English translations

Author: jon011235

_config.yml

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ mastodon:
 
 #lang: de-DE
 languages: ["de", "en"]
-default_lang: "de"
+default_lang: "en"
 exclude_from_localization: ["javascript", "images", "css", "public", "sitemap", "CNAME"]
 parallel_localization: true
 

_posts/2025-12-04-instagram-en.markdown

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+layout: post_comment
+title: "One Month of Instagram - Impressions After Long Refusal"
+date: 2025-12-04 16:43:32 +0100
+categories: reflection
+lang: en
+comment_id: '115828460041618137'
+---
+
+> AI translation by Gemini 3 Flash
+
+> **Update: Jan 2, 2026**: The text was originally titled "One Month of Instagram - The Ultimate Challenge," which I found nicely ironic, but apparently the irony didn't land and it was interpreted as actual clickbait instead. I'm afraid the title still isn't great, but hopefully it's better.
+
+I'm currently trying out Instagram after refusing it for 20 years. I set myself a month to explore the app, and I have to say already: I'm looking forward to uninstalling it again soon. I already know that I'll still miss a few things:
+
+I'm truly fascinated that this app is not, as I originally thought, a way to stay in touch with friends – which I find very unfortunate, as I always thought that was the most compelling use case.
+
+I'm trying to sort and analyze my thoughts according to different needs and wishes I have for the app.
+
+First of all: I didn't believe it, but the algorithm actually managed very quickly to wash content toward me that interests me and kept me in the app – even if never for longer than 10 minutes. That's probably a lot of habit.
+
+At the same time, it didn't seem to me as if the algorithm had to be particularly sophisticated, since the vast majority of the content suggested to me had already been liked by my friends, so the chance was high that I could do something with it.
+
+When I talk about content here, I mean almost exclusively "Shorts" (on Instagram "Reels," as far as I understand), which are at most about a minute long and then repeat. That is almost the only content you are exposed to (as of November 2025). Photos hardly exist; posts with predominantly text, on the other hand, don't exist at all. Many posts do have some accompanying text, but this is placed in a rather hidden way and is not easy to read. Several times it happened to me that when I wanted to continue reading in the text (and scrolled there), I scrolled the content further instead, which made it very unpleasant.
+
+## Social Gatekeeper
+
+First, I should perhaps explain why I even got Instagram after such a long time: after having heard about it from others so often and slowly realizing that certain data of mine is already widespread anyway (there are guaranteed to be dozens of pictures on Instagram alone that others have uploaded), and having also surrendered to other modern hostages like LinkedIn, my aversion has weakened somewhat.
+
+However, that wasn't enough. The final straw that led me to install Instagram was the fact that I wanted to meet people in Athens and I could only view the events of the ESN (Erasmus Student Network) with an account on Instagram – the websites hadn't been maintained for over a year.
+
+This is just one of many examples of Instagram becoming a social bulletin board that makes it possible to network locally, make offers visible, and communicate information – in contrast to the World Wide Web, but to the exclusion of all people who do not want to register with Meta (Facebook). And what an invasive registration process it is: email, phone number (involuntary link with WhatsApp, another app of which I am an involuntary hostage), CAPTCHA, and then a scan of my face.
+
+In my opinion, it is really not okay that this is the hurdle for participation. Even then, you are still restricted: for example, I was initially forbidden from following some accounts. The goal is of course to lock out bots, but why with such means? Many private accounts require the owner to confirm that the content may be viewed, and such measures do not stop bot armies. The bot armies then arise, at worst, through the exploitation of the poorest or even with human trafficking, as described for example [here](https://re-publica.com/de/session/gefangen-im-scam-milliagedbetrug-asiens-schattenstaedten).
+
+## Enormous Masses of Original, Culturally and Intellectually Impressive Content
+
+As it quickly turns out, however, Instagram is not primarily the bulletin board for which I installed it; nor is it the way to stay in touch with friends and acquaintances. Rather, you have to look for these things relatively actively. The feed (i.e., the things you are shown) consists of an endless number of videos dealing with really everything. A list doesn't do it justice; you find every genre, every topic – everything.
+
