I’ve held off rewatching Rogue One until Andor season two finishes, so the former isn’t fresh in my mind, but there is plenty of character development in Andor. He’s the “guy who gets shit done” but at the beginning of the show, he’s reckless and only in it for himself. In that season he sees first hand how the evils of the Empire affect his life, recognizes how his selfishness negatively impacts those around him, sees what it means to be part of something bigger than yourself, and is able to (sort of) move on from a life that revolves around his missing sister. The Rebellion gives him something to focus on and be apart of.
The ending of episode 6, exactly halfway through the season, is also a perfect midpoint for this arc. He’s approached by somebody that’s in it for themselves, and the reckless, reactive part of Andor reflexively shoots him. He’s refuting the selfish part of himself that would have done the very same thing, but the reckless “shoot first think later” part of him is still alive and well.
It’s based on assumption, not faith. If we can trust our senses, and if things will continue to be as they have been, then the things we are learning have value. As long as you can recognize that everything could in theory end or completely change at any moment, it’s not blind belief.
I am optimistic about Meta’s investment in the Fediverse. If you don’t believe the Fediverse can survive the embrace of big tech, I don’t think you believe in it at all. You don’t want an open web, you just want to be the one in control. The goal of a decentralized internet - in my opinion - is to separate content from service. And if you believe that is the future, then you have to accept that companies are going to build new services that will try to monetize that content. But the beauty of that paradigm is you get to choose the service that works best for you without sacrificing access to the people or media you’re interested in. And really, it’s not much different from say, Google, being able to monetize Chrome because it can access your website. I mean… yeah, but that’s kind of the point?
by adding features you can only get if you are on their platform. Their goal is to make most people prefer the Meta version of the fediverse
Why is this a bad thing? This is the system working as intended: a company forced to make a service people want, rather than just taking users for granted. You resist enshittification because you’re not being held hostage through access to content, so the company is forced to make the service good. And this will attract other companies to produce competing services.
And besides, most people already prefer the Meta version… they already have the user advantage. There’s already way more users locked in their services than there is on the rest of the Fediverse.
Assuming you mean “Can Mastodon instances defederate with Threads?”: Yes. Mastodon (and similar services) run on the ActivityPub protocol, which allows them to decide who they do and do not federate with. Many instances have chosen to preemptively block Threads, many have chosen not to. Pick what works for you.
Doesn’t really seem spoilery to me at all. Alan Wake - and Remedy in general - is very into surreal weirdness and world fuckery. He’s mostly talking about audiences being receptive to pushing creative boundaries.
Threads will be implementing federation in the near future and many instances have been discussing whether they should be pre-emptively defederated to protect the fediverse. See below for our local discussion thread, which will remain active until this vote is complete....
The 41% number combines both instances that have actually blocked Threads and those who have pledged to do so at some point, so “have blocked” is a bit misleading
As stated, this is a percentage of instances, not users. Roughly 24% of users are on instances that have limited, blocked, or pledged to block Threads.
I wanna see instances federated with most instances now that in individuals can ban entire instances. I know theres still some instances you want completely blocked from the off tho....
I think a perfectly acceptable line to draw is “Is it reasonable to expect a large majority of the people on this instance would want this other instance blocked?” If the answer is yes, block them. If somebody has a problem with that, move to a different instance.
Is there a way to set it up so user@example.com can be a lemmy account and also a mastadon account? I seen people using subdomains like user@lemmy.example.com and user@mastadon.example.com is this nessasary? Could u also set up a matrix account with the same user@example.com? If not what woukd be requured to change to make this...
I don’t know if there’s a service that provides both functions. I’m sure there’s a way to do it - Lemmy posts are already accessible through Mastodon. Currently, I assume you would need the instance itself to offer both services under one account.
I'm making a new #homebrew#dnd setting. The mistake I felt I made last time was trying to devise an orgin from whole cloth for each playable race, which wasted a TON of time and energy while also confusing my players. So, herein I wish to ask: What playable races would you miss, if you joined my table and noticed their absence?
