Lemmy right now feels like reddit from the early 2010s. The community is still quite small, it’s mostly still early adopters and folks looking for an alternative to big social medias, which attracts a different crowd than the mainstream.
It’s actually a hit of nostalgia for me, I’m kind of into the weirdness and intimacy of a smaller community, but I certainly understand where you’re coming from.
One of my favorite niche subreddits has over 600k members, the biggest equivalent community has about 350ish users here, there’s a certain quality that comes with that quantity of users.
But if we stick with it more folks will join and we can make this place into what we want it to be, and that’s pretty cool imo. Lemmy is still in it’s infancy compared to reddit, and it’s not perfect, but I think we can build it into something even better, and missing the good parts of reddit can inspire us to make sure that we incorporate them into lemmy in the future.
I’ve been embracing the weirdness of multiple platforms with distinct cultures and equally enjoying going to different parts of the internet again after quite some time! I do miss the sense that in browsing Reddit you could sample the cultural pulse of a particular demographic cluster.
Looks like this decision is decided already but I figured I'd put in my input. Given this instance has an open registration policy, nothing is stopping someone from another instance to create an alternative just for voting on this instance. This individual might align and contribute positively to the fediverse and have really great ideas and contributions to discussions here. However because they use their alt account here on sh.itjust.works only for voting, their vote might get dismissed due to poor account reputation (another issue that I believe was already brought up in another post). The fediverse is meant to be a decentralized community and by forcing people to need to join this community to vote promotes centralization which I believe is the opposite of what the fediverse is trying to accomplish. I guess for now I'll hold off on casting my vote until the community determines what criteria should be considered when counting a vote.
Was in the middle of posting the exact same thing when your post came in. Yes, it's open registration. So even if you make it so only local users can vote... anyone anywhere can instantly make an account here and vote. So there is no reason to enforce this. The reputation thing would just mean that people would have to "farm karma" before their alt can vote and then they just leave the alt sitting for votes. Im not sure you should be doing anything that promotes karma farming...
So if it's easier to set up the vote with it local only. Do that. If it's easier to set up by allowing voting for anywhere. Do that. Just do what takes the least effort because at the end of the day there is no way to prevent outside voting.
I think that, in general, it almost shouldn't matter which instance you're a part of. Ideally that choice doesn't affect how you view the fediverse. One of the largest reasons I'm against de-federation for anything but the worst offenders is that I think that we need to move away from centrally controlled social media to a more decentralized means of interacting.
I think if I had to design it myself I would ensure that there not any governance decisions that should be made on the instance level. Communities should have rules, instances should have rules about what communities they want to host and the communities should work with the people running the instance to ensure that their software needs are taken care of (maybe they need video hosting, or some software integration into a game or whatever).
Decisions about how to govern communities should be made at the community level and the community leaders should work with the instance administrators to ensure that everything runs correctly. The communities should determine their own means of setting rules. The instance owner is basically just running the hardware, keeping the software updated and ensuring the community moderators have the tools they need.
I could see this being a vulnerability though, there are people out there who would want to game democratic systems - particularly for hot-button issues, from real-life politics to defederating Meta.
I think another big thing to consider is that we need to have a discussion thread first before people can cast their vote. A lot of people in this thread have already voted before hearing any arguments other than the OP, which heavily skews the vote in favor of OP. If we have a discussion thread for a few days first and get all the discussion out of the way we can then have a vote after and people can go back and read all the arguments made before voting.
On the other hand, quite some people still need to grasp all intricacies of federation: we already have quite a few users over from kbin demanding defederation from a third party instance without realising it would not affect them at all.
Of course, it will be easy to sign up just for voting, but at least if you choose to do so, you know what you are doing...
requiring an account on this instance is not going to stop everyone, and it doesn't need to. i think this is on par with adding captcha to the account creation. people who are determined to disrupt will still get through, but this minimizes the possibility of low effort trolling.
i agree that voting shouldn't be tied to account reputation or age. if someone's going to create an account just to vote here then so be it.
