Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | throw_a_grenade's commentslogin

They'll then defederate also from you. The argument goes, you're a nazi/facist/racist/*phobe, because you associate with (== did not defederate from) the designated nazi/facist/racist/*phobe.

Yes, it's that toxic. Go subscribe #FediBlock hashtag if you don't believe me.


Ok, so what? Let those people block you then, sounds like people you probably don't want to interact with anyways?

I've seen that, and I'm not sure what's supposed to be toxic. It's community-organized filtering of unwanted views, for the people who want to engage in that. I don't agree with that, so I don't participate or do that myself, and I also don't seem to face any negative consequences because I'm not participating in that. What am I supposed to be sad about here, that some people don't want to listen to my views?


Witch hunts and guilt by association are generally seen as toxic. If you disagree with that I'm not really sure what to say as it's a rather fundamental principle from my perspective.

> sounds like people you probably don't want to interact with anyways?

That's all well and good when it's a single user instance or small group of friends. But often enough it will be a much larger one with unknowing participants caught up in it. Blaming them for choosing the "wrong" instance is about as productive as blaming people for using facebook - technically correct but that's about it.

That said, the AP model seems like the least worst to me. Every option I'm aware of has significant downsides.


Look, life is complicated and not a single issue, contrary to what admins of many of those fedi instances would like. Typical human has views on multiple subjects, but it takes only a single incorrect opinion expressed to have you ejected. Worse yet, it happens by leveraging the admin of your instance: they go to the admin and tell him/her that if you're not banned, they'll defederate the whole instance. IOW they're bullies, and bullies squared at that: they designed a whole protocol to enable bullying.

Again, go check #FediBlock. If you'd like a specific example of the single issue vs multiple issues, pay specific attention to trans vs black conflict there and see how it is played by both sides.


>Ok, so what? Let those people block you then, sounds like people you probably don't want to interact with anyways?

The problem is when this is a large server with people you know using it. They suddenly disappear from your feed. And those people may not have even agreed with the reason for defederation.

At that point, the only way to connect with your friend(s) is for you or them to find new servers that haven't (yet) gotten into a defederation slap fight.

The TL;DR of the problem with Mastodon is that you basically need to pin your identity to what is essentially a small internet community/forum and then give them full power to decide who/what you can consume while your identity is tagged to their community.


How is that when car drivers decide the rules are nonsensical it's bad, but when bicycle drivers decide the rules (that, please note, apply to everyone on the street, car or not), it's somehow A-ok?

How come that when people handling uranium decide the rules are nonsensical it's bad, but when people handling bananas decide the rules (that, please note, apply to everyone with radioactive materials), it's somehow A-ok?

When I go to buy banana I always bring my Geiger counter. I also aways get kicked out of the supermarket, I wonder what they're trying to cover up...

Hmm well, we have some "smart traffic lights" where I live that are always red unless a vehicle goes over a metal detecting loop under the road in front of them. Guess how well that works for any vehicle that's not a car.

Rules of the road are generally designed in the same way — for cars. Nobody cares about carving out obvious exceptions for bikes, like the Idaho stop.


> Not clear whether soldiers are acting on their own or following policy.

It mostly doesn't matter, unless they're punished. If they're not, then the policy is, what they did is okay. That's why it's important to keep army disciplined.


It doesn't matter for things that are bad whether they are policy or not, like sexual assault. It matters for things that are okay if they are policy, like strip searches. If prison guards do strip searches on their own for fun, that is a problem, but the mandated ones are not. (Assuming the policy was made with a normal level of concern for human dignity and officer safety.)


> Who was abusing?

It's possible that in some cases it was settlers. So technically not soldiers. But soldiers protected them, incl. from any resisting abuse.


[flagged]


„There” — you mean where? Generally in the West Bank or intruding into Palestinian homes to abuse their children?

I'd wager Palestinians would throw them out of their homes. Instead, parents had to stand there helpless.

If you meant generally, I think they wouldn't be there without soldiers at all, illegaly tranfering own population into occupied territories.


Is this a joke?


Doesn't matter, I (not OP, but also operating VPS) still want to support this, so the clients can eventually assume all correctly configured servers support it.


No, that's steel, and not with voltage, but with temperature: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_coloring_of_metals. For aluminium, you add dye to third bath.


