TheObviousSolution @ TheObviousSolution @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

41

Joined

3 wk. ago

IMO, blocking should only be limited to hiding comments and prevent them from directly replying to you, and it should also be transparent to other users if the parent comment or a nested child comment is blocked or being blocked. Depending on the person you are blocking, it also shouldn't be permanent but have an expiry date. If they are clearly a hate filled bigot, block for a decade, if they are immature, for a year or two, if they are just worked up in the moment, weeks to a month. Sort of like banning, but at an individual level.

It's definitely real, even if it is just the list of 150 Epstein associates that were unsealed years ago. If there was anything more, it ceased to exist during the first Trump administration.

"Please assume the position."

I'm hoping it includes New Game+

The new account icon tells very little in comparison to the comment history.

If, say, my account was created today as I'm posting in a very politically radicalized topic, it can be very suggestive about the type of user I am. If the account seems to be speaking from experience and awareness of the social network they are speaking to and it is new, it can indicate they are an alt, like a newly created one from one that closed down like lemm.ee.

But aside from that, it can do very little. It is the comment history that is most revealing to the type of user you are interacting with. With comment history and a recently created account, it can pretty much nail why someone created the account for sure, whereas if you just have a new account participating and just see a single comment with the signs of a dog whistle in a very politically radicalized topic from them, that might be suggestive, but nowhere near what a flurry of hate filled comment history would be that you might have been denied the chance to check up on with Reddit.

Some people can outgrow their comment history, akin to what "right to forget", but I'd argue for something more like the ability to be able to tack on that you have done that, how, why, and what shows it, so more akin to a right to forgive. The only thing that should have a hard right to forget IMO is strictly doxxable and harassable private data.That's a different but tangential type of discussion.

They added functionality that allows you to hide your comment history, so now you have even less information regarding whether you are talking to a real human being or not. Before, they didn't even have to advertise. Now, they've enshittified themselves so much they desperately need new users.

I mean, it's a Trump appointee. Was there ever any doubt?

Oh no, but that might mean the more consumers spend their money in the economy for their free time, which is what the service industry now adopting AI is complaining is increasingly absent! Whatever shall we do!

TrumpUSA doesn't want a rich economy, they want a serfdom with high socioeconomic inquality that the new ultranationalist oligarchy can exploit for their nationalist interests while they push out the industries they ordinarily would not be able to compete against.

Thanks for the correction, I was going off of the FAQ page, https://join.piefed.social/features/, that had a post to a thread that has not been updated.

So in that regard, is it what lemmy instances already do when they don't want instances like mbin to see downvotes? Or does it completely eliminate federation of votes and only shows tallies from the host instance? Either way, the decision is taken from the user and basically undoes the federated aspect of the platform for a dubious concern. At the very least, it should be up to the user.

PieFed private voting is just sad as well as toxic. Inevitably PieFed instances will be abused to facilitate manufactured downvotes from instances due to their inherent anonymity. We are already blind enough online, not being able to see upvotes or downvotes does nothing. Being able to go to mbin and see the way people vote hasn't resulted in some huge controversy. Even the most recent controversy involved admins shouting brigade due to downvotes they didn't like, and PieFed does nothing to prevent it.

I'm not saying people wouldn't react to being able to see who downvoted or upvoted them, but I would liken it to a toddler phase getting used to socialization. Once people get acclimated to it, it essentially adds transparency that can explain trends, reveal stalking and remove suspicions. Without it, people just get fed up and make their own assumptions, which just feeds toxicity and division without any real awareness.

The fediverse is prone to manipulation, and PieFed makes it more so with this change without really providing a reason except that people feel uncomfortable standing behind their downvotes. Downvotes (or upvotes) from the people who can't stand behind them shouldn't count. The whole reputation system also sounds a bit like a love letter to reddit karmawhores, and the whole design seems to be designed to take away power from users and move it to particular instances admins to curate content through things like visibility.

They want to remain in their small, closed off bubbles. Experiencing different social networks beats the purpose.

Elon neuralinked into Grok AI, and mechahitler was the result.

Opted for large scaled systems. It’s more than just simple software. There is a ton of infrastructure and proprietary solutioning that goes into it. That’s likely used for other games as well.