I get what you mean, but if this is the forum for discussing how this instance is run, then I think at the very least, the opinions and views of those with accounts based on this instance should weigh more than those from elsewhere. They have their own instances to take an active role in, and if they find the direct-democracy aspect of sh.itjust.works, they should have their "main" account here. There's been a long-requested feature to allow account instance migration a la Mastodon style, making such a weighting or restriction more equitable.
This post seems like a good reminder for everyone that people can see who upvoted, downvoted, and boosted any post and comment by clicking "more" and "activity".
What exactly is such a feature supposed to do, other than making it easier to try to dig through someone's history to 'win' an argument or discredit users?
Between this and the requirement for email address at registration I find the lack of privacy on kbin/fediverse a bit curious. I don't see why such a feature brings value, but at the same time I guess it's more for a technical reason. The list of users who upvoted need to be saved anyway and as it's decentralized anyway anyone can read it. Just wished it was hashed instead, or replaced by some digital signature.
I'm only guessing, but I assume email is likely to help cut down on spam bots. Maybe? (Someone do tell me if that's wrong. I wouldn't mind learning something!)
I know some users here say seeing who upvotes promotes transparency. Maybe you're less likely to upvote some hatespeech if you're attached to it and not doing so anonymously. Which then means it gets less traction and the user feels less welcome. Which curbs it.
But then privacy is important, too. There's nothing wrong with me going to the adult store and buying a gimp suit for myself with the Anal Blaster Master 3000: Destroyer of Rims vibrating dildo pack. But I also don't need my neighbors or family to know. Just like I don't need people to know I upvoted that really hot video of a man smearing chunky peanut butter on his incredibly hairy chest as a girl tries to lick it off.
I'm sticking around for now and seeing if things either change (like if the users for upvoted etc get hashed or something for example) and how things end up feeling in the long run with or without those changes.
The prime directive seems more like an excuse rather than a philosophy most of the time. The prime directive gets reinterpreted harder than the prophecies from Nostradamus.
On screen it suffers from the audience’s availability heuristic. We see the times when it’s hard to follow or should be broken because those are the encounters worth making an episode about. The mundane “Here’s a planet in its Bronze Age. We take only holographs and leave only footprints.”
Who Watches the Watchers kinda is a mundane episode about the prime directive since it’s morality isn’t really being questioned. The interesting part of the episode is watching the Enterprise crew repeatedly screw up trying to uphold the prime directive before deciding that they’ve already violated it like crazy on accident, might as well use that as a way to try and fix it now. The scenes actually about the prime directive were the most boring parts of that episode.
The problem is that the Prime Directive as presented in Star Trek is shown as this fully formed dictate without anyone having a good idea as to why it is important. It is made worse with Star Trek’s episodic form that doesn’t go back to previous worlds to check up on them; Lower Decks makes it a point to show that the Federation is really bad at this.
In contrast, Stargate has a few episodes which show how such a policy would be good for the program.
I love that one episode in Atlantis with the “strategy game” in the Atlantean computer for this. Arguably one big difference is that the Tau’ri were always closer in tech to the places they visited than the Goa’uld et al.
I always took it more as the Tau’ri were never in a condition to control the space around primitive cultures, so they never bothered trying to protect local cultures. You also don’t have a utopia economy yet, so the Tau’ri government was far more willing to not worry about societal impacts if it meant gaining access to technology or resources.
So basically what this guy is saying: "Let's go from reddit to another closed platform, so they could lock us again later the way reddit did". Nice alternative
Yeah, that's my concern when it comes to BlueSky as a Twitter replacement. Seems like the Fediverse is the best way so far to keep that from happening.
Microsoft Windows is a closed platform, while Linux is an open one. You could make the same argument, but that doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of things that Windows has going for it that Linux does not. While there is a subsection of power users who are fine with Linux, it's nowhere near what it needs to be to appeal to the masses.
