zalack

It’s a remake that uses new, higher quality assets though, so isn’t an option in this case.

Counterpoint: If I was one of the people in charge of keeping it secret and Trump got elected… I would just “forget” to ever schedule that briefing.

Sure, but that assumes this manager would be happy with generic “medical stuff” as an answer…

Right, but if you’re request for denied for something medically necessary unless you revealed it, you went anyway (because it’s necessary), and then you got fired… That feels like it shouldn’t be legal (obviously that doesn’t mean that it isn’t).

I’m not sure it would be legal if they were forced to reveal medical information.

I think better algorithms wouldn’t be a waste of developer resources. At the end of the day, the post feed algorithm is the core product, IMO.

Figuring out how to lower the weights on highly active subs is a good idea. As is ranking smaller subs’ content appropriately.

For all it’s faults, Reddit’s algorithm was pretty good. There was always a decent mix of small and large subs on my feed.

Kbin’s post ranking overall seems better than Lemmy’s and that was a major factor in me choosing it as my home base.

Oldie but a goodie.

Thems the breaks when using what is essentially alpha software. The devs of both Lemmy and Kbin are aware that the admin tools need work, but stuff takes time.

Have unsecured messages be opt-in and have a warning banner on non-encrypted messages. Maybe even a confirmation dialog.

That way people who want or need to be that paranoid can be, but the rest of us can have something a bit more convenient.

By disallowing SMS messaging they’ve just made it so a lot of people who were being secure when their contacts allowed, aren’t being secure at all.

First off, cool your jets; you’re being kinda rude for no reason here. Just because we disagree doesn’t mean either of us is an idiot.

My point is just that you still develop features specifically for your admin-privileged users right? That’s the only thing I’m trying to say by calling admins users, that they still belong to the bucket of people you consider when adding features to your software, even if they are only admin-facing features. You’re right that it’s just a semantic difference, so let me rephrase using your terminology then;

Admins of the software may want to create and promote their own private sites using the lemmy software that federate with only a subset of other lemmy instances. For instance, a network of ‘academic’ lemmy instances run by universities – with high moderation requirements – that do not federate with the ‘popular’ fedeverse.

In that sense federation is a feature, to admins.

I’m also not 100% sold on it not mattering to end-users. Like I’m a user by your metric, and I like that Kbin can de-federate from extremist instances or instances run by corporations like Meta, and will likely move homes if it doesn’t and I start seeing too much content from those instances. It’s a feature I specifically appreciate about this platform.

First off, cool your jets; you’re being kinda rude for no reason here. Just because we disagree doesn’t mean either of us is an idiot.

My point is just that you still develop features specifically for your admin-privileged users right? That’s the only thing I’m trying to say by calling admins users, that they still belong to the bucket of people you consider when adding features to your software, even if they are only admin-facing features. You’re right that it’s just a semantic difference, so let me rephrase using your terminology then;

Admins may want to create and promote their own private sites – using the lemmy software – that federate with only a subset of other lemmy instances. For instance, a network of ‘academic’ lemmy instances run by universities – with high moderation requirements – that do not federate with the ‘popular’ fedeverse.

In that sense federation is a feature, to admins.

I’m also not 100% sold on it not mattering to end-users. Like I’m a user by your metric, and I like that Kbin can de-federate from extremist instances or instances run by corporations like Meta, and will likely move homes if it doesn’t and I start seeing too much content from those instances. It’s a feature I specifically appreciate about this platform.

I develop software for a living. If someone is using my software in any capacity, they are a user from my point of view, even if they have admin privileges.

Admins are users too from a developer’s point of view.

If that were true, then the software wouldn’t have the ability to defederate built directly into it in the admin panel. You could write software in a way where defederating from a specific instance is hard to do.

IMO the point of any open source software is the noone really has ownership over what “the point” of it is. Anyone can take that software and use it how they see fit.

Federation is a feature. If you want to spin up a network of Lemmy instances between universities and ONLY federate with other universities, you could!

Want to spin up a private instance for you and your friends and not federate with anyone? You can do that too!

To me one of the big selling points of federated services is you don’t have to be part of the same giant bucket as every other shithead. If you want, you can pick and choose who you federate with.

Beehaw never tried to promote itself as a default instance. It was a toy hobby project started by four friends that through a fluke of where it was listed, had an enormous, unexpected growth spurt.

It’s still those four people’s server though, and it’s totally their prerogative in how they run it. We aren’t entitled to it’s content, and users don’t have to stick around if they don’t like the way it’s being run.

The fedeverse gives you choice. That means there will be some servers whose choices you don’t agree with.

My understanding is that other users on the same home instance would still be able to see each other’s content.

A lot (all) nuclear accidents also occurred with older reactor designs.

Traditional nuclear reactors were designed in such a way that they required management to keep the reaction from running away. The reaction itself was self-sustaining and therefore the had to be actively moderated to stay inside safe conditions. If something broke, or was mis-managed, the reaction had a chance of continuing to grow out of control. That’s called a melt-down.

As an imperfect analogy, older reactors were water towers. The machinery is keeping the water in an unstable state, and a failure means it comes crashing down to earth

Newer reactrs are designed so they they require active management to keep the reaction going. The reaction isn’t self-sustaining, and requires outside power to maintain. If something breaks or is mismanaged, the reaction stops and the whole thing shuts down. That means they can’t melt down.

As an imperfect analogy, newer reactors are water pumps. If power is interrupted nothing breaks catastrophically, water just stops moving.

I’m not saying it should be illegal to release games for only one console. Obviously not every studio is going to have the bandwidth to develop for every platform, and some games will use special features of some systems.

What I’m saying is that it should be illegal for console makers to give any special incentives or preference to developers to do so artificially.

Console exclusives are anti consumer and it should be illegal for console makers to offer any incentive to developers – including studios they own – to make a game exclusive.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk

It’s the weekend. No need for smart hat until Monday.