I’d like the name to be “community feed” and “feeds” for short. Reddit was always essentially a collective rss with voting weights. In this way “subs” would still work since one subscribes to the feeds.
Ultimately it’s something the devs need to encourage though
They’ll boil the frog slowly enough. Threads is huge compared to the fediverse, and will likely do piecemeal federation. Like sending account activity out but not sharing any fediverse voices, getting everyone here following and desensitized
I’m not super familiar with the right terminology, but in short I think users should be able to follow whoever they want, but restrictions on how it is interacted with is fair game. I think following and replying to threads accounts is sort of a must, even if boosting and other functions are disabled. Also on favor of preventing non-replies from being sent to threads.
The real issue issue is interop with Threads means surveillance of users. Limiting the info going from here to there is essential. However a read-only mode that lets us get some value out of it is fine
To be a bit more precise, Signal is against federation from two angles:
Innovation: Signal values absolute control over the protocol so that they can more rapidly implement UX experiences scene in other modern messaging apps. It also eliminates malicious or outdated servers changing the UX between users. Ultimately folks won’t blame the servers, they’ll blame the app, and stop using it.
No rope for users: They seem pretty confident that the Apple-style of software and UX is right— if a user can change stuff enough to break it, they will. For secure messaging, they’d rather users have fewer choices to be sure it is secure.
I’m somewhat tempted by B2 but $5/TB/mo feels a bit steep for a NAS.
For me that would be about $100/mo, and for OP that’s $25/mo. It would only take a few months before buying a drive for off site cold backup would be more cost effective.
Considering their personal plan is $7/mo for unlimited TBs, it really invites hobbiests to find workarounds after their first TB. Unless I’m missing something.
Great advice, but you lost me at going to the bank weekly :)
My flavor of crazy is I visit family across the country twice/year and drop off a full backup. A bit hard to recover but, nuke-proof.
To flip it, this means that only AI which responsibly manages it’s initial data set will be successful. Can’t simply scrape and pray, need to have some level of vetting with input.
More labor intensive? Sure, but AI companies aren’t entitled to quick and easy solutions they started with…
And NYC is wildly over-policed.
I swear, some people have never met a societal problem they didn’t want to throw a cop at. Meanwhile we have more cops and prisoners per Capita than most of the world, funny how that works…
Dangerous to think you’re more media literate than you are.
Very common for reports or scientific articles, where a sharable link is not readily available. Take it up with the city council who received the report being slow. The claims are sourced, and that source is credible, that’s what matters.
Aka, a website you don’t know. Nola.com is a reputable local site, but that hardly matters here because the link is backing up a matter of public record— the previous FR ban was reversed.
It’s funny, what representatives say publicly is indeed newsworthy. When such statements happen on Twitter, you link to Twitter. Shocking, I know.
Maybe you haven’t read a news article before, but providing the opinions of both sides of an issue is common practice, so that the reader has context and can consider their own position
To be clear I’m not saying there’s no value to such improvements, but specifically want people to exercise caution in the realm of the hypothetical.
Rather, we should lift up actual evidence and voices of the people affected. If such disabled people are hard to find, that’s a good reason to reframe. Sometimes the actual needs are much less hypothetical. Sometimes the hypothetical greatly overestimated the tech.
To root this discussion, maybe linking to paraplegic speaking on creative AI tools? Or similar examples of AI being used for a11y today which indicates this trend is realistic and a priority.
They also deleted all chat history from prior to this year.
Even with IP, there is very little stopping the big actors from developing something similar but debatable distinct, at a larger scale. By the time the lawsuit clears, they’ve wrecked your profitablity.
In fact, more often you see big companies act as patent trolls, using IP as a bludgeon to threaten smaller players who don’t have an army of lawyers. See, DMCA takedowns to suppress speech, patent trolls, and esp trademark nonsense.
Trade secrets fit your example best, but more often than not that’s something that relies on worker restrictions rather than traditional “IP”
Intellectual property is cultural theft.
You may be right in some ways, but if encourage you (or anyone) to not use theoretical disabled people as counterpoints. Ideally, cite something someone has said instead.
I understand the impulse, but doing so often makes people sound more disabled today andputs words in the communities’ mouth.
There are paraplegics writing and creating art today. There is a great list of needs they have from society which precedes ai assistance.
More nefarious people (not saying you, to be clear) also do this to veil shitty tech or policies. “Think of the disabled, with targeted advertisements based on personal data we’ll make using the web less burdensome”
That’s simply not how hiring works at most institutions.
For high traffic lower level positions, hiring managers resent getting given these AI tools. You wind up with candidates that are best at manipulating AI, not the most qualified. Their previous method, basic sorting and hitting the first acceptable worker (rather than the absolute best), is much more efficient use of their time.
For higher level positions, networking plays a much more significant roll. Since it’s a much more significant decision, companies are also less likely to entrust it to an AI.
Screening out unserious applicants is easier than you think, and can be addressed without a blackbox of potential lawsuits
Hell no, speaking as someone who has actually done a lot of hiring. It is very easy to find the top 20 candidates or so based on CVs. The hard part is actually sorting those folks out, which AI cannot do.
AI offers an unknowable bias and unbounded potentoal for discrimination without consequences. this rubber stamp from NYC is a disaster for civil rights.
AI should not be touching these sort of decisions , all agorithims need to be fully auditable and replicable
The thing is, meta has a user base 100sx the size of the fediverse, and absolutely no incentive to EEE a project that is very very niche and inaccessible to a lay audience.
So much of my job is email and I was forced to use Outlook instead of Thunderbird a few years back. It feels like every day it is actually fighting me over every small task. Moments at work where I’d formally clear 2-3 messages, I’m now lucky to get through one. I’ve seriously considered finding a new job over it, but I know Office365 dominates my field these days.
It’s unfortunate that this drop in replacement isn’t in the fediverse though. Bluesky’s success isn’t technical (yet), it is better marketing and connections with VIP users.
It’s not that straightforward. Copyright is different in that infringement is only enforced by rightsholders through litigation. That means they hato find you, sue you, and make a convincing argument that your backup is harming their market viability.
On that last point, some personal backup is unlikely to be found to be infringing. It’s more problematic if it’s something shared or done in a significant scale.