Imagine what the original varieties looked like.
Likely similar to this:
Betteridge’s Law of Headlines
It's more like a myth than a real thing. Or rather, a pattern that is false so often that you can't use it to guess if it's true.
Here's a list of a few .ml communities and potential replacements:
Side note the main issue with .ml is transparency. It's fine if the admins of an instance implement whatever rules they want in their instance; however, once they start enforcing hidden rules disguised as violations of the listed rules, they're being liars and treating the users as stupid things to be herded, not as human beings.
EDIT: as people noticed I'm not including .world comms to not encourage even further concentration of activity into the largest instance. Decentralisation is important. Also I'm adding stuff that you guys suggest.
* for specialised memes, as the category is rather large:
May I be frank? I suspect that, in the long run, Mozilla not getting this money will actually benefit Firefox. Sure, so exec will get pissed as they won't get 5.6 million dollars a year, and Firefox won't get some weird nobody-asked-for feature that'll be ditched some time later; but I think that they'll focus better on the browser this way. Specially because whoever is paying the dinner is the one picking the dish, and with a higher proportion of their effective income coming from donations, what users want will stop being so neglected.
Just my two cents.
"So, those guys generate positive advertisement for our games. How do we stop it, and make sure that public opinion shifts to «Nintendo is cringe and you're a loser if you play this shit»?"
Also, what the fuck is with Japanese law, criminalising modding?
Reworded rules for clarity:
- Min required length must be 8 chars (obligatory), but it should be 15 chars (recommended).
- Max length should allow at least 64 chars.
- You should accept all ASCII plus space.
- You should accept Unicode; if doing so, you must count each code as one char.
- Don't demand composition rules (e.g. "u're password requires a comma! lol lmao haha" tier idiocy)
- Don't bug users to change passwords periodically. Only do it if there's evidence of compromise.
- Don't store password hints that others can guess.
- Don't prompt the user to use knowledge-based authentication.
- Don't truncate passwords for verification.
I was expecting idiotic rules screaming "bureaucratic muppets don't know what they're legislating on", but instead what I'm seeing is surprisingly sane and sensible.
I see this as a small victory for the Fediverse.
As I mentioned in another post, about the same topic:
Slapping the words “artificial intelligence” onto your product makes you look like those shady used cars salesmen: in the best hypothesis it’s misleading, in the worst it’s actually true but poorly done.
The sad part is that the idea behind DLCs (to develop further content for a game already released, in exchange for additional money) is reasonable. Or it would be, if shitty developers didn't abuse it to the point that it stopped being "downloadable content" to become "dumb and lazy cashgrab".
I also think that CA isn't just being benign with this statement, or his whole "let us not be arseholes" approach towards development. He's being smart; player trust might be hard to measure but it has direct impact on word-of-mouth advertisement and piracy, so it's basically the difference between "everybody knows it, plenty bought it" and "the few ones who know it pirated it".
I got a weird problem involving both of my cats (Siegfrieda, to the left; Kika, to the right).
Kika is rather particular about having her own litterbox(es), and refuses to use a litterbox shared by another cat. Frieda on the other hand is adept to the "if I fits, I sits, I shits" philosophy, and is totally OK sharing litterboxes.
That creates a problem: no matter if properly and regularly cleaned, the only one using litterboxes here is Frieda. We had, like, five of them at once; and Kika would still rather do her business on the patio.
How do I either teach Kika "it's fine to share a litterbox", or teach Siegfrieda "that's Kika's litterbox, leave it alone"?
This is one of those rare cases where what is being said is less interesting than who says it.
What: Reddit stock is junk, the IPO will fail hard, and anyone investing on it is begging to lose money. I believe that most people discussing this in Lemmy already know that, so the info isn't new here.
Who: Forbes. Forbes' target audience is investors; greedy vulture capitalists love it. So if Forbes says "it'll sink!", investors are less eager to buy stock, and that sinks the stonks even further. So what Forbes says is often a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I'm glad that Forbes is doing it. I want to see Reddit die.
EDIT: as other posters are correctly highlighting, I derped - the article is from a "contributor", and it has basically no impact or visibility.
Damn - now I want Forbes shitting on the IPO!
I think that governments should be tackling both Edge and Chrome at the same time. One of them for underhanded tactics, another for being a monopoly. Tackling only one of them is not enough.
I also think that Microsoft's strategy is worse than just underhanded - it stinks stupidity from a distance. It's clearly backfiring - this is not the first Browser Wars any more, people nowadays have a good grasp on what a browser is supposed to be. And while some pressure might convert a few users, too much pressure is bound to create resistance, even on users that would be otherwise inclined to follow you like cattle.
We wear magnets in our shoes. They keep us bound to Earth.