Humans, dwarves, halflings, orcs, goblinoids, and elves will all stay, but I am not sure about all the others.
I would just write the world in a way that is interesting to you, and add to it as players show interest. “Hey, I want to play a Tabaxi” -> “oh okay, let me think about what that means and I’ll get back to you.” This also gives you more latitude for using their ideas to inform the world. “I want to play a Tabaxi Wizard” -> “oh interesting, maybe there’s a clan of them that…”
You’ll be able to focus on what you care about, which will make the world more interesting, and allow players to incorporate things they care about if they wish, which will make it more fun for them too. Framing it in terms of “up for deletion” implies you need to answer everything about the world from the start, which is not only inefficient but an impossible standard. Just because you haven’t considered something doesn’t mean it can’t exist.
I’ll go first. Mine is that I can’t stand the Deadpool movies. They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree. It’s like being continually reminded that I am in a movie. I swear the success of that movie has directly lead to every blockbuster having to have a joke every 30 seconds
People who like bad movies have been conditioned by consumerism to not appreciate art. They believe spectacle, humour, and a tight plot are ‘good enough’, and they don’t value thoughtfulness, novelty, beauty, or abrasiveness nearly enough. Film is more than a way to fill time and have fun. Film is more than an explosion, a laugh, and a happy ending.
On an unrelated note: Mad Max: Fury Road is one of my favourite movies.
I added that to sort of admit my own hypocrisy; I tried to exaggerate my opinion a bit for the sake of spurring discussion. I mostly believe what I said, but my real thoughts are much messier and less well thought out.
I don’t plan on staying here if you defederate with Threads, but I respect your right to do it. The move seems unnecessarily reactionary and premature. I think the open web has more to gain from encouraging companies to invest in ActivityPub than it does siloing itself off from anyone who represents real growth in the space.
If you want the community to remain small, fair enough. I believe in a world in which every social media service is using ActivityPub; I don’t care what or who they are. I don’t even really understand what the anti-EEE crowd is afraid of? The protocol is run by a neutral party (W3C), I can’t imagine any features that would compel major change, nobody that’s already on the Fediverse is going to leave, you can always decide later to defederate… The system already seems pretty well protected against hostile action.
how can i know the de/federation status of the instance? IIRC the instance subscribed to an auto-defederation program to auto exclude bot instances and such. is there a way to distinguish these from the manual defederations? like exploding heads, or hexbear (i thought we were defederated from them but i’ve just seen the old...
You’ve placed the bar so low that this suggests there is nothing an individual person can say or do that would warrant being banned, which is frankly bullshit. Every forum has rules, including this one, as it should. This is critical for maintaining a place of a discussion that is actually useful. I see no reason why “yeah but they’re popular” should give license to skirt the rules.
Freedom of speech, in the US at least, exists specifically to prevent the state from restricting speech. That’s all it is, and all it needs to be. Banning users from a private website does not contradict this.
The suggestion that unbanning Alex Jones makes the service less susceptible to ‘ignorant propaganda’ is also laughable.
You claimed “he shouldn’t have been banned”. Yet by your logic, any service is justified in banning any user for any reason, thus there is no reason that he should not have been banned in the first place.
They come and go. They’re random clutter. We only need a few big instances that hosts a majority of the communities and that’s it. Why do we need so many smaller ones?
I think you’ve correctly identified a problem, but misidentified the solution.
It’s true that there are many redundant communities of which everyone would be better served if there were an easy way to group them together. The solution, however, is not to reduce the number of instances, but rather to provide more tools for instances to group communities together. You want communities to be spread across many instances because this maximizes user control - it’s kind of the entire point? But of course, the lack of grouping makes it very difficult to try to centralize discussion, which is important for the community to grow. This service is still a work in progress, so these kinds of things - I hope - will come in time, as both the technology and culture develops.
tl;dr: centralized control bad, centralized discussion good, the current system does a bad job of reconciling these two positions
Science is what is, which requires nor benefits from belief. Adding a belief layer is interpreting, exploitable, and leads to believing untrue things as true (Science)....
