abff08f4813c @ abff08f4813c @j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us

Posts

5

Comments

1,044

Joined

11 mo. ago

Yeah, at least mandating all gov't employees to work from home who can work from home, alone would be a very good start!

If you're the one telling others to not vote, that means you're the one on the wrong side.

Agreed. The two-way runoff requires a new round of voting - since voters preferences for the top two were not adaquately recorded. But with RCA you'd basically be doing this without needing to actually host additional voting rounds - you just collect enough info in one round and then compare votes and preferences until you have your candidate.

I'm not sure that even Lemmy has a monopoly on the fediverse anyways. But outside of the fediverse, breaking up the tech monopolies and enforcing net neutrality are steps in the right direction.

For the fediverse specifically, I'm not sure. One thing that might help is to make user accounts and magazines (communities) more portable. So if one signs up on the wrong instance, it's easier to move to a friendlier instance. Currently, some folks seem to set up their own instance specifically for a community that they have planned explicitly to avoid this problem (but that makes it even harder to get a new owner if the mod-admin abandons the instance).

Of course, the technical bar to setting up and running your own instance is a bit higher than just signing up to, for example, fedia.io (And that's just if you want to run vanilla - you generally have to be an actual software dev if you want to customize the software that your instance runs.)

But coding software, and moderating a community, or an entire instance, are all different things and I suspect that there's not much overlap with the first one and the other two. So I don't have any good solutions either, just suggesting that if the fediverse required everyone to set up their own instance to join, we'd likely be in a pre-Eternal September phase.

No, I agree. My conclusion puts me on the less popular opinion on this one matter, and that's obvious to me. However, I was replying to a thread asking for someone to be banned, and - just as we don't automatically convict folks in court on the basis of popular opinion, I feel that it would be nice if stronger standards also applied before someone got a ban.

(Not saying the full criminal defendant protections should apply mind, as this is just a ban on one magazine or one instance in the fediverse, so it's not like we need to apply the full protections against depriving someone of their freedom as they are locked in jail, here.)

That said, if my reading of the numbers is wrong, I am open to having that explained - that is I'm open to admitting I'm wrong. (If one checks my history, they'll find that I've done so multiple times.)

11.6% of a person’s day is a lot,

I didn't mean to say otherwise. What I wrote was

Hadn't realized it was so little.

So to clarify, I'm not saying that 11.6% of a person's day is a small amount of time, but I was under the impression somehow that the account was actually spending more time that than on the fediverse.

and you don’t get to just erase this important piece:

None of this takes into account time reading others’ posts/comments, or alts this user may secretly have.

Didn't mean to erase it. Rather, it seems we're lacking confident data on these points, so I didn't have anything intelligent to add. Just at this point we can't quite rule out the extreme case of the user having zero alts, and a reasonable amount time for reading posts/comments. (Worth pointing out there's a certain irony here - some folks argue this must be a shared account (one account used by many), while here the argument seems to be that this person must have alts (many accounts used by one)).

You can try to use the fact that the script attempts to be subjective against it, sure.

Aren't I doing the opposite? I'm using the objective data on the script to call for caution here and questioning assumptions. (Of course, I remain open to further evidence. Just so I'm not accused of being vague, here's one example that would change my mind: if someone suggests with a high probability these accounts are controlled by one person/entity/group and has the data to back it up, and the combined data on the accounts shows a 24/7 level of activity, I'd concede.)

That’s just called “bad faith”.

For the above reasons, I respectively disagree. I'll also point out what I did not say, to further show I'm operating in good faith:

I never said he couldn't be a bot account or a shared account, just that the evidence leaned against this.

I never said he couldn't be a GOP supporter (he says he hasn't but I keep pointing out that evidence wise it's inconclusive).

I never said I unconditionally support his posts or comments. In fact I quoted a mod who had a disapproving opinion about them (even while explaining why).

No one is interested in your troll apologia.

Ultimately, I feel like this should be a case of "innocent unless proven guilty." A ban should be treated like a pretty big deal, so folks should have the evidence prepared to justify one. And by pointing out flaws or gaps in the specific reason (it's a bot account), folks get a chance to shore up the argument to address the flaws and make it stronger. So if you want, this could be a productive back and forth.

Lemmy is a leftist place. Sounds like it’s not for you.

This is the first time - like ever - that I've been accused of not being leftist enough. Typically it's the opposite. You should run this same analysis on my posts and comments.

Also, the issue with lemmy.ml isn't that it's too leftist but that it's too tankie. Censorship heavy with an aim to ignoring abuses by regimes still following Marxism or those having just recently left it..

Not cherry-picking, I said I came to the same conclusion independently of the mod.

