Spzi @ Spzi @lemm.ee

Posts

11

Comments

641

Joined

2 yr. ago

I hope this feature becomes included in all views soon. Some apps support it, others do not. Web view does not, AFAIK.

Even then, I think it's concerning. Yes, advanced users have tools to deal with the problem. But not everyone is an advanced user. Most people will have to rely on their instance admin to take care of instance blocking.

We should consider the experience of newcomers, especially since the intent of this bot seems to be to increase activity in niche communities. Newcomers are the people who can increase activity. We should aim to make Lemmy more welcoming and interesting for them, out of the box, not expect them to tweak their settings to have a bearable experience.

A lifeless copy? Why would people want to engage with any of these posts or comments?

I can ask a question but will never get a reply. Why bother asking?

I understand you try to populate communities which lack activity, but this sounds like a recipe for frustration. People might learn it's useless to comment, which could reduce activity even in actual, man-made posts and comments.

Even more so considering most of his 'users' will be in that role without consent. OP prefers to pretend his userbase only consists of those who consent. I say for every person who finds this useful, there will be 10 or more who have to take action to shut it off. For some, this action might be to leave Lemmy altogether, backfiring on the intended effect of the tool.

And it provides your weapons industry with real life data from a large-scale conflict with equipment from multiple origins.

And it advertises a competitors products as inferior, and yours as superior.

I despise all these things, but from a purely economic viewpoint, this is interesting for business.

The pro-Moscow Smer-SSD party had a clear lead with almost 24% of the vote

The liberal Progressive Slovakia party, which exit polls suggested had won the election, polled at about 17%.

FYI you can edit the (now sadly misleading) title, @MicroWave@lemmy.world

Wait, you're intending to use multiple bots, so users have to block multiple spammers?

These bots merely advertise for reddit. They drown the All feed in zero engagement posts, hiding actual activity.

Experienced users might be able to handle this (although the question persists why one unresponsible bot admin should be able to force thousands of users to take action), but new Lemmy users will not look for a fix. They will leave and never come back.

These bots make Lemmy a worse and shallow copy of reddit. Please stop running them, or make it in instances which do not federate their content to the rest of Lemmy.

Like I said, if you can’t stay within the relevant context your nuance becomes irrelevant.

Just for the record, the previous comment consisted of just the link when I replied to it. All the other text was edited in afterwards.

It feels a bit sketchy to edit a comment after it was replied to, then responding to the reply with "Like I said, ...".

Maybe (honest maybe) it was more the reverse; Some of the most richest people also enjoyed being scientists as a hobby.

In times when no one else could afford to play along, this could make you one of the most famous scientists.

This is funny. It also reflects in Lemmy. For example, take this tankie comment claiming "zelensky made having peace negotiations with putin ILLEGAL", based on an article which says "Zelensky’s decree released Tuesday declares that holding negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin has become impossible after his decision to annex four regions of Ukraine."

Then watch how mods from lemmy.ml and lemmygrad.ml ban users and delete comments which question their narrative.

Cherry on top: A user from this curated bubble remarks that "Nobody actually has any argument against this", because of course they are shielded from comments who pointed out the inaccuracy of the claim, and don't question it themselves.

Compare yourself:

• lemm.ee version: https://lemm.ee/comment/3929526
• lemmygrad.ml version: https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/2389500

Now read that comment in the basement of this thread again:

Understand we American make more lie for pleasure and entertaining. Not chinese lie. China always with great truth.

It has some irony that someone is arguing for an inaccurate value of Pi in a meme post which is all about Pi being used inaccurately, while complaining about "little lies".

If you want to talk about this opinion piece: Rayman himself says they are using many more digits, because two digits is not enough. Pi is also used in many more fields than astronomy. So to assume "all we ever need is two digits of Pi" because astronomers consider that to be enough "for most calculations" seems a bit short-sighted.

For example, if you repeatedly multiply a value by something with Pi, over many million iterations, you absolutely want more accuracy. The example given in the article is very specific. It's a nice insight, but no basis for generalization.

In the end, if you insist this simplification is sufficient, you're making the very point I was making: Sometimes, we don't need the full complexity of reality, but "a little lie" is fully sufficient and much easier to understand and deal with. However, students should understand that's not the full story, probably never will be.

And we already have the decimal cut off, it’s 3.14. You can even find a dozen scientific papers as to why this is specific enough for almost every purpose.

But that's exactly a little lie, in contrast to reality. The truth is, Pi is an irrational number. This means every decimal representation is necessarily wrong, or a "lie", if you insist. Wether someone deems it accurate "enough" for "almost every purpose" is their opinion. It's still not the number Pi. If you want to write Pi down in decimal representation, you need to use infinitely many digits. If you use less, you did not write down Pi. Anyone suggesting something else is feeding you a little lie.