I understand why an open platform is important to you, but it should not be treated as the only metric that matters.
I made the sacrifice and checked the IG account - it’s full of equally bigoted posts, in the spirit of a 4chan incel, where each post has between 0 to 3 likes. Especially the ones where he complains about the dating market are sad.
It amalgomates a few things the conservatives hate, abortion, gay parents, transgender. The result is grotesque and funny. It’s also funny to think that this is what conservatives think the left wants.
Maybe it’s because I live in a progressive country i can find the comic amusing. We don’t really get staunch conservatives around here and they are not really a threat.
Obviously also new here. What you are seeing, honestly, is that the communities that have the most activity. This is what the majority of the users here want. Can you really blame them? You came to a preexisting community that had one thing in common. The federated social networks are explicitly anti-faang, that’s their reason for being. We’re just here because Reddit took away our stuff. It’s on us to make the content and the community we want. They welcomed us.
Yep. The reason the fediverse exists is to solve the ownership problem of big social network companies (ranging from privacy issues, to greed, to political influence), so naturally the group that uses the fediverse first are the ones that feel most strongly about that issue.
It really isn't hostile here 95% of the time, but on the topic of Meta it's like poking a hornets nest.
I know my family and most people don't really care about the privacy settings of Meta and I don't bother trying to convince them to change, but I will always enjoy shit talking them to like minded folk online.
Nuclear is easily the best path forward and even when you consider events like Chernoble, the harm on humanity is vastly dwarfed by what coal has done to us.
Sometimes I can guess what a Cyrillic word is, because a few of the letters are similar to roman letters. Like, the K letters are similar, some of the vowels are similar, etc. But, I’d never have guessed that had anything to do with Chernobyl.
Johnny Harris and Big If True have a great video discussing fear and actual nuclear impacts. The only factor it lacks mentioning is how much land fossil fuels takes up. Each year, fossil fuels infrastructure distroys more land than Chernobyl and fukushima combined.
Agreed, except Johnny Harris routinely has no idea what he is talking about and does a horrible job at explaining factual content. He does tell an incredible story, however.
I doubt nuclear alone would suffice to power our civilization. Of course, you didn’t say that.
Oil has been quite easy energy source enabling complex supply chains and I don’t think we can change them to electric or nuclear powered ones.
We’ve had a horrible track record on waste disposal. Climate change is the result of our failure to dispose of CO2 from burning fossil fuels and that’s also why I’m wary of us dealing with nuclear waste.
It’s been mathematically proven that it could power our entire planet multiple times over for centuries. The waste created from nuclear power is much easier to keep from entering the environment than coal/oil.
It’s factually safer and more efficient. You’re just spewing corporate fear mongering designed to keep oil barons in control.
and instead of building plants with learnings from those events we continue to do nothing with nuclear, relying on ever aging tech and facilities. id love to see small nuclear reactors or some of the other designs being put into use. we also need to spread renewables around as well. if every house was its own powersource and onl relied on the grid for backup things would be cleaner.
I just see their response as being close to the stereotypical, skeptical IT guy response to problems. Including having an inflated view of ones self... that "shutting down the sub on a Monday will have an adverse impact on our readers, including possible production issues. really got me.
Let's be patient with this and not give him a hard time. For those of you who haven't used Sync before, there was a major update a while back which caused strong emotions from many people and caused the developer to take a hiatus. Please be patient and kind and the result will be worth it!
It was so sad because you could tell he put so much work into it. But like a good dev he listened to feedback and ended up allowing it to be customized to how I liked it originally.
It had to do with how the cards were presented and how the quick menu and swipe up/down worked. I preferred the previous way but the new way worked just fine. Just took an extra click to use it how I wanted.
It came down to changing how it looked / worked after everyone was already used to how it currently was. People get upset for no good reason sometimes and this was one of those reasons.
Yeah we need to leave that in the past and not repeat a fiasco like that. The community could have handled that much better. I'm just thankful for the support from lj.
Random
Top