+This infinity is curated, in an adjustable and intransparent way, by the algorithm that is repeatedly discussed in social debates. As soon as I had added some friends from the "real world," this algorithm actually became interesting, and it delivered a lot of funny content that really made me laugh. In between, there were incredibly concise excerpts from good speeches, news, history, and a surprising number of videos about the nuances of the English language. This is what my algorithm bestowed upon me, and in fact, I like much of it very much. As already mentioned, these recommendations don't come out of nowhere; the vast majority have already been liked by friends of mine.
+
+What I de facto don't see at all is content from my friends (some of the posts I see are quite old, but nothing current from my friends ever appears) and also no other content from the public profiles I follow (i.e., various organizers, media personalities, initiatives, etc.). For that, you have to explicitly click into a somewhat hidden tab, and as soon as you jump anywhere else, you're back in the other feed.
+
+Although it's not what I hoped for and what I thought Instagram was, I have to say: I find it surprisingly exciting. Inspiration at the push of a button, genius at the push of a button, jokes at the push of a button. But whose button? I have no way of deciding what of it I get, what I want to see more of, or if I just find the current videos stupid.
+
+Worse, however, is the contextlessness of everything: excerpts of historical speeches, life hacks, political jokes are strung together. Rarely is there an opportunity to deepen something. Even if you read the text or go to the creator's channel, there is rarely an opportunity to deepen this direction, e.g., in the form of the entire speech or a classification. Furthermore, the videos often repeat immediately, which I find very exhausting. There is also no "pause" button; it simply doesn't exist. If I want to think about what I've seen, I have to close the app. The only thing that is quick is to turn off the sound – perhaps so that it doesn't get too embarrassing when you use it by mistake at school or at work?
+
+I wish I could access the enormous variety of Instagram, to which billions of people contribute, in another way. I think that would be very exciting – especially the possibility to see "other" content could also be good training for one's own tolerance, as long as one stays open to it. But I know of course that that won't happen. I would think an alternative Instagram client that gives more control over the content, builds in pauses, and highlights texts would be incredibly great. That way, one could slowly develop the platform in a direction where it is a gateway to inspiration that doesn't follow a pee-poop joke, but offers the possibility to engage more deeply.
+
+That is of course just my very personal view. I assume that I'm out on a limb with large parts of this. There are definitely more reasons why Instagram is not as I wish it to be, besides the corporate structure behind it.
+
+## Conclusion: Thoughts on Contact with Friends
+
+While it's not the way I thought it was to stay in touch with friends that I had hoped for, the truth is: I've seen so much more from people I haven't had anything to do with for years, but in whom I'm interested in what they're up to. What I really wouldn't have thought and what almost makes me want to keep Instagram is the possibility to see the reels your friends see, even if they (this is just my feeling) don't suit me. I found this insight into my friends' and acquaintances' thoughts incredibly exciting! Even if it rarely truly surprised me, it gave me the unique opportunity to observe friends from my complete absence – and also, to a certain extent, how they see themselves. I find that fantastic.
+
+On Instagram, people follow each other very quickly, and so I got many suggestions for accounts of former classmates whom many of my Instagram-native friends follow. But here, too, the effect of experiencing what is happening with others did not occur. Most of them only had a profile picture and virtually no posts or stories (in the period I've had Instagram). Part of the problem is of course that even a private account becomes relatively more "public" relatively quickly if you add every little acquaintance over years. Therefore, Instagram allows making posts that not all followers of one's own profile can see, but only "close friends." So it may be that the contact aspect exists much more than I can perceive as a relatively outsider. But even in exchange with my friends, the feeling remains: Instagram is very little about staying in touch with friends and much more a platform for content marketing (even if one with sometimes very good content).
+
+I would wish for a platform that focuses on this friend-aspect and can map both the information needs with close friends and with distant acquaintances. But without the network effect, that probably won't happen for now. Maybe I should try "Be Real" next.
+
+## Summary
+
+In summary, I have to say: Instagram offers a very exciting insight into how many people spend a lot of time in their everyday lives, and it is significantly more interesting than expected. In its current form, however, I find the app terrible and not connecting.
+
+By the way, my Instagram username was: **disgusted.by.insta**. I'm surprised it wasn't already taken.