The intent of this paragraph was not to encourage you to always fully spell out Pi, but to lead the idea ad absurdum. It should be apparent that there are situations when it is practical, even necessary, to simplify reality to something we can handle.

Science education is full of these situations.

For example, when learning about the composition of atoms, you might first hear about them in the context of Chemistry. And use the Nuclear shell model, which imagines electrons to exist in tidy, circular orbits around the nucleus. Later your teacher might hint at another representation, Atomic orbitals. Later still you might learn about quantum mechanics and describe everything in Wave functions.

Which is reality? While they live in a spectrum from 'easier to understand' to 'more accurate'; Neither! They all are models. They all are human creations. Made by humans, for humans, to talk about reality. They are tools of communication tailored to specific use cases and audiences. Because reality is infinitely complex, but our understanding is always limited.

If you think about it, you will find endless examples like these in your journey how you learned science. We are unable to experience reality as it is, and need to wrap it in language and models. We are also curious at very young ages, and need models and language which is appropriate to our still developing individual capability. We need to embrace these little lies to stand on shoulders of giants.

5 Lies You Were Told in School (SciShow)

Why do they accept the lock-in?

Looks like there is no good answer if we view them as one entity which could simply make up it's mind. But it's a bunch of individuals, who probably disagree at least over details. Some probably have individual ambitions or pressures, some may struggle to pay their bills or satisfy their family or even themselves.

And for each individual on the fence, it's always an advantage to still publish to the network while hoping the rest of the group abstains and establishes a better platform in the meantime. Would you risk publishing your finally successful hard work to an immature platform, where it might not receive the attention it deserves?

And because they're smart, they know everyone else is thinking the same. Now we have reasonable doubts in something which relies on trust.

Basically, game theory. The system will find it's Nash equilibrium at a point where every individual move will worsen that individual's standing.

To break this spell, you need agreements and contracts. Someone needs to work on that, negotiate and lobby for it. But who? Would anyone who would benefit from that step away from their actual work and work on that meta-system instead? Would anyone who would not benefit from that system work on it? Maybe this could be a research project for scientists who already study these topics. Otherwise, I don't know.

"[X] Show Bot Accounts"?

Yes, you can uncheck it to ignore all bots. But then you also ignore useful bots like TL;DR, link converters and such.

It would be nice to have better control here, more fine granular. On the other hand, I'm not sure if we really need spammy bots like https://lemmit.online/u/bot and http://zerobytes.monster/u/bOt who mostly advertise for reddit.

Not only but also because, new lemmy users won't be aware how to control their settings, and be faced with an All-feed which consists of mostly bot posts with zero upvotes and zero comments. Then they leave and never come back.

However, I think people should experiment with what I call “open source universes”, which is basically creating shared universes that are open source. Maybe even make some open source RPG system with it too, so we could have an open source alternative to the likes of D&D, WH40k, etc. At one point I tried to make something like this, but the issue was that it was based on an old webcomic idea of mine, which I started working on when I had totally different views on many things. Might revisit it with different ideas later on.

Haven't played any of those, but I think they (and more) exist for a long time already: https://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Open_Game_Systems

They’re used to a decade or longer on Twitter and Facebook. So any new and improved protocol would split the user base and so struggle to gain traction.

Could that be an inherent issue, no matter how you approach it? The issue might be that any social IT system which gains traction is already 10 years outdated. If true, it would mean we could start making something new now, which might be popular in 10 years, but then unable to effectively deal with whatever people deem essential in 10 years.

That's a valid point, which is keeping some people from using public transit, wether we like it or not.

Some rail providers require you to reserve a seat when booking a ticket (French TGV, maybe?).

And another perspective: We might consider comfort for non-passengers, too. I'd rather cross a few tracks than a highway.

I still miss text searching a community. Often I vaguely remember what I saw, how it was called and in which community, but this information is worthless with the current state of the search function.

Right, I get now what you mean. In defense of the other person, they said this may be the case. Which implies that it also may not be the case. It's a worry spoken out, maybe without thinking too much about how to word it in a way which does not come across as insulting.

I would frown at this in a direct conversation, but not so much in an indirect, general talk about opinions. In the current setting, I appreciated the opinion as open and direct. I don't think anyone's feelings have been hurt here, unless someone actively wants to feel offended.

OP asked for opinions, and that was an opinion.

You are right a project author can do as they please, but so can a project contributor. Both spend their mostly free time on that project, so it should be comfortable for both to do so.

There is no need to automatically agree. We can have different styles and disagree, in which case people might prefer to contribute to some other project instead, or work with other contributors instead.