0x1C3B00DA

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

I use TiddlyWiki via TiddlyPWA I find it works way closer to the way my brain works

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

If you take a look at their CEOs fediverse acct, you'll see he's pretty caught up in the mastodon hype. He's coming at the whole thing from the perspective of mastodon being the platform, instead of the weird disjointed fediverse. People have tried explaining things he's not understanding fully, and he kinda brushes it off. I think even in a decentralized network, there are some ppl who still need some centralized platform to focus in on.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Meta (or any large entity) cannot monopolize or control the fediverse. If their implementation starts drifting from established norms, they will be blocked by most instances or will just be incompatible. The example used to back up this argument is usually XMPP, but people forget that XMPP is still around. It never died; its just a smaller, niche network.

The fediverse is already a small, niche network. So if Meta comes in and tries to control the network, it will then be responsible for maintaining its own "Meta-fediverse" network (that some instances may choose to be a part of) while the remaining instances will remain as a small, niche network. Meta can't force current fediverse servers to implement any Meta-specific features or to change their software in any way.

The mod workload argument is the only one that I see being a real issue, but the target is wrong. Anyone worried about that should be discussing it with fediverse devs to improve mod tools, not trying to force the entire fediverse to stay at their preferred size

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Once content dependence is established, there is no turning back.

Everyone who is on the fediverse has already made that choice. They are intentionally on a network with less content because of the other benefits And a huge portion of the discussion of Meta joining the fediverse is made up of ppl who are saying they will block Threads on day 1.

the latter will make it impossible to grow again.

That's what everyone was saying back when the fediverse was even smaller, or even before it existed. "How can you compete with giants like G+, twitter, and facebook?" There will always be groups of people who will not participate in corporate social media. And there will always be people who like the convenience of corporate social media but get fed up with it and seek alternatives. And there will always be people who bounce between services.

Tons of people will leave platforms like Mastodon to go to Threads

They're only here because they left corporate social media. If they were going to leave for Threads, why wouldn't they do it now? They've heard all the warnings about some supposed EEE and assume that Threads won't connect to the fediverse forever so why would Threads adding ActivityPub support suddenly change their mind? Going to threads now puts them in the same state as going to threads later in some hypothetical future where the fediverse is too small to matter.

If we want a fediverse with the values we care about to grow...

I don't care about Meta and I'm not relying on them for anything. When they join the fediverse, individual instance owners will still have all the power. User on the fediverse will still be able to control their own feeds. But there are people who use Threads and being able to communicate with them would be nice. I don't think any of the fears about Meta on the fediverse are justified and I think the fediverse will continue on just like it has for more than a decade.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

But if you have to install an extension, how does this differ from current extension that already do this? What could the url scheme do that using http urls couldn't?

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Genius (the lyrics company) tried to license the content on their website and a judge said that can't be legally binding because there's no guarantee the scraper read it. It seems like the same would apply here.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

It looks like I was mixing up some facts. The Genius case was denied because genius doesn't own the copyright to the lyrics they were publishing. I can't find the case now, but there was a case where a judge said scraping was allowed because it wasn't a given that the scraper had read a ToS.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Their step one is:

identify medium-to-large sized Fediverse servers

which means it'll be weighted toward mastodon servers. I hope they account for that somehow.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

I've never bought an apple product but I've worked at multiple jobs that provided me with a mac so I still want to see improvements in the mac ecosystem.

Also, I'm not a screenreader user but I am a web developer and screenreader users deserve the same experience as typical screen/keyboard/mouse users. Developing for screenreaders sometimes feels like developing for browsers use to be with inconsistencies and unimplemented standards. For browsers, it was Chromes launch that really spurred competition in the space that drove vendors to implement standards and interoperability so it seems reasonable that a new screenreader could provide the same outcome for screenreaders.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Kbin just released Collections, its feature to allow users to create groups of magazines. The microblogging side of the fediverse has lists. It sounds like this is basically what you're asking for.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

It looks like you're on kbin, which doesn't have lists. The equivalent feature is Collections but its fairly new. Collections are essentially arbitrary groupings of magazines, similar to reddits multireddits.

Lists on microblogging platforms allow you to manage multiple groupings of accounts instead of following them all. So your home timeline could be people you know IRL and you could have a list for different interests and you can view each one independently.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

This is for bicycles, not motorcycles. Also:

Solo inventor says he's not out to replace gears, just offer an alternative.

"I always imagined it going along the same line as when automobiles got automatic transmissions, and it got easier for more people to drive a car," Mercer said. Lycra-clad weekend warriors, gearheads, professionals, and retrogrouches may always prefer direct control of their cogs. "I just think the vast majority of people out there are in the same boat, where they find themselves in too high a gear going uphill, and it can be a pain to get to a low-enough gear quickly," he said.