I don’t really know what this post is on about, but science is not truth. It’s a system of prediction. The closest you can get to “truth” would be observation and data. Science is the process of interpreting these facts to better understand what things will look like in the future. It is obvious that science is not ‘true’, because by its nature it requires change over time as our models of the world improve.
If you want, you can view science as a system of organization. A way of making sense of facts. If I give you a file of seemingly random ones and zeroes, it is useless. If I give you an algorithm to decode those ones and zeroes into a message, that has utility. However, somebody else could produce an algorithm to decode those same ones and zeroes into an entirely different message. So, which algorithm is correct? Neither.
But say I give you another file, and Algorithm B doesn’t produce anything useful for this message, so now Algorithm A is more useful. But I also provide a new Algorithm C which also finds messages in both files. Now which is more correct, A or C? And on and on. We continue to refine our models of the data, and we hope that those models will have predictive utility until proven otherwise, but it is always possible (in fact, almost guaranteed) that there is a model of the universe that is more accurate than the one we have.
Consider the utility of a map. A map is an obviously useful thing, but it is also incomplete. A perfect map, a “true” map, would perfectly reproduce every single minute detail of the thing it is mapping. But to do so, it would need to be built at the same scale as the thing it is mapping, which would be far too cumbersome to actually use as, you know, a map. So, we abstract details to identify patterns to maximize utility. Science, likewise, is a tool of prediction, which is useful, but is also not true, because our model of the universe can never be complete.
New ‘Star Trek’ Movie in the Works at Paramount from ‘Andor’ Director (www.hollywoodreporter.com)
Fellow atheists: How do you know your senses and reasoning are reliable and valid? How do you know that you know anything? Solipsism vs Nihilism
Just looking for other answers to this....
Embrace, Extend, and Exploit: Meta's plan for ActivityPub, Mastodon and the fediverse (privacy.thenexus.today)
cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/9799372...
Alan Wake 2 director says Remedy's confidence in the game was boosted by Everything Everywhere All At Once (www.pcgamer.com)
[Vote] Should we pre-emptively defederate Threads? (sh.itjust.works)
Threads will be implementing federation in the near future and many instances have been discussing whether they should be pre-emptively defederated to protect the fediverse. See below for our local discussion thread, which will remain active until this vote is complete....
41% of fediverse instances have blocked threads so far!!! (tech.lgbt)
Minimizing instance defederation now
I wanna see instances federated with most instances now that in individuals can ban entire instances. I know theres still some instances you want completely blocked from the off tho....
Can you use the same domain/username for different fediverse services?
Is there a way to set it up so user@example.com can be a lemmy account and also a mastadon account? I seen people using subdomains like user@lemmy.example.com and user@mastadon.example.com is this nessasary? Could u also set up a matrix account with the same user@example.com? If not what woukd be requured to change to make this...
What is your unpopular flim opinion
I’ll go first. Mine is that I can’t stand the Deadpool movies. They are self aware and self referential to an obnoxious degree. It’s like being continually reminded that I am in a movie. I swear the success of that movie has directly lead to every blockbuster having to have a joke every 30 seconds
[Discussion] Pre-emptive Threads defederation (sh.itjust.works)
Should sh.itjust.works preemptively defederate from Threads?...
what's the status on Threads
how can i know the de/federation status of the instance? IIRC the instance subscribed to an auto-defederation program to auto exclude bot instances and such. is there a way to distinguish these from the manual defederations? like exploding heads, or hexbear (i thought we were defederated from them but i’ve just seen the old...
Alex Jones unbanned from Twitter after poll by Elon Musk (sh.itjust.works)
What is the point of small instances?
They come and go. They’re random clutter. We only need a few big instances that hosts a majority of the communities and that’s it. Why do we need so many smaller ones?
"Belief in Science" Oxymoronic Explainer for SecOps/Mathematicians/Programmers (lemmy.world)
Science is what is, which requires nor benefits from belief. Adding a belief layer is interpreting, exploitable, and leads to believing untrue things as true (Science)....