I honestly belive that donations are like savings. For people who do then this is the first expense out of their income. People who try to do it out of what’s left after all important stuff is covered really do it, becouse we all spant “all” every month. What’s different, is the definition of “all” if you manage to hide important stuff there buy “paying yourself first” it’s much easier to cover thing you truly care about.
“… for task that can be completed sucesfully with copy-pasting output with little to no changes”: the same not peer-reviewed MIT study published hasetly “to protect the children”.
We are better than this.
OK, let’s slow down for one secound.
There are so many problems with AI, and we need so many checks and balances. Sure. But let’s not change it into another “our pop-science vs their pop-science” kind of problem.
I think that the point is that instances can choose thier own rules. Article is about an instance. Not about the entire platform.
I’m glad you understood me know, thank you. I adapted your approach to learning languages - speaking slow and laudly. It worked like a charm.
I like to think I would less judgmental about people attepting to communicate with me in the only language I know. Maybe approach like that is the reason work is the only place where people spent time with you ;)
hmm, so having or not having kids have impact on your sence of workplace community during remote work?
Does it add up to you?
No, I think that’s the fair take. But to me, it’s similar when people say “Studies may teach me a thing, but I’m glad I went there because I met all this people”… Yes, you spent X years there. You’d probably bound with someone over that time if it was a different place as well. It’s perfectly understandable to have a need for structure. I just wish that work isnt that sole source of structure in most people live.
On the other hand, when people show they who they really are… you should believe them. There are some views that are either ignorant or bad will. I think evidence of those is a reasonable deal-breaker. And it’s perfectly ok if you have your line drown somewhere else as well.
According to my kids, candies are the most logical place to get most your nutritions from. Where else could you get so many calories?
If most of your time at work is spent socializing, couldn’t you cut your work time and build your community elsewhere?
If most of your time at work you spent on honest hard-work working, how much community are you really building?
Cut you calories. Life doesn’t happen at work.
Are you asking if I insist that the minds behind my secure private chat have some moral standing and common sense? One would hope so. I wouldn’t trust encryption made by anti-vaxer more than I would trust a plane put tougher by flat-earther. I don’t want to be the hero of the next leopard eat my face song.
Come on, work being the sole source of community is the problem here. What are we even talking about?
This is the part that resonated with me the most as the casual user. The interface is, so confusing that the differences between various forms of chats seems deliberately unclear. And all that’s “useful” is opt-in. And Groups - most used in corporate or project setting, can’t be encrypted at all? That’s… peculiar.
Again, thanks for the eye-opener.
No, I can’t stress enough how much I appreciate it. What I do right now is sending this article with TLDR to all my friends and family.
Any advice for people that used it in the past? After reading the article, my understanding is that what was sent in “private chat” was in fact encrypted (for the most part) and can be considered secured (to the degree - something is off and, maybe we didn’t find out yet, how the encryption is compromised). But it would wise to treat all other conversations as something that is compromised. Is this a fair summary?
Well, it was obvious to you. I’m a casual user, who tries to “do his best” and consider himself “somewhat informed” - obviously not by your standard. It was all news to me, and I find tremendous value in this article.
That’s what I heard, but, again, it’s all confusing to me as well :)
Hmm,
No idea how accurate that is - know nothing about anything, please take it into consideration - but I think this may be the case: the instance show every post from every federated instances that are subscribed by people in the instance?
If you’re on europe.pub and you subscribe to “!flippanarchy” than all people on europe.pub will gain the ability to see their post in the “all”. Until at least one person do it, it’s only “potentially” connected.
Could it be the case here?
Man, this is a high-quality joke… why am I crying?