4
Here's their accounts, for the curious:
Wow, I'm pretty impressed with BC for this.
Having font support really legitimizes a language. It's basically impossible to make digital content if you can't type in your language, so this is really unlocking a lot for the readers and writers of all those languages!
Just tagging things as Porn or Gore is a great idea! Let's mark stuff as what it is, not where it's... supposedly unsafe? lmao. Yes, you shouldn't be looking at porn while working, but there are plenty of non-work places where it's still not really appropriate.
I think there could be an argument for Gore being called like "Trauma" or something instead. Porn is broad, and I'd like another tag for "Viewer Beware" even if there isn't specifically Gore in it. A Gore tag feels more like a Sex tag, yes porn is sex but there's plenty of porn that isn't specifically sex.
I vote both!
There's a lot of situations where shared bikes are a great idea, so to me that's a default "Yes!" answer lol.
But my own bike can be better suited to my needs and preferences, so that also becomes a "Yes!" to me too lol. For example, I usually prefer my bike's seat to the ones on shared bikes.
But! If I've walked to my friend's house, and we get invited to a game across town, I'll gladly pick up a shared bike rather than detour home lol.
I love your question! I think these words are examples of a trochee!
In English poetic metre and modern linguistics, a trochee (/ˈtroʊkiː/) is a metrical foot consisting of a stressed syllable followed by an unstressed one.
It's usually easy to recognize a word that's a trochee because it'll sound like kids TV show title: Teenage Mutant Ninja Power Ranger Mega Turtles lol.
In this case, it's trochaic dimeter because there's two trochees. "LET'S-go RAN-gers!" You may have heard of iambic pentameter, somehow that one always seems popular to people. Well an iamb is just the reverse of a trochee, and pentameter means you'd put five of them on each line.
Now that you know what trochees are, you're gonna see 'em everywhere. Or maybe that's just me lol.
Edit: For extra fun, what do you think is going on with the clapping afterwards? I feel like we're doing something with this at the end, but it's late and I should go to sleep hahah. Good luck!
I feel like it would be nice to pull at least some content when the first person opens the box lol. Maybe the last 10-100 posts, or from the past 30-90 days, or whatever.
Maybe do this kind of smaller sync every time another user subscribes to it until it's fully synced up, 'cause that means we all really want the content lol.
Kbin could do that independently right? Or would ActivityPub need to change to allow that?
I think we could have multireddits by using tags, no? We'd just need a magazines tags to automatically be applied to any content in it, and then I could just have my #tech feed, my #ask feed, and my #cycling+#bikes+#bicycles feed lol.
I think it would be good to look at cross-posting across multiple magazines/communities too while we're here. It's an adjacent problem here, and I feel like we can find a nice solution for both here.
As things are now, if we just amalgamate 6 different /tech communities, there's going to be a lot of duplicate threads lol. If I want to post a news article to several places, it'd be nice to be able to just list them off and click post just once. Then in the multi-feeds, it'll only be listed once please!
Hmm interesting. I do think it's just as important that we double-defederate unfortunately. Meta/Threads has to be treated as if it's contagious.
If we stay federated with an instance that has accepted the Embrace, what do we do when the Extend happens? Is that when we defederate? Will we even recognize it?
EEE only works because it's difficult to see it happening to you. Instances that ally with Meta/Threads will actually present the same threat of EEE, or even a greater threat, because the Extend step may appear to come from non-Meta instances.
Imagine ActivityPub upgrades developed by a Meta/Threads-ally, let's say improved inter-instance moderator tools. That sounds good right?
It's basically all the exact same arguments again, but with a middle man.
- Meta/Threads have different foundational priorities (namely, profit) and real incentives to monopolize.
- Meta-ally instances have real and implied incentives to accommodate
Meta/Threads. - And we have incentives to accommodate the instances that we federate with, so of course kbin would use the well-developed new mod tools right?
- Seems crazy not to, even if it was developed by a Meta-ally. Right?
- Great! Repeat for thousands of tiny changes, that's called Extend.
