What absolute bull. 🤦
What absolute bull. 🤦
fixed again. jeebus.
Updated with a new link from EBU.
I think throwing around vague but scary-sounding terms like “compromised” is a very bad idea.
I can certainly tell you that Lemmy wont blindly follow what Mastodon is doing.
Good to hear.
They arent doing a good job for the Fediverse, for example they make zero effort to improve compatibility with other projects. Instead others are left to reverse engineer their federation logic.
Yeah. Plus, the sheer size of mastodon.social
and the monoculture of Mastodon-based instances is just unhealthy. I wrote about it at length.
Wonderful!
This Tech Won’t Save Us podcast episode makes a very important point: any movement that does not have a structure and some form of leadership can easily be taken over by anyone willing and able to fill that kind of power vacuum.
Fediverse currently does not have a structure nor a form of leadership other than perhaps “whatever Mastodon is doing”. That’s problematic. I hope that we recognize this and do something to fix it, before that power vacuum gets filled by… someone we might not like.
I do see that the researchers involved in the OP link are Erin Kissane and Darius Kazemi. That’s fantastic. They are truly fedi old guard, deeply engaged, very knowledgeable, and generally wonderful human beings.
Fair point, edited.
I am still hoping beyond hope they do revive it, there seems to be others that do as well.
Will we get tabbed/grouped windows finally again? Been waiting for this for half more than a decade.
Oh no! The browser that forked the browser that a browser made by the largest ad vendor in the world is based on in order to be able to serve different ads is legally threatening a browser that forked it in order to remove said ads?
Did I get this right?
Eh just what I came here for, glorified Markov-chain spam vaguely about torrents. 🙄
The concept of copyright did not exist for most of human history. The current shape of copyright and paying for culture is antiquated and puts creators at a disadvantage.
Instead of pondering if anyone can stop “digital piracy”, we should be pondering how to reform the copyright regime such that sharing culture is not considered “piracy”, and such that artists get paid. Rip out the middle-men.
These are just two different software projects that a Threadiverse instance can use. They federate with one another, so it doesn’t matter all that much if you have an account on a Kbin instance, or a Lemmy instance. The differences are in the interface, some functionality, and the tech stack used (Lemmy is written in Rust; Kbin in PHP).
There are 100+ instances of Lemmy, and ~10 instances of Kbin. Kbin is a much younger project (hence it might get missed), and it’s main instance, kbin.social seems to be experiencing more issues with the wave of new registrations. If you want to try Kbin, https://fedia.io/ might be a good instance to check out.
I don’t think you need to worry about it. It’s up to a given community whether or not that baggage affects it or not, I think. Building communities that are very explicitly not tankie is a great way of helping overcome that baggage for the whole project.
Absolutely not. Cryptobros showed that the whole cryptocurrency scene is either in on the scams or at least not bothered by them. Just consider Web3 Is Doing Great: for every promise “web3”/DAO people make, there is at least one story there how “web3”/DAO does not deliver and cannot deliver.
Here are some additional resources about why any suggestions of cryptocurrency/NFT/web3/DAO-related actions need to be pushed back on with full force:
Cryptobros had all the time to build sustainable, equitable, decentralized communities, and failed to do so. Instead, they scammed a lot of people out of their money, and a lot of artists out of their work.
Letting them in on the federated social networking action is letting in foxes into the hen house.
Donations, Liberapay, etc are the right way to support these federated social spaces. DAOs and other cryptocurrency scams are absolutely, positively not the right way to support them. Relying on them will let cryptobros benefit financially from it, while destroying the movement.
Ok, I should have been more specific: the way it is often framed (and the way I have seen it framed, and how the linked article frames it) is as if these were US-affiliated labs working on bioweapons. That is not what Nuland said. Biological research facilities do not have to be bioweapons labs, just as explosives research facilities need not be arms manufacturers.
Greenwald (the author of the linked article) of course does what Greenwald recently is hell-bent on doing, which is to try to scandalize anything he can. I used to respect the man, but that was a long while ago.
This will help:
The source is well-worth visiting and taking the time to read, plenty of additional info!
I don’t think this phrase means what you think it means; I do in fact put my money where my mouth is.
My mouth is clearly in the “blockchain-based privacy projects are very likely to be either misguided or outright scams, and this particular project has red flags all over” area. And so my money is on “I need to use tools that actually work; there is low likelihood that this project is such a tool; therefore I shall not waste my time on it”.
Demanding that I spent hours analyzing a project that has so many red flags just because you happen do disagree with me is somewhat weird. I’ve spent enough time having this conversation at all, but hey, that’s good entertainment value!
It’s not on me to disprove random project’s exorbitant claims (“prevents traffic analysis by an adversary capable of watching the entire network, including the NSA”). It’s on the project in question to prove them.
So far I have not seen such proof. I have, on the other hand, seen quite a lot of things that suggest that these claims might, in fact, be unsubstantiated.
I could retort by saying: prove to me that the project’s claims are true, “instead of going hurr durr it’s great I love it” (nice veiled ad hominem there, by the way). But I won’t, even though so far I have arguably provided more concrete reasons why I see this project as problematic than you did for your positive take on it.
Telling persons why they’ve decided to use tokens and not rely on pure altruism is not token hyping.
When the rubber hits the road, “using tokens” in this case means simply relying on greed. And relying on greed instead of altruism for something as fundamental as privacy is very telling. It’s not going to end well.
HAproxy cannot serve static files directly. You need a webserver behind it for that.
Apache is slow.
Nginx is both a capable, fast reverse-proxy, and a capable, fast webserver. It can do everything HAproxy does, and what Apache does, and more.
I am not saying it is absolutely best for every use-case, but this flexibility is a large part of why I use it in my infra (nad have been using it for a decade).