Doesn't mean it can't be released, just that it might be difficult to reproduce. It would still be much, much easier to reverse engineer that than to reverse engineer everything from the client and network communication captures.

It may not even be possible to release the software because it is not just software and the resources to prepare it for releasing may not be available.

In other words, so you don't know, and vague assumptions on a closed box because closed boxes allow you to make them.

Most MMOs usually have multiple instances running, each which need to be maintained separately. That means they have usually gone through the process of encapsulating the server functionality in a way that can be reproduced and recreated into new instances. They have to be maintained at the same time, so they need to be relatively standard. At one point those supposedly absent resources to duplicate the instance of a server have likely existed, and just need to be packaged for public release. Proprietary portions can simply be excluded - an incomplete release is preferable to an absent one. Can't release databases, they can release schemas, etc. Incomplete > absent.

You largely seem to be giving MMO companies the excuse that if their server solution could theoretically be proprietary and convoluted enough, even if it really isn't, that they not be subject to the Stop Killing Games initiative. MMOs, unlike single player games, have a far more notable sociable and persistence factor to them, a bigger cultural footprint within those communities, that makes the Stop Killing Games Initiative particularly applicable to them. There's one simply way not to be subject to its demands - don't kill the games.

The problem is a lack of "Beware of Grass Ticks" signs.

It's not being done to appease Trump. Europe has to build up its armies when China, US, Russia, and their proxy allies clearly are. In an ideal world, everyone would stay away from war. Right now, remaining a pacifist that isn't spending on defense is painting a crosshair on yourself. Defense is what has allowed Ukraine to continue to exist against an "empire's thirst for endless war, its military and oil oligarchies and colonization of allies".

The thing that Europe should also be doing is moving out of NATO into their own alliance. When the leaders of those alliances threaten to invade its members, its members should be leaving, not calling its leader pappy. I understand playing politics with democracies who can change administrations, but the US is rapidly ceasing to be one if it hasn't already.

It's hard to find a more Nazi way of doing it. Never forget, Zionists signed the Haavara Agreement with Hitler. You can look up Hitler's quotes on Zionists to find that his problem with them was that *"It doesn't even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there" *- that they weren't being imperial colonialist enough and were just all talk. It's sad to see the meaning of genocide twisted so much to use the genocide of the past to protect the genocide of the present. Hitler's problem with Jews in Germany is that they were staying in Germany, it was not with the Zionists who were trying to take over the reigns of Mandate Palestine.

Sort of what we are seeing now, radical far right groups sticking up for each other even when at face value ideologically they should be opposed - because it's not about the lie they are peddling, it's about forcing people out and conquering occupied territory to take their wealth and resources. Not that these far right leaders will ever admit it, but the shifting stream of excuses, justifications, and contradictions create the outline of what they've even lied to themselves about. They are not people of character.

I think people are overestimating what this petition is going to do. It will likely just end up in a response from the EU listing pros and cons but effectively saying "can't really do anything about it, sorry!". It's still good, even MMOs have server software gaming companies could release if legislation forced them instead of causing fandoms to die. Games are culture. They may also be entertainment, but that's culture as well. But I wouldn't hold out hope.

So, apart from the tourist trap price hike you will get with any souvenir, food, or service you purchase, foreign tourists will have to pay even more while also having the risk of getting illegally detained by non-identified federal officers or being denied entry because of memes on their phones? US patriot culture was already difficult enough to swallow, although to be fair the shift to fascism already left it in shambles well before this drop in the ocean.

Yeah, this is a shit instance to have a discussion in anyway.

Cool, I'll come to you to check on the feelings of literally entirely everyone else when I need to. I'm glad everyone went out and got themselves a spokesman. Meanwhile, I'll point you to an earlier mention in my comments about raising awareness.

You shift into completely diametrically opposed claims whenever it seems to suit you and portray a lack of awareness and possibility as consensus in this regard. Is it "trying to re-engineer the whole platform" or is it already "possible today"? There is no use like this because without willingness, people will just set up the instances like they've been told they have and perform slight variations on them. That is no proof or argument against the idea at all from people just following the cookie cutter.