_posts/2025-12-04-instagram.markdown

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ layout: post_comment
 title: "Ein Monat Instagram - Eindr\xFCcke nach langer Verweigerung"
 date: 2025-12-04 16:43:32 +0100
 categories: reflection
+lang: de
 comment_id: '115828460041618137'
 ---
 > **Update: 2.1.2026**: Ursprünglich hieß der Text "Ein Monat Instagram - die ultimative Challenge", was ich schön ironisch fand, aber anscheinend kam die Ironie nicht an und es wurde stattdessen als tatsächlicher Clickbait interpretiert. Ich fürchte der Titel ist immer noch nicht gut, aber hoffentlich besser.

_posts/2025-12-14-atheismus-en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+---
+layout: post_comment
+title: "Atheism - An Epistemologically Tenable Position?"
+date: 2025-12-14 14:24:00 +0100
+categories: reflection
+lang: en
+comment_id: '115828460090009764'
+---
+
+> AI translated using Gemini 3 Flash
+
+> This text is definitely nothing **new** and is probably also less well-sourced. I hope you find it interesting nonetheless.  
+> As a counter-thesis, one could read Richard Dawkins, for example, whom I personally find to be self-dogmatic. I should also add that I have not read any primary sources for most of the things mentioned here so far.
+
+Some definitions for the purpose of this post:
+
+**Atheism**: The conviction that a divine being of any form does not exist, or that it is wrong to assume such an existence.
+
+Distinguished from this is **Agnosticism**, which makes no statement about whether a divine being exists or not, thus moving neither toward atheism nor toward any form of faith or spirituality.
+
+The definition below for "empirical" used here ultimately goes back to Karl Popper, who postulated the possibility of falsifiability as a criterion for a scientific theory.
+
+For the "classical" empirical method to work, repeatability and thus control over the relevant factors of an experiment are essential. Conversely, this means that a divine being that does not want to "play along" with the experiment is not detectable. No verifiable (falsifiable) hypotheses can be set up; the question of a divine being thus lies outside the scope of science[^2].
+
+This results in infinitely many hypothetical worlds that are indistinguishable for us through experiments. Even more serious: even without the possibility of any "divine being," there are infinitely many models[^6] that cannot be distinguished by our experiments so far, and beyond that, numerous interpretations of these models[^1] (where theory and interpretation are not sharply separated).
+
+## Conflict with Occam's Razor and Untestable Gods
+
+To select from a multitude of non-falsifiable models one that is considered the "most probable"[^7], additional assumptions are needed. A very popular principle here is [Occam's Razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor). It refers to the rather abstract concept of choosing the "simpler" theory – typically the one that requires fewer or less pronounced assumptions. This principle can, of course, lead to theories being excluded that are closer to the underlying "real" truth[^3].
+
+I would even argue that the assumption of Occam's Razor together with the assumption of a divine being that does not intervene repeatably is necessarily inconsistent[^4]:
+
+1. Model 1 (with God) cannot be empirically falsified, while Model 2 (identical, but without God) would be falsifiable – according to our assumption about the divine being.
+2. If we assume Occam's Razor, we would choose Model 2 because it contains fewer assumptions; however, this is in direct conflict with our assumption of a divine being.
+
+This doesn't make Occam's Razor a bad assumption at all; it is, for example, very useful for deciding in which direction to continue research or which content should be disseminated in science communication[^8]. It is important to note that Occam's Razor itself is only an assumption that does not necessarily lead to the underlying truth.
+
+The problem is that Occam's Razor is often cited in debates to "refute" God. In doing so, Occam's Razor is just as carelessly a belief (or an assumption) as the assumption of a God, which atheists often dismiss as mere assumption. There is no deeper reason for it other than practicality and simplification – just like faith, which can lead to comfort and community even without the existence of God.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+Fewer assumptions and thus more general validity are achieved if one adopts neither Occam's Razor nor God (or belief) and instead takes an agnostic stance. For concrete belief systems that have falsifiable hypotheses (e.g., the effectiveness of talismans or homeopathy), the picture is obviously different. At the same time, it does not exclude occurrences of divine appearance, as these are inherently non-repeatable and thus also do not represent a testable hypothesis.
+
+> Update Jan 22: I received feedback that it is not sufficiently documented that (many) atheists make the restriction in their world view of excluding a God in any form. To provide this, I'd like to point to, for example, [Atheism: A Very Short Introduction](https://academic.oup.com/book/35408), which explains that most atheists are naturalists, "meaning that the world is to be understood as a purely natural phenomenon." - [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy))
+
+<!--  
+Additionally, some atheists (including [Richard Dawkins](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins), for example) replicate the system of faith quite well: They argue with great conviction that there is no God. This position is perfectly tenable, but not provable, and sometimes leads to generalizations such as "All believers are fanatics," thereby reproducing the very criticism of religion itself.  
+-->
+
+## Footnotes
+
+[^2]: One (or several) potentially existing divine beings apparently do not participate in experiments (e.g., a conversation) because they cannot or we haven't found the right experiment yet.
+
+[^6]: For example, all super-symmetries and string theories discussed in modern physics.
+
+[^1]: In quantum physics, for example, the Copenhagen interpretation versus the many-worlds theory; previously equivalent, experimentally indistinguishable interpretations like the [Dirac sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea) or the [luminiferous aether](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether).
+
+[^7]: For the purpose of prioritizing research or deciding what is taught and communicated.
+
+[^3]: The simplest example is [Flatland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland)[^5]: A society of beings that can only perceive a two-dimensional world, but in reality live in a three-dimensional one. The book is a recommended satire that illustrates the limitations of our imagination when we try to grasp higher dimensions.
+
+[^5]: Also mentioned on the [Influential](/influential) page with media that impressed me.
+
+[^4]: Mathematical term for "contradictory" (inkonsistent).
+
+[^8]: Noting that we are not sure is a rather boring explanation for people who have a basic interest in the current state of research but not the time and capacity to look at a hundred different models.

_posts/2025-12-14-atheismus.md

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ layout: post_comment
 title: Atheismus - eine erkenntnistheoretisch schwer haltbare Position
 date: 2025-12-14 14:24:00 +0100
 categories: reflection
+lang: de
 comment_id: '115828460090009764'
 ---
 > Dieser Text ist definitiv nichts **Neues** und ist wahrscheinlich auch schlechter belegt. Ich hoffe, du findest ihn trotzdem interessant.  

_posts/2026-01-03-autopost.md

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ layout: post_comment
 title: Automated posting upon new blog post and a neat comment system
 date: 2026-01-03 00:44:00
 categories: tech
+lang: en
 comment_id: '115828460137138706'
 ---
 > **TL;DL**