Be careful whose advice you buy, but, be patient with those who supply it. Advice is a form of nostalgia, dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it’s worth.
deleted by creator
Become a dog. They’re the happiest people I know.
Just installed it.
Went to Reddit, it recommended I use Lemmy. Sounds good.
“Tell me you work in America without telling me you work in America”
Big orders for single people, especially for stuff like curry, pizza and chinese, could just mean they’re buying several meals at once and are going to freeze it for later on. Think of it as meal prepping without having to cook.
How the heck is UK European? They left the EU 5 years ago.
Steady that jerky knee there fella, you might want to read that a bit more closely.
The premise is European, not EU. It’s a matter of geography, not politics.
Right answer. In fact, the only viable answer.
As a 54 year old who has just had two weeks of agony because he forgot his age and tried to deadlift a 225kg motorbike by himself, I’m going to skip this one because I clearly haven’t learned anything.
“That’s a great question!” </ai>
The truth is, we don’t need AI to have misinformation, and AI is not the biggest problem in the current post-truth society. There has been a war going on globally in undermining truth for a long time. The old saying, “The first casualty in war is truth” is invalid now, because truth is no longer relevant and lies are weaponised like never before in history. People don’t want to be certain of something, their first reaction to news is to react at a deep and emotional level and the science of misinformation is highly refined and successful in making most people react in a certain way. It takes effort and training not to do that, and most of us can’t.
Journalists have been warning us about this for decades but integrity costs money, and that funding has been under attack too. It’s pretty depressing whichever way you look at it.
Personal view: I’d rather you didn’t. One of the benefits of Lemmy over Reddit is that repost bots are at a minimum.
We must be getting popular.
But everytime I see it used it is always illeterate frontenders
*illiterate
I think this is the most downvoted thing I’ve seen on Lemmy.
Good show, chaps!
One of the interesting things about surveys is you only learn about the sort of people who complete surveys.
You waited two hours before demanding a reply? Wow. Funnily enough I don’t live at the keyboard and was away doing interesting real world stuff.
Your other question wasn’t relevant to the subject in my view, so although I wasn’t ignoring you, I will now.
I don’t want Lemmy to be zero censorship.
In every case I’ve known, anywhere claiming “zero censorship” either adopts it sooner or later, or disappears - and in every one of those cases, it was a godawful place to be 100% of the time. IME, those who do say they want this tend to be either edgy teenagers, crackpot conspiracy theorists or psychopaths.
Sure, you can say “well, zero censorship except bots” - well that’s censorship, isn’t it? And given no anti-bot tactic is reliable, you’ll be blocking humans. Or you can say, “zero censorship except CSAM, or extreme pornography, or anti-terrorist” and you’re either applying societal laws or your own morality on others. You can’t use “no censor” and “except” in a sentence without contradiction.
If you want zero censorship, I don’t think Lemmy is for you. I don’t think the fediverse is for you. But if you disagree, then run your own instance and put it on an onion address, please stop trying to rant at us for not sharing your views.
Thanks for the full and reasoned explanation.
I do agree there is nuance, and it is very difficult to balance these things when there is often not a great choice about who ultimately ends up with your money.
Nice - always fun to glimpse someone else’s workflow and how they’ve approached some of the same problems.
As a fellow lazy person (I use this term advisedly - lazy people work hard to find the easiest way to do something well) I like the thinking that I can see here. Thanks for sharing.
Good article and a reminder that all might not be as it seems, and I’m glad they’re reporting this to the French Police as well as raising awareness. The language used in the emails do suggest it could be a single zealot rather than a professional body. It also highlights how often “but what about the children?” is used to enact censorship. (Not least by my own government in the UK with the OSA)
I have one issue though;
Surely anyone registering any online organisation today would want to take reasonable steps to protect their real identity, especially one dealing with such sensitive matters? Anyone thwarted would want that information for malicious ends.