• Sonor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      This might not be true. Depending on where you live, your vote could be worth about 0.8th of what this guys vote is worth

      • Homescool@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Casper and Cheyenne Wyoming have the 75k most powerful voters in the country.

        They control the same number of US Senators as the world’s 5th largest economy.

        The fact that 75k can filibuster 40m is the peak of absurdity.

    • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The idea behind wisdom of the crowd is that the people who don’t know the answer cancel each other out. It’s the reason why the audience joker on who wants to be a millionaire is so powerful.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Wisdom of the crowds works when people are making somewhat educated guesses. It falls apart though if everybody groups themselves into camps that either think A or B and no other option because their camp leader has told them that they think A or B

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      If he’s from California then my vote counts a little more because my state has less population. The smaller the state’s population the more their vote counts.

      • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Wyoming has the lowest population.

        Makes sense why candidates spend all their time trying to get these powerful voters on their side. Those 3 electoral votes really makes it the most powerful swing state.

        Someone in Wyoming has more electoral votes to their votes, yes. And I believe that is the point you’re making.

        If everyone in Wyoming voted for Candidate A. Candidate A has basically the same chance of winning or losing.

        If everyone in California voted for Candidate A. Candidate A has a lot better chance of winning.

        It’s more powerful to be able to vote in something that actually matters than to vote in something that doesn’t.

        You could just not count any votes in Wyoming and still call the overall winner 99.999% of the time. It would have to come down to 3 electoral votes tie breaker for their votes to even matter. Whereas every vote in California always matters.

        Like in this last election. If Harris won every “swing state”. But Trump could have won California and he’d win the election.

        Electoral college has It’s pros and cons but “The smaller the state’s population the more their vote counts.” Isn’t true.

        It’s the middle size, “swing states”, that the voters have the most powerful.

        You aren’t a drop in the bucket like California, but your state has enough electoral votes to actually swing things.

        • sour@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          It wasn’t about how much the states electoral votes matter, but how much a single persons vote matters in the entire election.

          If 50.000 people in California changes their vote it hardly matters. If 50.000 people in wyoming do that, it heavily influences the outcome of who wyoming votes for.

          1 person in wyoming matters more than 1 person in California.

          • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            It wasn’t about how much the states electoral votes matter, but how much a single persons vote matters in the entire election.

            How electoral votes matter is the whole point. If it was done by pure population they would have equal voting power. They do not have equal voting power because the electoral votes matter.

            1 person in Wyoming makes more difference in how Wyoming election turns out. Less population, more influence.

            There are 538 electoral votes divided over 50 states

            Wyoming has 3

            California has 54

            Wyoming has 584k people

            California has 39m people

            In Wyoming each voters has 5.137E-6 electoral votes to cast

            In California each voters has 8.98305085E−7 electoral votes to cast

            Now winner takes all electoral votes aside. Someone in Wyoming is contributing more electoral votes to their candidate than someone in California.

            This is what’s always argued when talking about voting power based on population

            If the candidate needs 270 to win, if I am able to give more to a candidate with my vote, my vote is more powerful in a way.

            There has been two elections decided by 3 electoral votes. 1876 Hayes and 1796 Adams. Total electoral votes at the time were 261 and 138, respectively. It would be equivalent to winning by 6 and 12 votes today with the 538 electoral votes. So while it was 3, those 3 votes meant a lot more back then when it was 3/261 or 3/138.

            If 50.000 people in California changes their vote it hardly matters. If 50.000 people in wyoming do that, it heavily influences the outcome of who wyoming votes for.

            Like I said earlier, yes, Wyoming voters have more influence on who wins their electoral votes and they have more electoral votes per person

            California with 53 electoral votes is a 106 point swing. Taking 53 electoral votes from the winning candidate and giving it to the runner up would change the majority of all the elections.

            Think of it this way:

            2 states just California and Wyoming. California has 53 votes, Wyoming 3.

            56 votes total. Need 29 votes to win.

            Biggest issue the candidates are running on is spending money on beaches.

            Candidate A: For spending

            Candidate B: Against spending

            California wants A, Wyoming wants B.

            If what you’re saying is true, then Wyoming should have the most power in this election because each of their votes count more than a person in California.

            584k deciding 3 electoral votes vs 39m deciding 53 electoral votes

            Yet every single person in Wyoming could vote candidate B, and it’s still going to be up to California to decide

            So would you want to be a voter in Wyoming or California?

            California because your vote doesn’t matter in Wyoming. No matter who you vote for in Wyoming, California is going to decide. You want to be able to cast your vote in California to hopefully swing the state

            If you gave those 584k Wyoming voters the chance to not cast their vote in Wyoming but instead cast their vote in California against the 39m, they would be wise to do it. Doesn’t matter where 3/56 electoral votes go, it matters much more where the 53/56 electoral votes go.

            So yes, while each voter in California has less effect on the California electoral votes. California has more effect on the total electoral votes.