That's how accepting EEE works, each little step looks great but big picture we're unknowingly in trouble. We'll have to treat any Meta/Threads-ally as if it is Meta/Threads. (Hell, some of them probably will be lol, the fediverse is just asking for astroturfing lol.)
We can trust instances that don't have economic incentives. But any instance that shows they can be swayed by money, or that shows they'll accommodate instances driven by profit, well they're showing that they'd consider eating us to become the next reddit.
Discouraging Clout Chasing Behaviors:
Promoting Content Quality and Relevance:
I see your goal here, but how would this actually work? Like what buttons does the user see?
Are we all still collectively deciding what counts as valuable contributions? If so, this sounds veryyy similar to what we already have using either upvotes or boosts lol.
- "Agreement" sounds like an upvote. I like this content.
- "Mark as quality" sounds like a boost. More people should see this.
So what metric(s) do you actually want implemented?
alternative ways to measure influence and impact (insightful comments, fostering discussions, valuable contributions).
If those are the buttons you think we should have, I don't think the internet can be objective enough to make these reliably more useful than an upvote.
If I see buttons saying "Insightful / Fosters Discussion / Valuable", I'm mostly going to just hit any or all of them when I like the content. And I'll click none of them when I dislike content, 'cause duh that's not insightful or valuable!
So what should we actually do to achieve these noble goals?
Engagement, interactions, relevance, and authenticity
Ehh, sorting by interactions can encourage excess commenting or spamming near content you want promoted. More interactions doesn't necessarily mean higher quality. I'm commenting several times on this post, but it could have been one commentary for the exact same content. Should this thread's quality be treated differently based on my format?
Unfortunately, engagement is highest around controversial topics, which again doesn't necessarily indicate the highest quality content.
I'm pretty sure sorting by relevance is how YouTube & TikTok try to serve you content, but I don't think we should aspire to black box algorithms.
Agh, I swear I'm not trying to just shoot down all your ideas. I'm trusting based on your writing that you're open to collective constructive criticism. You're obviously thinking here, thinking more than most people do lol.
It's just that this is a very complex issue, that will need very nuanced solutions. Humans have spent a heck of a lot of time, money and effort trying to figure about it, and we still seem to get it wrong a lot haha.
Hmm, I think I understand your goals here, but I don't fully understand their implementation. I'm gonna reply in sections because you deserve nuanced response!
Hiding Voting Metrics:
Okay, so I participated in a similar discussion about removing downvotes recently.
Right off the bat, one of the key concerns here is that the technology we're using makes all voting public as a baseline. You can opt to close your own eyes (hide them for yourself or for your instance), but other people or instances will still see the votes because ActivityPub transfers information as "users acting upon other content."
So unfortunately this may be a hard feature to shift without fediverse-wide agreement (or fediverse splintering).
Anyways, I have some concerns about the actual goal here, because we can't actually prevent all fear of judgement or backlash. Anytime you say anything, someone can disagree with you by text comment, which can be very strong disagreement while staying within normal moderation limits.
But! I can see that mitigating the effects of voting may reduce the punishments for participating outside narrow echo-chambers, and that seems important. Even if I don't think this is the correct solution, it is a worthwhile discussion!
I propose making downvotes have no effect on reputation. It's okay to know people disagree with you. We just reduce the extent a downvote harms users. I'm even willing to make upvotes have no effect on reputation either, to address some of your later concerns.
This would let people casually agree/disagree with comments as we all seem to like doing. Rather than committing to a full comment when I don't have a meaningful contribution, a little upvote feels like the correct way to say "Nice!" vs no response and letting the author think they aren't being seen. But benign voting would be for just that specific content with no further ramifications lol.
I do find vote counts have benefits for me, letting me feel the pulse of community response, and I'm idealistic about finding a healthy medium!
Nice! Worked for me. 697 subreddits, yikes.
view more: next ›
shepherd
joined 1 year ago
Okay, so I'm here on kbin.social. And I see that it's artemis.camp only until 0.2.1 comes out.
Should I just come back in a bit to use my established account? Or is 0.2.1 going to take like 3-12 months so I might as well just make an artemis.camp account?