I'm on lemmy.world - maybe I've just gotten lucky. I have seen some furry content but it's closer to a post a week, compared to blocking like 8 regular porn communities a day.
I've seen a lot of people complaining about that too, but it hasn't really showed up on my All page: Only one of my blocked communities has "yiff" anywhere in its name
This isn't about controlling what others see - I'd just like for users to be able to block entire instances, because blocking 3 more porn communities every time I reload All gets tiring.
I like porn when I'm in the mood for it. I've got an alt on lemmynsfw for that. Though I feel your point about high quality content: The specific stuff I'm interested in hasn't had a new post in a month. The only thing I still use reddit for, really...
My preferred way to browse (even when I was on reddit) is to ignore subscriptions entirely, always browse All, and just block communities that regularly post content I'm not interested in. Once enough things are blocked it starts being pretty much all stuff I want to see.
I am subscribed to a lot of communities on Lemmy, but I might as well not be for how often I swap from All to Subscribed. For all the years I used reddit I only ever subscribed to like 3 subreddits.
I've only blocked a single user: @youtube_feed_bot@lemm.ee. The amount of posts from them on my All page was stupid.
I've considered blocking a few people who cross-post, since it's annoying to have the same exact post from the same exact user in 2-4 different communities being on my All page at the same time, but haven't yet.
I think it's just okay. I very much wish there were at least 10x as many daily active users.
I think natural growth will be either very slow, or negative, for the time being. But I also think future "events" will probably end up being more effective - because with each new influx of users Lemmy will be more mature as a platform, and have a larger pre-existing userbase to fill it with content that isn't just about Lemmy or reddit - which was so bad when I joined that I nearly quit.
Same domain. Every email is just the username it's associated with @ the domain (Not gmail). The passwords are different between account and email (And no two accounts anywhere share passwords).
As of right now I have 19 already-created email accounts just waiting to eventually be associated with some account I'll make for some service in the future. Any time I get low I'll make a bunch more at once. I have almost 60 accounts across the internet using this system already. It does get a bit annoying when certain sites want to email me a login code every time I log in.
Different randomized username on everything I sign up for. I do it so you can't google my username on one platform and find me on another. Each account also gets its own unique email address.
I'm not sure if you quoted the right portion of my message - but I don't think the halting problem plays any part in this scenario. It's perfectly possible to simulate a computer running a program with an unknown halting state - there's no real need to know if or when a nested program will halt to simulate it anyways. The arbitrary future state you want to determine may just have it in a non-halted state. The simulation itself is likely non-halting.
I want to clarify that I say "simulation", but I don't mean it in the sense it's usually used at all - I think our universe is as real as real gets. I think of it like this xkcd. If you accept that the universe can in principle be simulated (Such that you, as an inhabitant of the universe, would notice no difference), then why not accept that it can be so simulated with rocks? And if you can accept that your entire existence and subjective experience is determined by rock placement in a desert - then why require the rocks at all? To me, the fact that the universe is mathematically consistent is then enough for it to exist - at least as far as it and its inhabitants are concerned.
I will admit that non-determinism from quantum randomness makes this all a bit hairier / fuzzier, but I don't think it invalidates the whole thing at all.
"Free will", as almost anyone defines it, is completely indistinguishable from no free will.
Also: The universe exists as a manifestation of pure math. In the same sense that the answer to "What is 9827349328659327498327592432^98374239563298473298324253?" exists even if nobody bothers to actually calculate it, the answer to "What does a universe with [these] parameters look like at t = 13.7 billion years look like?" exists as well - and it looks like you. A lot of people agree that it might be in principle possible to simulate the universe - even if it requires something silly like a computer larger than the universe. I just take it a step further and say that if a simulation is possible, even only in principle, then actually carrying out the simulation isn't a necessary step.
I don't think the deciding factor here is literal ownership - what does a vampire care if you're owning, renting, paying a mortgage, or living with your parents? Rather, it makes most sense that the deciding factor to whether you can validly invite a vampire into a given location, is if that location is where you live. So the 4-year-old can invite the vampire in because the 4-year-old lives there. I might also accept that a vampire can be invited in by anyone who is already inside. There are plenty of more consistent options than just those you described.
In your hypothetical scenario, if vampires were to somehow gain control of the government, could they simply pass a law stating all vampires are invited in all domiciles? Legal systems change and can vary wildly depending on location - it's silly to think they'd have an effect on something based in magic, not law.
I swapped from Active to Hot for this reason, but every so often I'll try New too.