It is illegal. That’s what the lawsuit is about.
Way down yonder?
Oh, absolutely. I’m sure that they are infiltrated, which is why they keep getting caught. If you and I can figure out what they are up to, then I’m guessing the FBI and all their fun toys know what’s up.
They have evidence against all of them, but it’s better to wait until they can really put them away for a long time.
Mastodon manages to do it on ActivityPub
I just can’t take all this free speech that’s happening right now
I would argue that there should be a block feature and also a mute feature. What we currently call “block” is actually just a mute.
Imagine finding out one day that someone you’ve blocked for harassment has been following you around and making nasty comments on every single post you made for months, or even leaking personal information. You just didn’t know it.
It happens, and even on Lemmy you will have people who will do this (doxing will get a ban but other behaviors may slide under the radar, especiallyif the target doesn’t see and report it).
That was my first instinct, but no… The specific inclusion of 14 & 88, together and in that order?
Walmart just did it to be noticeably less than competitors, who often would price items ending in .99, .98, or .97.
Not stupid, just lucky that you haven’t had extensive dealings with these people
When I’ve brought this up with the devs, they have shot it down immediately. Basically, their attitude is that posts are public by default. So hiding them from a blocked user doesn’t really do anything.
Of course, that’s nonsense. Mastodon does it. It has an incredible chilling effect on harassment.
What does this mean? Does this mean they’re trying to do something like Yelp and hold those reviews hostage?
True, but most orgs and devs would take the reliable monthly income rather than an unpredictable infusion every two years. If it’s a massive donor base, maybe those things even out. For smaller, active projects, I don’t mind giving a percentage to the bank knowing that they can rely on my donations every month. The larger annual gifts are usually reserved for orgs like clinics, food banks, and community institutions that can handle the fluctuations.
I think there may be a challenge or challenges that you haven’t pinned down yet. First is: what problem does this solve?
Second is, how will people know that they are housed under the same roof, so to speak? A small instance dedicated to NBA basketball may be interesting, but if it seems disconnected then people would be wary. Small specialty instances can be shut down without warning for all sort if reasons.A consortium of instances may help with this issue, as long as it is immediately clear through common branding that they are part if the same group.
Third is that different communities have different needs.
Don’t worry, deceptive sales are still allowed everywhere else…
Not specifically software, but I divide my donations into three categories - for my budget, that’s basically the $10-20 range, the $20-500 range, and $500-2000. I track the donations I make over the year, with a target in mind. For me, the target is 10% of income.
I decide which organizations are doing the most important work, and prioritize those. I try to donate monthly to those that I make use of regularly, then I give the rest as what comes up from day to day.
I consider free software to be a social good, so I don’t separate it from other giving.
This is a weirdly commonly held belief among far right accelerationists. They think that the race war is inevitable, and if there is enough social disruption, social order will break down, people will turn to the militias, and guess who runs the militias?
The US electrical grid is shockingly vulnerable. Transfer stations can be disabled from a distance by rifle fire. There is no practical way to guard or physically secure every single one. A disabled transfer station has the potential to cause a cascade failure that could cause catastrophic failure of the grid. The USA has just three grids, Eastern, Western, and Texas. So terrorists have figured that attacking the power grid is the easiest way to cause maximum disruption with a single bullet.
The thing is, each of the grids has failed in the past, and while there was some disruption for a couple days, there has never been a social breakdown. The other thing is that the dummies who plan these attacks keep getting caught before they can do any damage.
As I read it, the article is comparing the two shows exactly to show why they shouldn’t be judged the same. But maybe I just don’t get it.
I used to say not the sharpest cookie in the jar
Sounds fishy
I think this still eliminates class action suits. According to the article quotes, they still define the court and terms under which you can sue.