[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think they're great for giving OEMs extra incentive to ensure that Linux runs well on the hardware and providing consumers a slightly cheaper option. If I knew I wasn't going to need Windows at all, I'd definitely go the Ubuntu route, but there's software I use that doesn't run on WINE, so I'd personally be more inclined to get a laptop with a Windows license bundled in.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 11 points 1 year ago

What you're describing is only possible on de-anonymized platforms that essentially have "know your customer" type policies where users have to provide some kind of proof of their identity. While I agree that there is value in social spaces where everyone generally knows the people they're interacting with are who they say they are, I don't think this is ever going to be feasible in a federated social platform. I think Facebook is the closest thing we have to what you're describing, to be honest, and I believe Meta has even kicked around having a more sandboxed Instagram for minors (though I don't use Instagram, so I'm not certain on the details there).

For me, in most cases on a platform like Lemmy, a person's age is not something I care about. I care about what people are sharing and saying. But then again, none of my interests for online discussion at this point in my life are really age centric. I think there are clearly better platforms than Lemmy if people want to guarantee they're only interacting within their age specific peer groups.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 9 points 1 year ago

Yes, Koch has apparently funded a good amount of Ken Burns' work. I have no reason to suspect that Ken Burns has let Koch influence the content of his work, however.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 10 points 1 year ago

Yeah, except Bernie's supporters voted for Hillary at higher rates than Hillary folks voted for Obama, so maybe Hillary, her dumb fucking insecure email server, her lack of personality, and the DNC who helped her cheat her way through primary debates are the real ones to blame, not the progressives. She was a terrible candidate who the right hated and independents didn't like much better and she proved she was a terrible candidate by losing to the worst Republican candidate in the last hundred years. She had all the help she should've needed from progressives.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 10 points 1 year ago

I have no idea how anyone could have more than a passing familiarity with that woman and still vote for her. She's truly a trashy human being.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I would really like to see them either stop doing that or make it very clear in their email that you should only respond if you know the answer to the question.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 9 points 1 year ago

I see, well I'll gladly keep my fingerprint sensor over that unnecessary mess.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 9 points 1 year ago

If you want to learn a little bit more about Lemmy, this docs page on join-lemmy.org is a pretty good primer.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 11 points 1 year ago

That would require Musk to either be intelligent or willing to listen to people who are and I'm unconvinced he's either.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 9 points 1 year ago

Ultra also has a lifetime option now.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 10 points 1 year ago

I'd honestly look for an alternative financial institution that either has an app that implements whatever security they think they need or doesn't implement this DRM bullshit for their website.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 10 points 1 year ago

The goal of Bluesky is to turn social media into a shared public commons.

I agree with most of their blog post and it sounds like they're taking a very measured approach to building out federation, but I really want everyone to stop trying to insist social networks be "public commons". Moderation tools that do anything more than the bare minimum of blocking forms of speech that are not protected free speech by definition transform the social network into a place that's not a public commons. Being able to block individuals, communities, topics (via keywords and hashtags), and entire federated servers makes it so that if you really want, you never have to see viewpoints you strongly disagree with. The same is not guaranteed in real public commons. Every day you walk down the street, you have the potential to be confronted with ideas you never considered and your only recourse is to engage, drown out, try to ignore, or walk away from those people, which is not analogous to blocking and thereby deplatforming them online.

That said, I do not want my social network to be a public commons (and from what they're describing, it doesn't sound like Bluesky actually does either). Online, I want to be able to block and deplatform e.g. Nazis and MAGA trolls pre-emptively and with extreme prejudice because I want to enjoy my time on social networking sites, not raise my blood pressure.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

stu

joined 5 months ago