But in a way, you could consider me a test. If you can change my mind with your arguments and statistics, then perhaps jordanlund would also be convinced by the same post replies.

(I'm not guaranteeing it, in fact considering that I'm not a mod here, I'm probably a lower bar to convince than jordanlund or the other mods.)

Ah, sorry, I see now that it was not you but gsfraley who was accusing of a shared or bot account (when even you have provided evidence to the contrary on that point).

Speaking of being contrary - well, just how far backwards can I be bending if I have independently come to the same conclusion as the mods here?

Nice, brilliant! They will get taken down eventually - as they are genuine fake reviews.

Newsweek has emailed Harris' campaign team for a response to Trump's allegation that she fabricated her old summer job.

Still? They're still pushing this?

After all this time, the only gov't agency that still has records from that long ago is the SSA, and it takes a minimum of six months to pull them down (and likely would take a year or two). So we're not likely to get any updates until long after the election is over. Maybe in time for the 2028 campaigns.

Hey, would the opposite work?

If AOC and friends managed to push something thru to defund arms supplies to Israel, would that force them to stop?

That's a good point. So the ROK should work closely with Ukraine in order to try and bridge the gap on the other end...

Agreed, but on the flip side, they likely don't want the stain of this war on anything that can be termed "Korean".

Wow, I hope the full story comes out and they figure out how to avoid this happening again.

Dang, that's really terrible.

Why even have commercial ovens that big? They should be small enough that a person couldn't fit, and tilted so a person would fall out if they fell unconcious.

... why? Like, will that have any effect at all? (Spoiler: nope)

Actually, your script goes a long way to convincing me the account is not a bot or shared account but a regular person.

111 mins / day

So the guy gets a full 8 hours of sleep, does a full 8 hours of work at a job and has a reasonable commute, spends less than 2 hours on the fediverse, and still has quite a few hours of personal time for other things like catching the latest movie?

(Alternatively, guy works at home, checks in on the fediverse frequently on his work computer while also doing his regular job, and maybe stays logged on for 10 hours a day instead of the required 8 to make up for the difference.)

It's certainly possible that this is a guy who is a GOP and MAGA supporter, and is being less than fully honest about his motives in promoting third parties.

But it's also possible that what's written on the tin is in fact accurate - he's a person who dislikes the duopoly in the US and wants to vote 3rd party no matter what, and wanting to share his thoughts on the election in an unfiltered way.

Which one is the truth? I'll let you, the voter, decide.

But, that aside, I think this comment from our mod explains it best,

https://lemmy.world/comment/12661845

The consensus is, yes, they have shitty opinions, but having shitty opinions is not against the TOS.
The comments and downvotes do their job exposing just how shitty their opinions are.

Agreed. Even from the reason article itself,

it is clear that Trump, contrary to the gloss offered by the Times, was talking about rioting by "radical left lunatics," as opposed to peaceful protests

Except that the quote that they give is this one,

I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within—not even the people that have come in and destroyed our country, by the way, totally destroying our country. The towns, the villages, they're being inundated. But I don't think they're the problem in terms of Election Day.
I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they're the—and it should be very easily handled by—if necessary, by [the] National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can't let that happen.

Which has no mentioning of rioting or violence. The implication is clear - he'd be willing to sic the military on nonviolent dissidents.

11.6% of their waking hours

Hadn't realized it was so little.

and fully opposite anything resembling a leftist goal.

Is this a leftist politics magazine? Or was it intended to be more neutral? If it was named /m/VoteBlue or something then that's make more sense - but in fact I see there are separate magazines for moderate politics and progressive politics (that this one is partnered with).

it’s been beyond clear for two months that this user intends to sway it,

I mean that's probably true for most of us as well. (We want to sway it to a Harris win, naturally.)

lemmy.ml banned this user yesterday for being a troll. Isn’t it about time that lemmy.world did also?

I'm not sure lemmy.ml is the best example to follow here. Lots of users block the instance outright because of their censorship policies.

Ironically, a ban from lemmy.ml is likely a point in favour of this user - as tankies seem unlikely to be the type to ban a Russian troll on the Russian gov't payroll, strongly suggesting that this user is in fact not that.

There probably is, but you can use a VPN to hide the ip address. There's probably a way to disable or pull out the builtin GPS detector too.

With starlink terminals, things have even escalated to GPS spoofing. So expect that Apple will cooperate but that the other side will also have ways of fighting back.

Hmm .. https://www.theverge.com/24100979/altstore-europe-app-marketplace-price-games

It's not a bad idea but in the end they'll likely find a way around that.

This article made me feel sick inside.