The thing is, they haven’t chosen not to decide, they’ve chosen to hide behind the rhetoric of not choosing. Substack chose the Nazis, fairly explicitly. And I’m sure Sequoia wouldn’t be neutral if the female COO had been making anti-Israel posts.
Weirdly enough, most companies collecting your data are actually really bad at doing so. Business people don’t prioritize data at all, and data collection is a total afterthought, often treated as a major inconvenience. It costs money, and they can’t charge for it.
The reason why there was no fallback is because that would have cost money to implement, and they can’t imagine someone wanting to use their product that way.
No. You don’t get to just decide you have the right to use someone else’s work just because you coudn’t find them to ask, any more than you get to decide that you can use their car. Them not actively selling their works isn’t the equivalent of leaving the car derilict on public property.
They’re visible on other fedi platforms, making it trivially easy for assholes to go looking for who downvoted them anyway. The illusion of safety is a dereliction of duty to users.
Also, downvotes exist to allow large social sites to give the illusion of moderation and user agency while ignoring their duty to actually manage their spaces. They’re not needed here, and their existence promotes excessively large and unmanageable communities where people shout into voids and engage with hostility rather than discuss topics with people. Their use and inclusion should be seriously reconsidered.
'Tis a bit of a thorn in one’s side, aye.
The only real work is my work. The only person who deserves a living wage is meeeeee!
Look to something like wordpress.org or writefreely.org if you want to self host. If you want a free hosting platform, weirdly enough, blogger still exists, or you can use wordpress.com.
Is this something communities could opt out of? Not everyone wants their community flooded with comments from people replying to people who aren’t even community members.
Exactly. Nintendo is not our friend, but it’s also playing by the rules it has available to it. It’s the rulemaker’s fault if the rules are shite.
As a publically traded company in the current system, Nintendo is not in the business of making video games, it’s in the business of making shareholder value. Video games are just a tool for doing that, exactly how a PC is a tool for writing documents or developing software. At the end of the day, companies have more than one tool at their disposal, and are going to use all of them to compete.
It’s on us to take away the tools we don’t think they should have access to, not on them to voluntarily not use the ones that are in play.
It’s the slow but inevitable achievement of end-state of a system designed to re-frame and re-centralize power in the hands of the elite following the liberalization of political power.
This is its purpose. It always has been.
If you don’t have a 649.2.2 Atmos setup, that’s your fault. Get hearing loss, scrub!
/s because… sigh…
Regular reminder that prices are not based on what something’s component pieces are worth, but what people are willing to pay.
Nah. This is the sort of thing you get when different features are owned by different dev teams.
Didn’t spend all of their time arguing about idological purity online and actually pushed to achieve their agenda.
It’s patently bizarre how a company whose only purpose is transferring money from account A to B can then arbitrarily decide what people are allowed to buy and sell.
This is the whole point of capitalism. Those who control the systems, control the people, and capital exists to ensure that the people do not control the systems.
Yup. This is purposeful mischaracterization from one of the biggest boosters of games-as-a-streaming-product. Ubisoft doesn’t want you to have the ability to play things at your whim, but exclusively at theirs. They sure as fuck don’t want you spending your time on something they sold you 10 years ago.
Quick Time Events; characters that automatically do 60 things just by holding down “forward” on the joystick; the Ubisoft logo.
The Internet is populated by people who think English grammar is cosmic law, so it doesn’t surprise me that they think you should bend over for dogshit urban planning.
Ironically, none of them follow the rule of shutting up if they don’t know shit about shit.
Green spaces: Just for viewing.
What kind of dystopian hellscape do you want the world to be, exactly?
This has been covered. This is a content-sharing network. Emphasis on both sharing and network. This means things that are posted are, by design, sent across the network. It’s not a walled garden; it’s the antithesis of a walled garden.
The only way for your posts to be seen by people on other websites is for those posts to be sent to those other websites, openly.
This isn’t a Lemmy issue, but the fact that it keeps coming up again and again framed as one is telling of the giant misconception people have about the Fediverse in general, and “Lemmy” in particular.
Lemmy is not a website. Or a space. It’s a website engine. Complaining about the quality or variety of content “on Lemmy” is like complaining about the content “on WordPress”.
The content that is here is actually almost magically discoverable, because that content likely didn’t start where you are, and website search bars only search their own databases. This is as true of lemmy.dbzer0.com as it is of Google itself. That’s why webspiders exist, to bring the content of the internet into Google’s database.
This is the nature of linking multiple different forum-based websites together. Some of them will have their own sub-forums for their own population to use that are similar to sub-forums on another website. Those two sub-forums may have similar, or even the same, name, but that doesn’t mean they should be treated as the same place by people outside of them.
The constant drive by people not using those sub-forums to consolidate said sub-forums, because of fucking aesthetics, is pretty directly disrespectful to the people using those sub-forums.
“Lemmy” is not a singular space. It’s a network of independent websites that have agreed to syndicate content. That means they are both in cooperation and competition with each other. Kicking and screaming that one or another should give up its own various cultures and nuances for the sake of some pan-fediverse whole is kind of a dick move.
It’s one thing if two websites just want to explicitly merge, but to just be like “why is there Burger King and McDonald’s on the same street? Everyone should just be in one burger joint!” is kinda entitled.
Reddit users complaining that things are different isn’t really good evidence of bad UX. At least the NodeBB discussion is getting close to the fundamental issue, but everyone seems to want the solution to it to be to force websites running Lemmy servers to act as dumb nodes in someone else’s project. And you’re not going to get too many hobby site owners signing up for that.
The solution is to highlight the independence of Fediverse websites, but then you get everyone whining about how small it is, how hard it is to find things, blah blah blah.
Search is actually pretty good, if you’re on a busy server. At least in my experience.
Archiving old content, though… That’s getting back into a whole “demand volunteers shoulder the responsibility for hosting other websites’ content indefinitely” thing.
And we’re back to “users aren’t talking about what I want to hear”, which… K.