When the first NES came out I was over there with my C64 and my shoebox full of disks with games I hadn't tried yet like, lol suckers.
I wish I had seen this, there might have been a moment when we could've shifted some parental money from Nintendo to Commodore with the right campaign, and kept the Amiga going...
It's better to just downvote, really. You are always running the risk that you're helping a troll earn his paycheque. I'm sure this fellow is not being paid, he seems very dedicated to dunking on [women with mental illness] on a personal level.
(edit for grammatical clarity; "mentally ill" is still often used pejoratively by people like the one you're responding to...)
I think they should pivot to a whole season of Interdimensional Cable, with a season-length R&M plotline weaved in with no actual exposure to the usual characters.
Sorry dude, he was Paypal mafia. He has never been anything but a rich kid playing with money - it has just been a very congenial environment for the already rich for some time. I know it's hard to accept that you were just colossally taken in by a huckster, but that is really what happened.
I'm sure there is a much more sophisticated explanation from the lawyers' end, but more fundamentally, I'm pretty sure that encryption is not part of the basic protocol. Privacy is not actually a basic feature of the internet, so something as basic as email does not include it. Anything that uses email to do private coms would have to be referred to as ________ over email.
PGP/GPG has been around as an option since the 90s, but it's rather clunky to implement and you need to know how to keep your private key safe. So, the problem has long been functionally "solved" for the competent, and there we stay; you and anyone you want to talk to privately will always be free (possibly not legal, but free) to generate a key pair each, share your public keys, and then talk privately using those keys for as long as you can keep your private keys safe.
And really, I personally find the idea fairly silly, that some company is going to keep my key for me and respect my privacy. No, if someone wants to keep your private key for you, they want to know your business, all of it. You don't ask to hold anyone's keys anymore than you ask to hold their johnson for them when they piss. I do use some corporate encryptions, signal for things I don't want the DEA to know about mainly. Oh also FUCK THE DEA
I had the benefit of a better environment growing up, but when I was at Uni, I cannot say how many people told me this story, particularly about gay folks.
Just so you know, he removed the post and has apologized in here. As an ADHD myself, it's a pretty typical fuckup for people like us, but most of us tend to own it pretty hard once it's pointed out. Some don't, but this guy did.
edit: I did come here primed for disdain, but by the time I did he had handled it. Too bad he took a few hours and maybe lost a few people for good.
This is the way; if all follow the way, our future does return to an endless scroll, but one of ever-ascending quality and novelty using gentle pruning algorithms that we each control for ourselves.
Duplicating the function of FB as it is, it seems to me, is entirely off the table, and bandwidth/egress costs are the primary reason, with no real solution that actually replicates their level of reach. On that, we entirely agree.
But, who says the media you're sharing needs that much reach? People definitely would need to be able to post video - good video - of their kids' recitals and whatnot, for viewing by those who want to watch a video of a child's recital. That group of people, however, consists of immediate friends, family, teammates, teachers, etc. It's an amount of bandwidth that you could handle in your own email account.
Again, what I'm proposing we ought to be doing, is identifying and speccing out the actual, constructive social benefit of Facebook's specific social infrastructure, and ideally remove all toxic elements (privacy etc), and then look at what resources are required to achieve that subset of Facebook's current range of functionalities. In the example of posting your kid's recital, the assumption that you need Facebook's servers to achieve that is not a correct one - as I said, a simple group email will get the media to everyone in your immediate circle with great efficiency. Even just a webhook script could format that payload for easy viewing.
Hell, more I think about it, duplicating the good parts of Facebook actually looks easier and easier... (edit: on a purely tech level, assuming usage to network with close real world connections only - this is the stated reason why all of my friends who are still there, are still there)
The splintering, the difficulty of the federation relative to the easy UX of the silos, the normal pickup time of any new thing on the internet, but most of all, [unlike Reddit and every other platform], there is nothing in the server code which is designed to keep you here. Go play with your cat, and post a video of it.
Well, I just spent about ten minutes typing out a few thoughts in response but we're also getting a momentary lesson that nothing comes without work or money - Lemmy.world is running slow right now, and my post went down the memory hole, it seems. It might resurface, I don't quite understand these servers yet.
We are in difficult, choppy waters, and will be for some time. We gave up the smooth ride when we left the safety of the corporate silo, where eveyrthing is paved and painted for us.
edit: speaking strictly for me, it's good to be home.
I don't actually agree with my government, I'm just amused that that - a tax - was all it took to make them cede the territory. We found the news just fine before FB and google, we will find it again without them. It's a net win for us, IMO.
Not so much the E2E, that is a disaster - I just see the question of corporate capitulation to authoritarianism as a question of "when" rather than "if" so I don't much care what shithead politicians do, the more obnoxious the better at this point, and I have zero faith that a corporation will lead the fight that saves us from their fuckery.
Ah yes, the E2E band, I'd forgotten they were doing that.
No, I'm against that one fully. But, I also think that the hacker community will take steps, and if it comes right down to it, I trust the tech workers of the world to say enough is enough at some point. There are a statistically small number of us who actually know how to make machine go and they will eventually alienate enough of us that we go full John Galt on their ass. I guarantee it!
It's interesting too, back in the 90s, there was a steady stream of new stuff coming online always, but you did tend to run out of new stuff within a set period of time and need to go play Doom or something. I remember when the first Reddit phone app came out and there was this idea that you could just scroll forever, as a feature, and... hmm.
I look around and I see a lot of things being treated as not just necessary, but articles of faith, when discussing what social media needs to look like. Zero effort is one, and global reach is another. The former was never intended to be a feature of the internet, the latter is there as the default - a silo can only limit your reach, in the final analysis, but it can make you louder within its bubble I suppose, and it seems that a lot of us find that very important. I'm happy just to be discussing this with another presumably human and obviously rational brain, me. If I post my dog, I just need one "zomg so cute" and I'm satisfied.
None whatsoever, other than, I actually was enjoying Mastodon for about two weeks and then two Twitter exodi brought a flood what I can only describe as twitthink, so I definitely know how a userbase can fundamentally alter the character of a community in a relative heartbeat.
I'm sure there's all sorts of well-thought-out technical reasons why it can't work that I haven't thought of, but in all honesty I don't find such ministrations very compelling. Fundamentally, I do still believe in the ability of groups of well-informed and competent people to pull things off.
But again, aside from the stuff I already thought about like server loads, traffic management, all the problems of federation that we're already aware of, what I'm specifically wondering if I'm missing, is, are there risks specific to going up against FB that are different risks from what we're already doing to the other sites?
I just use email and, you know, telephones. They see about as much of me as they ever did in real life, and facebook was never a representation of my real life to begin with. But the place is hurting them, and they think they can't leave. Just like when a friend is in an abusive relationship, we can't make them leave, but we can prepare a place for them to land when they do, and these people are all gonna need some doomscrolling methadone if they ever jump off that slot machine.
When the first NES came out I was over there with my C64 and my shoebox full of disks with games I hadn't tried yet like, lol suckers.
I wish I had seen this, there might have been a moment when we could've shifted some parental money from Nintendo to Commodore with the right campaign, and kept the Amiga going...