Kalcifer

joined 1 year ago
 

More often than not, the best way to hide is to simply blend in with the crowds -- this also encompasses one's choice for a username. It is relatively simple to make a single throwaway account -- just come up with a username, and off you go -- however, if one makes throwaway accounts often, the task of thinking of a unique, and non-identifiable username can become a challenge. I would argue that poeple would often resort to using a pattern employing small changes for all subsequent usernames. Such patterns can be identified to a specific user if all users have their own unique patterns.

How can one reliably generate many unique-but-normal, and non-pattern-identifiable usernames?

 

Currently, only one company in the world -- ASML -- has the technological capability necessary for the creation of photolithography machines which are sufficient for the production of modern semiconductor devices. What I'm wondering is at what point does semiconductor manufacturing become practical, or even feesible for small organizations, or independents? One must be able to surpass the cost of the machines, and the resources necessary to manufacture them. I presume that a company like ASML is also extremely picky -- willfully, or by regulation, or otherwise -- about who they lend their technology to.


I'm not sure if this is the right community for this sort of post. Please let me know if not, and if there is a more suitable place to put it.

 

On the side bar it lists the following:

  • [Matrix/Element]Dead
  • Discord

"Discord" is an active link, but the Matrix link is completely inactive. Not only is it inactive (which could have be excused as a broken link), but it is also manually labeled as "Dead", as if there is no intention of making it work. How can a community that is focused on privacy willingly favor a service that is privacy non-respecting when a perfectly functional privacy-respecting alternative exists?

 

I believe that the addition of an edit history would be a massive boon to the usefulness of Lemmy on the whole. A common problem with forums is the relatively low level of trust that users can have in another's content. When one has the ability to edit their posts, and comments this invites the possibility of misleading the reader -- for example, one can create a comment, then, after gaining likes, and comments, reword the comment to either destroy the usefulness of the thread on the whole, or mislead a future reader. The addition of an edit history would solve this issue.

Lemmy already tracks that a post was edited (I point your attention to the little pencil icon that you see in a posts header in the browser version of the lemmy-ui). What I am describing is the expansion of this feature. The format that I have envisioned is something very similar to what Element does. For example:

What this image is depicting is a visual of what parts of the post were changed at the time that it was edited, and a complete history of every edit made to the post -- sort of like a "git diff".

I would love to hear the feedback of all Lemmings on this idea for a feature -- concerns, suggestions, praise, criticisms, or anything else!


This post is the result of the current (2023-10-03T07:37Z) status of this GitHub post. It was closed by a maintainer/dev of the Lemmy repo. I personally don't think that the issue got enough attention, or input, so I am posting it here in an attempt to open it up to a potentially wider audience.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Perhaps the next emergent entity is not corporeal, but, instead, of the collective. A good example could be similar to what @[email protected] stated about how the movements of people in crowds are, on the "microscopic" scale, seemingly random, and unpredictable, but, on the "macroscopic" scale, can be predicted quite accurately. One could look at economies, traffic flow, entire nations, etc. as emergent entities that rely on our individual, autonomous interaction. A very interesting such example is outlined in this paper which explains how "Online communities featuring ‘anti-X’ hate and extremism" can be accurately modeled using "novel generalization of nonlinear fluid physics".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

they are all cover for ultra individualist ‘I got mine’ ways of thinking.

Maximizing individual freedoms is not implying that it is at the expense of the freedoms of others.

I’ve seen that kind of thinking take over in some towns near me where they weren’t sure how they were going to repair streets or keep the streetlights on because “private entities will have a natural interest in handling those things” but they never do.

Hm, streetlights would fall into a category of something called a natural monopoly. A Georgist would probably say that natural monopolies should be owned, or tightly regulated by the state -- a monopoly is inherently anti-competitive, as a result, it is fundamentally opposed to a competitive free market.

legal abortions

I will say, with certainty, that there is borderline zero consensus across all libertarians on how abortions should be handled. This is a tricky issue. I personally think that any solution will lie entirely within the grey, rather than the black and white. I suspect that no solution will be agreeable to all.

Libertarians seem the least interested in actually enacting

This is a dubious statement -- it falsely generalizes to all libertarians. It entirely depends on who you talk to.

And that’s because sure maybe some of them support those ideas, but they like the idea of fewer taxes and fewer regulations to help their bottom line a lot more.

While, yes, fewer taxes, and regulation increase profits, that's not their only purpose. Reductions in those result in increases in scale of the free market. It could be argued, dependent on circumstance, whether such decreases are actually beneficial, or not, but, at any rate, reductions in taxes and regulations don't only serve the purpose of lining the pockets of special interest groups.

It’s embarrassing because it is conclusive that we are better when we work together and combine our efforts, and Libertarianism only drags us apart.

While, idealistically, it would be great if all humans could work together, real life is unfortunately far from ideal.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What do you think is embarrassing about libertarianism? What is so objectionable about resisting oppression? What is so objectionable about maximising each individuals rights, and freedoms?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

solution1... Qxg2 2. Kxg2 Nf4+ 3. Kg1 Nh3#? Nice queen sacrifice