            Being able to participate in a more important election is worth more than having more influence in an election that is next to meaningless.

              • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                TLDR:

                Only 2 states to simplify things

                Wyoming 3 EV

                California 53 EV

                56 EV total, 29 EV need to win

                Wyoming still has more EV per capita

                California wants Candidate B

                Wyoming wants Candidate A

                Who decides the election? (California)

                If what you’re saying is that the smaller population with more EV per capita has more pull in an election, then Wyoming would actually have a shot at making Candidate A win by themselves.

                California has 53/538 EV.

                California controls 10% of the total EVs

                Wyoming controls .06%

                TLDR again:

                As a voter, being able to effect 10% of the total EVs is more powerful than being able to effect .06%.

                • sour@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  You’re missing the point. The viewpoint in the argument is from a single voter. One vote in wyoming weighs more than one vote in California

    • little_tuptup@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Devil’s advocate. We should only let a select few who we deem as intelligent to vote for us?

  • spujb@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Almost certain they were playing it up and this is satire, sorry to spoil everyone’s fun. https://www.instagram.com/jaayfilms They started again on September 30 this year and are now in Missouri. If these content creators are good at one thing it’s creating a compelling narrative and this guy did it by getting himself called illiterate.

  • Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    That voter is gonna learn some stuff.

    I was not surprised by the presence of a giant cross necklace.

  • thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I met a guy like that in the 90’s except he was on a lot of LSD and was making his way around the world. IDK if that was true but my buddy picked him up one night and we had a party with him and he cut his dreads off and burned them so a witch wouldn’t get them. Good times!

    • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It is easy to have motivation to skateboard across america when you don’t have enough education to understand what doing that means.

    • fern@lemmy.autism.place
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Illiterate refers to both being able to read basic words all the way up to reading comprehenson. Equally possible he simply cannot understand what he reads and is anti-intellectual as that seems to be on the rise in the US.

      • ZeffSyde@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        As a victim of the US public School system, every class had one or more kids that simply couldn’t read aloud in class for one reason or another. The teachers learned to not call on them in the future to keep things moving.

        Some of them got moved to special education classes over the years, but in my experience they were just free periods to keep them from slowing the other kids down.

        It’s sad, I knew a guy that was smart as a whip, but we went to a restaurant he wasn’t used to and he sheepishly asked me what was on the menu since there weren’t any pictures.

        • fern@lemmy.autism.place
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s called functional literacy, which is what’s being talked to here. Also, your anecdote fails to address other possibilities. I have a friend that, under stress of a new location, may lose the ability to read menus, and their literacy matches other academics in their field. I am a reader that cannot read aloud because that is an entirely different skill than reading.

    • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Spelling (in non phonetic languages) has nothing to do with intelligence levels - it is all to do with memory and exposure. Perhaps he never went to school, or the level of education was pathetic… or he is incredibly dyslexic. Sorry if this answer sounds harsh but I’m pissed-off at what you wrote. I know of at least one illiterate person who stands head and shoulders above the “college kids” around them. They were such an integral part of our team that were bought them speech-to-text / text-to-speech software to keep their job.

      • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s why I didn’t say he was stupid. I asked if he had a learning disability which is not a taboo thing and it doesn’t mean you’re stupid. If anything I complimented him on his motivation and determination. You were just out to find something to get mad and offended over so you interjected that into my comment, even though I didn’t say that. I see that happening a lot lately with Americans. They all wanna be offended so they can moralize

      • sparkle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        or he is incredibly dyslexic

        Dyslexia is a learning disability

    • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Most likely functionally illiterate and not 100% “I can’t read,” but I’ve overestimated instagrammers before

      • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Most people are illiterate. Literacy is a skill with levels and most people don’t actually ever reach the level required to be a fully functional person.

        This meme is a great example. Most people don’t actually reach Ogre’s level of literacy. Yeah, it’s played for laughs in the fact that Ogre is smarter than the average human, but Ogre is also completely correct about the level of literacy we should expect of people, in a perfect world.

        • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          A lot about this is, in my opinion, misleading.

          I don’t need to be able to read Ulysses and understand all the themes and the deeper meanings, to be literate. As to actually understand all the meanings, I would have to be familiar with the culture in which it was written and the personal perspective of the author on that culture.

          I don’t think the perfect world entails that everyone (or, at least most people) is overly familiar with ancient cultures and authors.

          Unfamiliarity with the context of what was written is usually why people don’t catch on themes. A person with german cultural background will not read a passage about bringing honor to your bloodline, in the same way a chinese person will. A lot of Germans are deeply suspicious of the idea of honor. I learned that after decades with Germans and their culture.

          How many Cultures are you familiar enough with to be able to correctly understand a text written in it?

          E.g. the “remorse of conscience” is a cultural theme. A person who reads a lot of books and seek out these themes, has a different culture than a person who only scrolls on TikTok. And if the person reading books isn’t on TikTok, they are probably unable to properly understand the themes in a TikTok.

