Just some IT guy
You agree that tagging the username of a mod (wasn’t even one it was an admin) is doxxing? If so, you’re delusional.
Mod names are visible by default on my instance so if taking a look there and then mentioning the username you see there is doxxing good luck with the rest of your life. You can’t have a system where everyone can easily find out who performed a mod action and then claim you were “doxxed”
To quote the reason why calling out mods by name is forbidden from a previous encounter I had with them: “removed for doxxing”
So yeah I think you’re giving them too much credit here
I feel your pain, pretty much the same here except the heat is at least dry
I hate summer, I dislike shorts and t-shirts being too much clothing for the scorching heat. I also don’t like seeing our dried up husk of a garden despite best attempts to water the damn thing.
I feel like much how OP seems to experience extremely hot summers you get extremely mild ones
Nope, it’ll just get worse and worse as LLMs start getting compact enough to get sicced on that Bot blocker. I think eventually the whole system will invert with captchas only proving you are human if you fail them.
It’s usually the cache after the dns making you think it was the cache all along when it’s just still hanging onto messed up dns data
Da andere hier auch ihre Erfahrungen teilen hier ein Auszug meiner Erfahrungen:
GLS:
Hermes:
UPS:
Amazon:
DHL:
Verdammt an die Variante hatte ich beim Ausfüllen gar nicht mehr gedacht…
The developer working on federation plans to merge the changes into forgejo first and then from there into gitea but I’m not sure in how far the recent changes to gitea’s CLA have affected those plans.
Forgejo is a drop in replacement (they are committed to keeping it that way for as long as possible) so, as far as I know, simply changing the gitea image to the forgejo image is all you would need to do.
They did start a cloud service for hosting Gitea which introduces a direct incentive for them to make Gitea less hosting friendly by, for example, making newly added configuration options less comfortable to set up. And more recently some changes to code contributions that are not exactly community friendly (as a result forgejo will be unable to upstream some of their changes)
What lead to Forgejo, as far as I am aware, was less a problem that is already there and more the set of problems that have a very high chance of eventually manifesting, at which point forking the project would be too late.
Tut gut feddit pfosten endlich wieder sehen zu können
iirc Microsoft is doing it, read of a case where a parent sent a picture of his son to the doctor via onedrove share and his entire account got suspended over it.
Also CSAM detection algorithms are known to misfire on occasion (it’s hard to impossible to tell apart a picture of a naked child sent for porn purposes and one not send for that) and people want to avoid any false allegations of that if at all possible.
I’d be very careful with those words given that lemmy.world is rather trigger happy with defederations.
It is almost impossible to completely censor away content and anyone can bridge blocks by creating a new intermediary instance where they can view content of mutually blocked instances but it’s not like you see all the fediverse content on any instance.
Matter of fact you just need to look at the blocklists of most instances to get a pretty good guess at the other, less legal, Fediverse out there running almost in parallel to the popular one. But since almost every instance has those blocked you don’t see any of that shit in your feeds. Highly censorship resistant, but ultimately an individual is still at the mercy of their instance admins.
> make a new messenger using a niche protocol > new users choose your messenger because it is objectively the best after you dumped unreasonable amounts of cash into it > userbase grows, in large parts because the small messenger is interoperable so you can say “hey, if other company wanted to they could just implement [protocol] for you, we are already doing that” > once userbase reaches critical mass, pull the plug on the protocol > users with long chat histories and contact books are now more or less stuck on your platform whether they like it or not because getting people to switch suddenly means two messengers instead of one for them, not a good proposition to make.
XMPP did take off while it was in Messenger, Facebook decided to kill it with its superior reach because it was a step-ladder rather than something actually useful to them. Facebook will absolutely use the Mastodon interoperability as a marketing trick “Hey guys, if you have friends that don’t like threads they can use another platform and still talk with you”. They’ll use it to distinguish threads from twitter until they feel like they don’t need it anymore. Then they’ll find some sort of technical excuse and pull the plug on ActivityPub support.
Can confirm, my mail server does just about everything I found it needs to do to not get flagged spam. And it doesn’t except for Gmail. Not even Microsoft has “Spam” filters that strict beyond checking the basic records.
On the browsers, I think in large parts Google should have never been allowed to push for their own Browser in their own products simply because the have monopolies in so many of them. Free market this and that, IRL it doesn’t work without some regulations and imo (American) Tech companies have been allowed too much freedom to abuse the market whichever way they like.
If they are having instance owners sign NDA’s they must have pre-selected who to talk to or only target Mastodon because feddit.de just pre-emptively defederated threads.net after users made the owner aware of the news and it’s one of the largest instances (even more so if you go by MAU which is arguably what Meta would be intersted in).
The way I see it have them show through actions that they won’t EEE for a good few years with whoever is willing to risk it. If they don’t show any signs of EEE then, I might reconsider my stance on federation with them. Until then I’ll keep threads.net on the blocked list of my instance.
well in this particular case it wouldn’t have mattered, I used the username but the admin in question has their clear name set as the display name (which made the whole “doxxing” claim even funnier to me)