I appreciate your reconsidering your position! Thanks for taking my argument in good faith hahaha. I was worried I’d get some hate for it.
Cheers!
I appreciate your reconsidering your position! Thanks for taking my argument in good faith hahaha. I was worried I’d get some hate for it.
Cheers!
So, are we saying we want more people to create accounts on Meta's Threads?
That's what defederation would imply: people who want to interact with Meta's folks and be in touch with Meta's community would end up creating accounts there. We'd be handing users to Meta by doing that.
Clearly, Meta has tons of resources to invest. If they have half a braincell among them, they'll be able to create some value with those resources. Given that they're launching Threads with or without federation, we now have two options:
What are we even talking about here? A ton of people put in a ton of effort and work to create a platform where the whole point is to have different organizations be able to inter-operate without any one instance gaining too much power. As soon as someone with actual resources wants to contribute, we shut them out? Folks, if a single organization could bring down the fediverse, then the "decentralize so that no one can gain too much power" model is proven wrong, and it was bound to fail anyway.
If we become an echo chamber where the only one who can be part of the "fediverse" are people without resources, then what's even the point? Who wants an email service that can't send emails to Gmail and Hotmail, but only YourFriendlyLocalInstance.com?
The way I see it, we should absolutely not defederate. I'd prefer to see Google or Twitter also join the fediverse, and have them competing amongst each other to make sure we have enough competition to keep any of them from wanting to defederate.
EDIT: Quoting this deep child-level comment, which explains my point of view better:
We care about the vision of a “fediverse”, where all instances’ users can talk to one another if they choose. If that’s what we care about, there’s no choice here: federate, or you’ve already broken the vision.
Look, no one is saying that programming.dev should promote Meta’s content on their home page. Let’s beef up our moderation/content filtering tools:
- Let users block all Meta communities and all Meta users if they choose.
- Let users set that none of their posts should federate to Meta.
- Let community mods block all posts from Meta users.
- Let community mods decide never to let Meta users see any of the posts on their community.
- Let the instance owners decide never to feature a Meta user’s post or a Meta community post on “all” or “local”. Make it so that the only way to find a Meta post/user is by actively searching for it or subscribing to their communities.
That’s all well and good.
But defederation is worse than that. What defederation really means is: “Even if programming.dev users want to see Meta content or post there, we won’t allow it. Go create an account there instead.” As soon as you do that, it’s not a fediverse anymore.
I toss my KeePass file (encrypted database) in Google Drive.
That way I have all the convenience of syncing through the cloud, but I also get the benefit of having my database access and database storage be managed by separate companies.
If Google has a breach and my data gets leaked, sucks, but the database is encrypted so I’m good. If KeePass encryption is broken, sucks, but attackers would also have to find a way to gain access to my Google Drive.
You’re welcome! Hope it’s useful :)
Thanks for calling this out! Fixed, I hope. Wasn’t intentional.
Agreed! I think this is generalizable to say that CSR is when you need to show "loading indicators" which is kind of annoying because.... I had to send the loading indicator from server -> browser.... so it was loading just to load some more.
It depends what you mean by "rendering". Of course, the visuals are only shown to users, and that happens on the browser.
But the browser uses HTML/CSS/JS to create the visuals (I'll call this a "bundle"). There are different strategies for how this bundle is created. The classic way is to just create it on the server on a per-request basis, and send it to the client. These ways I've listed are other ways.
Yeah, a few times. It was especially helpful in finding causes of subtle UI bugs, to identify the exact commit which changed the UI.
As a stadia user, I loved it.
It made gaming accessible in a way that GeForce definitely doesn’t. It felt more like a console than GeForce, which feels like… well honestly like emulation.
I think they had 3 solid strategies, each of which they fucked up in execution. First they were trying to compete against consoles (hence the studio acquisitions as they were trying to make exclusives). Then they gave up. Then they were trying to compete against steam by being a Netflix-like library online. But then they gave up. Then they tried to build a new “cloud gaming” market (maybe whitelabel to existing game companies).Then they gave up that too.
Throughout the whole time, they were great from a user perspective.
I prefer a flat time period not in excess of a single lifetime. So, like, 20 years.
Reason being: if an old person invents something (presumably) to benefit his family and immediately dies, I think it’s fair to give the kids time to benefit from it.
Shouldn’t be too long, though, since it shouldn’t have a multigenerational effect. As in, it shouldn’t benefit him during his lifetime AND his kids during theirs.
I dunno! Try and see if you like it!
It’s absolutely a useful skill no matter where your life/career takes you.
To get started, just write about whatever interests you. Could be a diary, or short stories, or fanfic. Doesn’t matter— the goal is to write.
To get better, two things: read more, and write more. The more you read, the more you’ll absorb of how others write and the more ideas you’ll get. The more you write, the more practice you get.
Good luck! Have fun!
This is essentially the argument that Thomas Malthus (economist) made in the 1800's. And he had a point!
In his time, history had shown that the entire output of a country/state was people's productivity times some function of land and labour. Meaning you could increase the output of a country by making people more productive (limited), or increasing the land available (limited), or by increasing the labour available (also limited). Therefore, there was a hard limit on how much output a country could have. And therefore we were fucked because population increases exponentially but output only increases linearly and has limits.
I think this is similar to your lego analogy: the pieces (land, labour) are limited, therefore the output is also limited.
Then the capitalist revolution happened and once the capitalist-style legal framework was in place which allowed the ownership of capital, countries' outputs broke from the historical trend. We realized that a different function better described the output of a country. Rather than land, the correct thing to look at was capital. So the new function was people's productivity times some function of land and capital (hence, capitalism).
And unlike land, capital is, in fact, unlimited. Someone might build a factory on the land, and owning the factory, he/she has incentive to improve the factory. "How much you can improve the factory" is, for all intents and purposes, unlimited. Therefore the output is also unlimited. This equation better described the growth in output that people were seeing in reality (GDP is an attempt to measure this), which has been growing exponentially ever since.
So... we're not fucked? Well, it remains to be seen! We've certainly avoided being fucked so far! The standard of living of the average person on Earth has increased by a lot since Malthus.
Of course, this has come with negative externalities (pollution). We're still seeing infinite growth riiiiiight up until we go extinct. The trick is to keep the infinite growth without going extinct!
EDIT: spelling correction