to someone you liked was a simple „:-)“, not the spawn of a corporate marketing campaign.
I have this awful déjà-vu of that time facebook used their sentiment analysis to target depressed teens for special anti-depressant ads…
We seriously need better privacy laws. Especially for any kind of medical records!