Oh, honey…

I’m going to say it’s not a “you” problem, but a “who you’re surrounded by” problem. Is this something you’re used to percieving accurately? Do you have friends or family who would actually mean it rudely? Because, as others have mentioned, I simply would not be able to function at work if I interpreted 👍 as rude/sarcastic.

I have to assume you’re young or your work doesn’t involve communicating with coworkers or clients over text. I’d also be curious if you look back at this post 5-10 years from now and think “wtf was I on about?” (I’d also be curious if civilization still exists 5-10 years from now, but I digress…)

In the sense that people who aren’t actually being watched by a higher power will legitimately believe they are because believing anything else can be hazardous to their health.

Historically/anthropologically, conforming to the beliefs of the society you live in is the most logical thing a human can do for their survival.

I don’t think there is such a thing as over-the-top with this issue. Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. And we’re already miles past that point.

“Um, yeah, but we could have already known everything thousands of years ago if we had just made any effort. AI is just a worse version of what evolution already made between my ears. We could have already blown the planet up 70 years ago. The beginning of time is sooooo 13.8 billion years ago, YAWN!” - OP probably

Thanks for sharing 👍

Also relevant: Americans think Bison and Buffalo are the same type of animal.

Hah! That’s interesting! I wonder if that’s purely by coincidence, or if there is some etymological reason for this.

I think Lemmy has the capacity to have even more bots, because moderation is so inconsistent and underfunded. The big sites have the resources to fight bots, but ironically have an incentive to embrace them because it reflects well on DAU. IMO the only thing keeping bots off lemmy is a lack of ROI. Great, you spent how much to influence the views of a minuscule userbase in the corner of the internet no one goes to?

Still, it does feel sometimes like our share of braindead group think is higher than it should be…

Well…there was a time when that was true. Now we’ve got a mostly dead internet. But yeah, if you’re going to bother engaging because you believe they’re real, then treat them like a person.

I take it this thread is the first time you’ve heard the phrase Right to be Forgotten?

Yeah, “Right to be Forgotten” is a bit of a misnomer. It’s trying to be catchy, but oversimplifies the issue. At the end of the day it’s a data privacy concern. It’s less about someone else remembering you, and more about someone else resharing information they gathered about you with a third party without your consent. But that’s harder to put a name to.

I think answering questions in the context of work is different, because then, yeah I agree, your goal isn’t to answer their question, it’s to solve their problem.

But if someone makes a thread asking “How do I serve a fileshare publicly”, I think it’s better to answer with something like, “Open this config, change these options, open these ports in your network, and restart these services. NOW, why do you want to do this? Because it might be a bad idea…etc.” Assume that their usecase is private info, and that they are asking the question they mean to ask. Because when someone else who knows they need to do X comes searching for this thread later, you won’t be able to ask about their use case.

I also made this adjustment in another comment, but I think at a minimum, if you’re offering Y because you don’t know how to do X, don’t say “you shouldn’t want to do X”, instead be clear and say “I don’t know how to do X, but Y might be an option for you”. If no one reading the thread actually knows how to do X, then that’s also useful info.

I had actually decided I’m not a fan of the Golden Rule for…reasons, and this is actually the first time I’ve heard that those reasons are referred to as the Platinum Rule. TIL.

Yes, the XY Problem (or in this case, the YX Problem).

I think it’s still better to abide by the rule as I wrote it, because IMO it is actually more elucidating for someone to be able to explain how to do X as it is written, and then provide Y as a possibly preferable alternative, than for someone who maybe really doesn’t know how to do X just propose Y instead.

It might even be the case that Y is the solution OP should be asking for, but 10y later when someone else finds that same thread, and Y isn’t an option for them, the thread is much less useful.

At a bare minimum, don’t say “you shouldn’t want to do X”, either explain how to do X, or be clear about the fact that you don’t know how.

Did you know NASA uses Linux on all its spaceships? That’s why there’s no sound in space.

I would not agree. Every metric is subject to Goodhart’s law, approval ratings is no exception. Putin has (allegedly) maintained an approval rating well over 50% for his entire career.

I’m not saying he wants to do right by his constituents, I’m saying he wants to be told he’s a winner. Trump is a narcissist. He’s all the other terrible things because at the end of the day he needs to feel liked. He will only do things that he thinks will fill that void.

He had to defend TikTok to win over youth votes for the election.

Now that he’s pres again, he knows that in one year it will become very apparent that he can’t lower grocery/gas prices, and isn’t willing to take action on home prices, the deficit, AI, or wage inequality.

So instead he has a list of things that will prop up his approval rating, because that is the only metric that actually matters to him. Right now that seems to mean keeping TikTok, and annexing new territory (even if that just means renaming the Gulf of Mexico).

Gotcha.

Yeah, it sounds like it’s not “open source” according to a specific definition set by the OSI. But the term “open source” has grown beyond what they believe it to mean, and the FUTO license seems more than reasonable to me.

I think the freedom to commercialize worked in the past, but we now live in a time of weaponized commercialization, especially in the mobile world. It seems reasonable to me for them to want to ensure their code is not commercialized in ways that are antithetical to the purpose of the project.