Yeah. There’s some good stuff there, like 8:32*, but it’s full of so much crap** that… urgh.

*“And you’ll know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

**Give the whole chapter 5 a check, specially 5:14; crippling people is apparently their god’s punishment for sinning. Or 3:36, someone gets really pissy if you don’t believe him!

It depends on your tastes. It’s effective for me as I enjoy quite a bit of the popular content here (like Linux stuff), but we need far more activity for other topics.

I don’t think that there’s a specific term for picking a religious figure solely as a behaviour standard, with no regards to the beliefs. But you could describe yourself as “morally Christian”, I guess?

what can we do?

The link itself offers a good first step: Stallman himself should be encouraged to step down, and if he doesn’t the FSF should remove him from its board.

Furthermore we should be backing up both things and, in their failure, backing up a competing entity.

This should be done in a subtle way, though - without causing unnecessary drama. I know, easier said than done.

A silver lining on everything here is that his saner views are likely to be backed up by other people in the libre software movement.

Agreed.

And that’s extremely shitty because it stains all his views over freedom of speech and libre software, even the sensible ones.

This is solely a hypothesis, and it’s backed by informal and subjective impressions, but:

From online interactions with them, I think that Anglos are specially prone to fall for nirvana fallacy, where a solution is discarded as useless because it is not complete or perfect. That might encourage them to frame the problems in a negative way, as it won’t beg the question “what’s your proposed solution?”, thus being easier to gather agreement and support.

If that hypothesis is correct, I predict that English speakers in Canada should follow a similar pattern as the ones in USA, while the French speakers would follow a pattern more similar to Europe and/or the rest of Latin America.

There are a few things that Stallman really does not get.

1. Power over an individual reduces their ability to consent, and adults have considerable power over teens.
2. The discussion about having those teens accessing pornography should be handled separately. It’s simply not the same matter.
3. Pornography and nudity are not the same thing.
4. No matter how bad witch hunters are, this should not be used as a defence for the alleged target of their witch hunts.
5. “Normal” or “natural” are not the same as “should be taken as morally, ethically, or legally acceptable”.

Once you take those things into account, you notice that most of the things that Stallman talks about the topic aren’t just immoral, they’re outright idiotic.

Morally speaking I’d blame both sides on this matter - Microsoft/LinkedIn for shoving down generative A"I" where it shouldn’t, and users assumptive/gullible thus harmful enough to take the output at face value.

I don’t know. Instead I’ll focus on my subjective experience with comics and manga, as a nobody from LatAm who likes fantasy.

Manga is something that I grew up with. As adulthood came by, I didn’t feel the need to ditch it - instead I found other manga series to enjoy. There’s stuff for young kids and adults; spicy and tame; comedic and serious; romance and no romance. No matter who you are and the stuff that you like, I feel like you could find at least one enjoyable manga series to read.

In the meantime, what I’ve found from comics elsewhere:

• Local (at least in Brazil) - either tailored for kids (see: Monica’s Gang) or newspaper 4-koma with social commentary (see: anything from Glauco). So only kids get actual stories? Based on Mafalda I feel like that’s how the cookie crumbles in Latin America as a whole.
• European - wider in age demographic than the local ones, and some do have fantasy (Even erotica. Druuna, I’m looking at you. And your butt.), but I feel like they lack dynamic. Even adventure ones like Tintin. Still enjoyable to read, but sometimes my cup of tea might be yerba or coffee, you know?
• United-Statian - Mary Sue protag got superpowers from Z’bh’thy, and now is fighting the Evil for the sake of their country. Skip past 20 years and they’re still in the same slop, never reaching the end, in a multiverse that makes my PC cabling look tidy in comparison.
• manhua (China) - I actually found quite a few enjoyable series (like the Fairy Captivity, Yaoguai Mingdan, My Wife is the Demon Queen). Perhaps not surprisingly they’re similar in spirit to Japanese manga. I could see myself reading more of that stuff. (I’ll skip wuxia though.)
• manhwa (S. Korea) - 90% of the stuff that I’ve seen boils down to either “adultery stories” (I’m not into that stuff) or what feels like ultra-shōnen: “level ZZ is not enough, MC needs to reach level ZZZ”. That said I did find a few enjoyable series, like FFF-Trashero or Carnivorous Princess Yegrinna.

Are they always like this? Probably not; I bet that people can find exceptions to every single bullet point that I’ve listed.

Something must be also said about the synergy between light novels, manga, and anime: if you want you get to enjoy the same story thrice, in three different media, and the pleasure associated with each will be different. And if the story is good enough it won’t tire you down. I simply don’t feel the same in non-Japanese series, even the ones that adapt the same universe across different media (like X-Men).

Yup, we are growing. It isn’t just in number of users, or their activity here, but also in the number of platforms using the protocol - and that’s one of the things that the ActivityPub developers did really right: they picked the concept of federation from earlier protocols/standards (like OStatus), and made it usable for more than just microblogging. The impact of that is twofold:

• future-proofing the protocol. Even if microblogging were to fade away, as a trend, the protocol would still survive.
• older platforms push new ones up, even if the new ones are something completely novel.