0x1C3B00DA, 7 months ago

Not every instance is running mastodon. This would be useful for other software that don't have it built in

0x1C3B00DA, 7 months ago

Just a heads up: there's a mastodon specific community at https://lemmy.ml/c/mastodon that would be more appropriate for this post.

0x1C3B00DA, 7 months ago

I definitely think this is the cooler way to go. You could even put engines on them so that they could migrate around (slowly; I'm envisioning engines that modify their orbits, not allow for free motion). We could have space stations orbiting Mars and the Moon coordinating drones below for research and asteroid habs that can visit these stations for transfers.

But as the article/book points out, there are still a ton of questions we need to answer before that is possible.

0x1C3B00DA, 7 months ago

Exactly. In the podcast episode I linked, the authors explain how they're sci-fi nerds and fans of space exploration. They started out writing a book about how cool it would be, but started asking these questions and realized we don't have the answers yet. That's not pessimism, it's practicality

0x1C3B00DA, 7 months ago

Nobody is doing it right now. Its a scifi concept, but the parent is saying that is an alternative to trying to colonize planetary bodies.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Any government with launch capability, I guess. I get what you're saying but this is already how it works. NASA recently modified the orbit of an asteroid and I'm sure they're already studying how to do more. Any govt with launch capability probably already has access to nukes, though, so I don't think this is an existential threat.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Putin already has nukes. They are a much more immediate existential threat and we have a framework in place to deal with it. I also don't know what you're proposing. If any entity has the capability to move an asteroid, how do you propose we stop them? NASA has already moved an asteroid and they didn't ask for anybody's permission.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

I'm not handwaving them away. We were having a fun conversation about theoretical concepts and you jumped in with "what about madmen who wanna destroy the world". I have no political power on the global stage so that question is so far outside my scope that it's absurd.

You're also handwaving away the fact that there's nothing we can do. It doesn't matter how settled space law gets. If somebody with the capability wants to do that, they will unless someone else forcibly stops them. Laws won't matter at that point (see all the humanitarian crises going on right now despite being against some law and how most of the world isn't actively stopping them)

And, yes, NASA tested asteroid redirection on an inconsequential asteroid. But that was a choice and now we know they have the capability. We're not adding a threat, it's already there.

Lastly, if you read my other comments in this thread and crossposted threads, you'll see me reiterating that the point of this article is that there are a ton of unanswered questions about space colonization and I don't think it's going to happen in our lifetimes. There's plenty of time for you to figure out how to write a law to stop physics/math or outlaw rocketry or whatever. So excuse me if I continue to imagine cool sci-fi futures.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

pointed out that it doesn’t actually address any of the problems with space settlements.

It does address some of the problems. We already have a lot of the capability. Like I've said, moving an asteroid has already been demonstrated. Capping the dig sites makes it reasonable to maintain an atmosphere inside the hollow body of the asteroid and the body of the asteroid protects inhabitants from radiation. We can build soil using basic principles we've used for millennia here on Earth and raise crops so the hab could possibly be self sustaining. This addresses most of the scientific issues the article presents.

You keep ignoring a lot of what I'm saying so it feels like you're not actually arguing with me and this is a personal bugaboo for you. I never said "space will be the wild west". There are already laws in place that work and prevent a lot of bad things. What I was trying to get across is that laws don't actually stop people from doing bad things. Putin invaded Ukraine, Israel is bombing civilians, etc, even though those are against international laws. The laws are a deterrent but can't actually stop someone. And the international community has shown they will not forcibly stop countries from breaking these laws. What would stop people from doing something like this is the same as what currently stops countries from using nukes.

There’s a huge difference between dart and redirecting an asteroid to a specific near earth orbit. These are not comparable existential threats.

They redirected an asteroid into an orbit farther from Earth. That's not a huge difference from bringing its orbit closer to Earth.

My push back is because we are just randos on the internet having a fun conversation about hypothetical far futures, not an organization with space launch capabilities, and you started yelling at us for being irresponsible with existential threats. No matter how this argument here end, nothing will change in the status of space law and the ability to ram asteroids into Earth. So we wanted to spend our time theorizing about the fun questions and there's no international law requiring us to submit a thesis on how we would prevent a global apocalypse before we play armchair scientist/explorer.

0x1C3B00DA, 6 months ago

Again, you keep avoiding replying directly to my points. Can you explain to me what's wrong or absurd about my post?

so I won’t engage with the topic

I've been engaging with you. I'm trying to understand what exactly you want to happen. You keep mentioning how dangerous asteroids are and then casting my responses as "lol ez" or "world bad mkay" I just don't understand what you want here. Are we not allowed to talk about asteroid habs at all because there is a hypothetical danger to them? I don't know how to prevent people from crashing an asteroid into the Earth. But I still think the idea of asteroid habs is interesting and, because I'm not actually moving an asteroid myself, I don't think that's dangerous.