It's a bit of hit and miss, really. Like every big organisation, it's not a single, coherent entity, but has branches and departments filled by real, flawed people, so in practice it depends on which industry your're in. For example, digital policy bureaucrats are usually extremely competent, like, they do know how the stuff discussed here on HN works. (That they often have differen expectations from what people here want is orthogonal). Automotive industry is on the other hand squarely in bed with manufacturers (cars, but also accessories like child safety chairs). The average is suprisingly good, esp. in comparison with national bureaucracies.


I'd guess it's because of the general attitude of the project's community, specifically GNOME people and their “my way or highway” style of answering questions e.g. about CSD or other non-critical stuff, not directly related to core protocol. If they were a bit more accommodating to reasonable requests from outside, they'd get less backlash in comments. There's plenty of exemplar behaviour elsewhere in adjacent communities, they could have taken hint multiple times.

That they provide this stuff for free would be a good argument if the stuff wasn't pushed down people's throats with no working alternative and Xorg being discontinued.


meanwhile i have 0 issues atm with kde wayland which i have been running for 3 years

because the devs actually have implemented things that i cared about


And how would they be able to "push stuff down people's throats" if people could walk away towards alternatives? When such alternatives don't exist, that's exactly how "they do stuff for free and nobody else is putting in the work to make something else" looks like.

The problem isn't they "pushing stuff down your throats", it's nobody else (including you) making alternatives that you like better. You are voluntarily ingesting their stuff because your only alternative is starving.


> And how would they be able to "push stuff down people's throats" if people could walk away towards alternatives?

It's a forcing of their narrow opinion on what should be allowed onto the ecosystem at large, because all of these things are connected. You can leave to a different DE/distro, but if every DE is doing its own thing for global hotkeys or whatever, then software in the ecosystem is going to be hacky/bespoke or have an unreasonable maintenance burden.

Even if you in particular can move elsewhere the ecosystem is still held back. We only recently got consensus on apps being able to request a window position on screen, which is something x11, macos, and windows all allow you to do. CSD and tray icons are other examples of things found everywhere else that they did not want to support. Some applications are just broken without tray icon support.

This bleeds over into work for folks releasing software for Linux in general. By not supporting SSD they were pushing the burden of drawing window decorations onto every single app author, and while most frameworks will handle this, it's not like everyone is using qt or gtk. App authors will get bug reports and the burden of releasing software on Linux needlessly climbs again.

Hard to convey how unreasonable I feel their stance was on tray icons / SSD. It should be the domain of the DE from a conceptual but also practical point of view, even from just the amount of work involved. It reminds me of LSP's enabling text editors to have great support for every language. And again, Gnome was the odd man out in this, they want extra attention and work when Linux is the lowest desktop marketshare by far, and they themselves are not the overwhelming majority but they are large enough that you really do need to make sure your software runs well on Gnome even if you want to support Linux.

People think Gnome push stuff down your throat because they have the power and influence to impact the ecosystem, and they use that power and influence to die on absolutely absurd hills.


I dunno, I think tray icons support is kind of the absurd hill to die on. They're a Windows 95-ism and generally extremely horrible in terms of usability. Apps use them and desktop environments support them mostly out of a lack of imagination, and they are frankly extremely overused.

I'm personally a KDE user, but I'm with the GNOME folks on this one.


They may have been introduced in Windows 95, but they didn't actually become particularly common until years later. They weren't originally intended as a long-term feature and, in Win 2000, Microsoft started recommending that people use custom Control Panel objects or MMC console snap-ins instead. But the MMC wasn't an option in Win98/Me and, by the time MS finally managed to produced a consumer variant of NT, use of the system tray had become entrenched.

I'm not sure what Windows is like these days, but in MacOS they're patently absurd. My corporate Mac laptop has twelve of the fucking things, and I've never actually had genuine need to click on any of them (and 5 of them are from Apple and so of course use 4 different corner radii between them - the 3rd party ones are at least a little more consistent).


Nonsense. Gnome is not Wayland.


Not OP, but that post clearly was alluding to Hitler coming to power democratically. That they don't need to worry was a very dark joke. Anyway, it's just history.


Not just Hitler.

There are more recent examples in Europe, like Putin, Orban and Vucic. All of them got elected fairly, and all of them engaged in the process of slowly but surely breaking democratic institutions and checks and balances down. The guidebook is actually exactly the same. Putin is now 25 years in power, Orban 16 years and Vucic 14 years.

You could say that those Eastern European democracies were fragile to begin with, but what MAGA is so far very much successfully doing is fully matching the existing proven guidebook.

If Polymarket were legal in my country I'd actually consider betting on it.


(2015)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: