I didn't especially "want" to brush my teeth last night, but I did anyway. Because I know that the alternative is opening up the door to things I don't want, even more than I don't want to brush my teeth.
If someone woke up and said, I'm proud I didn't brush my teeth, because I didn't want to, I would have trouble looking at them as a source of wisdom about how to accomplish the goals they're trying to pursue.
Claude.ai is quite a bit superior to GPT in my experience. That one, I pay for, and it seems like it's worth it.
Like I said, definitely still possible. It is certainly an action that you can take.
~~in Ohio~~
If you want your vote to count, you're going to need to vote for one of the major party candidates.
If you want to move towards a future where third-party candidates are viable, you need to support RCV, so that they can get electoral support without producing the opposite impact on the election that is intended. And then, vote for one of the major party candidates this time, ideally the one who won't destroy the machinery of democracy which we will need in future elections to enact RCV, or elect Green Party people or Democrats.
If you wanted to mark the box for Jill Stein and accomplish nothing, you can still do that. Nothing has changed. I don't recommend it, but it's definitely still possible.
Sounds good. If you redid the import, I think you’ll want to make some manual fixes to the .json. Off the top of my head, I think you just need to add bbc.co.uk and aljazeera.com to the URL lists for those sources.
I never abused the report system. That was the mod of News abusing the rule, I only ever reported stuff hurled at me which never ever got removed even when it was very obvious personal attacks or other people doing exactly what I had a comment removed for.
Can you link to some examples of people abusing you? You don't have to spend a ton of time on it if you don't want to. I'm just curious.
Moderation is never completely fair. It can't be. I'm just saying that by some coincidence, the moderators that interacted with you are some of the only ones who I tend to agree with a lot of the time.
And I 100% will admit that I’ve called for the removal of Israel. I don’t view that as the negative FlyingSquid does.
It's not just FlyingSquid. I think calling for "removing" Moscow, or Washington, or Israel, or Gaza, or Ukraine, for whatever reasons of geopolitical argument, would lead to your removal from most communities outside of the instances that tend to get defederated.
You can hold whatever views you want, but surely breaking the community rules on purpose by speaking about them, and then getting banned, isn't a confusing outcome.
I moderate differently than I comment. Moderation for me is only about removing spam etc or obvious bad actors, people voting are what determines what’s visible not what I’ve decided should be allowed.
Maybe so. It could work fine. Definitely having you be a member of the community instead of someone coming from above, and open about what you're doing and why, is a step in the right direction. I'm just saying that moderation is hard and thankless work that is going to bring you into contact with a lot of obnoxious people, and refraining from becoming obnoxious or unfair yourself, as you deal with that day in and day out, is a lot more difficult than it seems like it would be.
My guess is that a good portion of that comes down to the quality and breadth (or lack thereof) of the Lemmy built-in moderation tools. Combined with volunteer moderation and a presidential election year in the US, and I’m sure the moderation load is close to overwhelming and they don’t really have the tools they need to be more sophisticated or efficient about it.
I completely agree. I have a whole mini-essay that I've been meaning to write about this, about problems of incentives and social contracts on Lemmy-style servers in the fediverse that I think lead to a lot of these issues that keep cropping up.
Your actor (https://lemmy.today/u/tal)'s public key is:
-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----
MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA1VR4k0/gurS2iULVe7D6
xwlQNTeEsn0EOVuGC2e9ZBPHv4b02Z8mvuJmWIcLxWmaL+cgHu2cJCWx2lxNYyfQ
ivorluJHQcwPtkx9B0gFBR5SHmQzMuk6cllDMhfqUBCONiy5cpYRIs4LBpChV4vg
frSquHPl+5LvEs1jgCZnAcTtJZVKBRISNhSp560ftntlFATMh/hIFG2Sfdi3V3+/
0nf0QDPm77vqykj2aUk8RnnkMG2KfPwSdJMUhHQ6HQZS+AZuZ7Q+t5bs8bISFeLR
6uqJHcrXtvOIXuFe7d/g/MKjqURaSh/Pqet8dVIwvLFFr5oNkcKhWG1QXL1k62Tr
owIDAQAB
-----END PUBLIC KEY-----
All ActivityPub users have their own private keys. I'm not completely sure, and I just took a quick look through the code and protocols and couldn't find the place where vote activity signatures are validated. But I swear I thought that all ActivityPub activities including votes were signed with the key of the actor that did them.
Regardless, I know that when votes federate, they do get identified according to the person who did the vote.
In practice, you are completely correct that the trust is per-instance, since the instance DB keeps all the actor private keys anyway, so it's six of one vs. half dozen of the other whether you have 100 fake votes from bad.instance signed with that instance's TLS key, or 100 fake votes signed with individual private keys that bad.instance made up. I'm just nitpicking about how it works at a protocol level.
That's not quite true. If a community was resolved but no one's currently subscribed to it, for example because someone searched for it or subscribed and then unsubscribed, you'll see exactly the situation that you're looking at. You'll see partial content and almost no votes.
!globalnews@lemmy.zip and !politics@sh.itjust.works are the best news communities I'm aware of.
Especially with "scaled" sorting, there's no real downside to subscribing to any number of them, but if I had to pick one for each category, those would be the ones. Mostly, my metric is that interesting stories reliably come across the feed without a lot of dreck.
It's very obvious that someone is doing deliberate astroturfing on Lemmy. How much is an open question, but some amount of it is definitely happening.
The open question, to me, is why the .world moderation team seems so totally uninterested in dealing with the topic. For example, they're happy for UniversalMonk to spam for Jill Stein in a way that openly violates the rules, that almost every single member of the community is against, and that objectively makes the community worse. Why that is happening is a baffling and interesting question to me.
You're so close to getting it. Millimeters away.