          And yes, you said that there are different levels of literacy, so you didn’t say that I was illiterate if I wouldn’t catch on the “remorse”. But you present literacy as a 1 dimensional scale. 1 level, 2, 3, etc… When it is not, your ability to correctly parse a text is not 1 dimensional. You will probably fail to correctly understand a story written in ancient china, and if you understand it, you will probably fail to understand a story written in the 1950s in Germany.

          Get off the horse. Stand next to us and enjoy your pleasure of reading with other people and learn different perspectives. They aren’t less literate than you, they are differently literate than you.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah, I’ve been really enjoying discussing the themes and deeper meanings in the stormlight archive, but a ton of its themes are deeply American or focused on mental illness or theology and those are areas I have background in. If I were to read the tale of genji or some Dostoyevsky I’d miss so much. I can’t imagine someone in China really getting Huckleberry Finn because it’s deeply American satire, hell I don’t expect a Brit to get it particularly well either.

          • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Most people can’t understand the themes of works from their own culture. How many American conservatives think the Matrix supports their ideas, and brag about taking the “red pill”, not realising it’s an estrogen pill? How many people watch Rick and Morty, and proceed to idolise Rick? Or the same with Sherlock, or House? How many people think Thanos did nothing wrong?

            So much of our popular media criticises the flaws inherent in capitalism. Iron Man does it. Star Wars does it. Why don’t we live in a society of socialists? When Starship Troopers was first released, it bombed. Because most people couldn’t tell it was satire. It took years for people to catch on.

            Hell, most christians read the Bible and think Jesus was white! It is literally their religious identity, and they can’t be bothered to understand it.

            Drag doesn’t think literacy is one dimensional. But drag does think that most people don’t meet the standard for being a functional person in any culture. If most people were literate, then most of the kids who grew up watching Captain Planet would be vegan and carfree. But they aren’t, because they fundamentally don’t understand how to think about the entertainment media they consume.

            And by the way, it’s a high dragon, not a horse.

            • kwomp2@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I agree with you about most people not understanding their social structural sorroundings sufficiently to lead their (collective) lives in a souvereign way.

              But this is not a primarily cognitive problem. Just as much it is rooted in the social structure itself. One must take into account: Which opportunities does a given act of thinking and understanding provide an individual?

              In an individualized and individualizing political, ecological, cultural landscape, understanding things critically often is fruitless. For example to ensure social affiliation or navigate through the market specifique concepts, notions and sorts of “truth” are productive. Analyzing your culture to find collective paths of historic development require different scopes.

              Praxeology might be a notion you could enjoy exploring.

              IMO this is important if you want both, get of the high horse and fly the mighty dragon of critique.

              • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Drag agrees, society is to blame for the way people are.

                But, people are also to blame for the way society is. It’s a vicious chicken.

                Therefore, we need to educate people, like by telling them there’s more to literacy than knowing to to read something literally.

        • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          to be a fully functional person

          I’m pretty sure people with sub-god-tier level reading abilities, as you say they should have, can function just fine in their day to day.

          • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            No, they can’t. The globe is warming and the human race is on its way to extinction. Humanity is failing as a species.

              • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                And furthermore, Captain Planet told us all what to do in the 90s. Abolish the conditions of Capital which allow greedy billionaires to destroy the environment for personal enrichment. We didn’t pay enough attention to realise what we had to do, because we’re media illiterate. It’s not just Captain Planet, there’s thousands of books, movies, songs, and TV shows that tell us what the problems are in society, and we still don’t fix them!

        • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          No, most people are not illiterate, you’re confusing literacy with media literacy because that’s what you want to talk about instead.

          There is a difference between “I don’t know what that sign says” and “I don’t know what this book means.”

          • fern@lemmy.autism.place
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            It’s called functional literacy, which is what’s being talked to here. Also, your anecdote fails to address other possibilities. I have a friend that, under stress of a new location, may lose the ability to read menus, and their literacy matches other academics in their field. I am a reader that cannot read aloud because that is an entirely different skill than reading.

            • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I know I’m talking about functional illiteracy, that’s why I said “Most likely functionally illiterate” in my comment.

              The person who replied to me brought up media literacy/illiteracy, which is a separate concept, and mistakenly referred to it as illiteracy, which I corrected.

        • ZeffSyde@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I have ‘Agenbite Inwit’ tattooed on my person and feel as though this ogre meme has called me out.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Idunno anything about this guy, but for some folks they just weren’t taught early enough. You can learn to read at any age, but no amount of motivation can match an early education

    • CafecitoHippo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      No need to board shame him. He’s just rocking with what he’s got. It’s not the size of the board, it’s the motion on the pavement.

    • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      If the longboard is the length of the US and he mounts it, does that count? Does he have to walk the length on the longboard? I have so many (very stupid) questions!