(I also like chatting with you!)

I’m not sure if the analogy with communism holds well, as communism implies post-scarcity. Perhaps socialism - if you see the current AP protocol as the Soviet economy from 1918 to 22, my proposal is basically a Lenin style New Economic Policy: a step back (less federation) to take two steps forward later (federation growth).

As for the mirrors, secondary (as in backup) would be a good analogy; their main reason to exist would be to make admins+mods accountable. (“Why did you remove [content]? It’s within the rules, even if you disagree with it!”). And ideally it should be possible for a single mirror to work for multiple instances, specially smaller ones. In the meantime, the actual (non-mirror) instances would be on equal grounds.

In contrast, ActivityPub […]

As far as I know, as someone who didn’t read the source either, that’s accurate. aussie.zone is basically mirroring the content of federated instances, to service its users, then when some aussie.zone user posts something there the other instances mirror it.

On the other hand, there’s nothing stopping someone from not respecting the deletion requests, and instead highlighting that content, in the current Lemmy framework. It would definitely be a deviation from the standard codebase though. And therefore every time there’s an update or patch, there would have to be a merge event to keep that feature functional.

In theory, there isn’t. In practice:

• AFAIK this is not something that Lemmy or Mastodon were coded for. It’s unsupported so the person doing it would need to maintain their own fork of the relevant software.
• This becomes specially problematic once users from the non-deleting instance interact with content that, for other instances, has been deleted.

I wonder if the reason your idea is not done is bc it relies too much on “trusting” the client for security reasons? Although… tbf I’m not certain how much that would differ from how things are now.

If I had to take a guess, the reason why W3C, Lemmer-Webber and Prodromou created the AP the current way is because, while you’re raising a baby, you never know the growing pains that it’ll have as a teen.

Ease discovery of federated communities has been funded: https://join-lemmy.org/news/2024-09-11_-_New_NLnet_funding_for_Lemmy

That’s some great news! It’s great to see that the issues are being ironed out.

Redundancy is better handled through specialised mirrors, similar in spirit to reveddit. That would be even more transparent than the current system - as the mirrors could translate actions like content removal into content highlighting, so it would stick out like a sore thumb*. This would also throw the burden associated with redundancy (transmission, storage, removal of clearly illegal content) into a few machines, instead of the whole network.

I’m aware that it’s a weaker form of federation than the current one but, as long as the front-end handles simultaneous multi-account and merges the feeds of the instances that you’re registered to, it’s already addressing the main needs:

• users can see content from multiple places without registering individually to each
• users don’t need to see what they don’t want to
• content is still spread out, so no instance controls the whole
• admins still have control over who accesses their own instance (through defederation + banning).

*currently you can only find a piece of removed content if you know that it exists.

I feel like ActivityPub implemented federation in a really weird way, and that’s what causes problems like @[email protected] is reporting, or the issue that Blaze is addressing through multi-accounting. Perhaps we shouldn’t be sharing content across instances but only credentials.

For example. If you’re registered to instance A, and B federates with A, then B would let you post from your A account as if you were registered to B. Then let the retrieval of the content of different instances up to the front-end, instead of mirroring it.

A lot of this boils down to consequences of lemmy.world being the largest instance: typical Reddit users beeline for it, trolls go there, larger comms so more frequent issues with moderation, people who fail to distinguish between “we shouldn’t concentrate our activity into the largest instance” and “largest instance bad! EDIT WOW THANKS FOR LE GOLD TO LE KNEE KIND STRANGER!”, so goes on.

Exactly! (Plus bitcoin mining. Same deal, really - a flawed tech with some potential and some use, but that does not justify the associated environmental harm.)

Of course, tech bros like Schmidt won’t like the solution.

And if the underlying tech improves in such a way that it stops being fined, it stopped being part of the problem.

Or alternatively fine (yes, fine; not just “tax”) heavy energy sinks, to the point that they’re unable to run, and use the money to address climatic issues now.

But it’s easier to wallow in a mix of nirvana fallacy (either solving the climate issue altogether, or doing jack shit) + wishful belief (“AGI is cooooming! Praise AGI!”), right?

This wouldn’t even stop the development of model-based generation, mind you. Only force it towards smarter approaches, that don’t boil down to “needz moar [parameters | training data | cranks]!” brute-force.

But nah. I’m supposed to treat it as a devil or as an angel, right? And this specific muppet is treating it like an angel talking about the First Coming of AGI.

I’ve translated it to Portuguese on a whim, might as well share it here.

Then as you ask “provide sources.”, it says simply “Source: Tech Review Websites”. If this came from an actual person I would genuinely ask it “do you take me for gullible trash?”.

It’s still somewhat useful, due to Google Search crumbling away into nothingness, if you ask “link me five sites with info about [topic]”.

more [with a higher pitch]

Yes, I can. /me leaves the room

Serious now, this sentence is a great example because, even if phrased as a yes/no question, you’ll typically see it being used as a request - “please tell me more”. And as such you’ll often hear it without the higher pitch associated with yes/no questions.