201–210 of 507 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, they want to create Mastodon?
what a horrible name
Edit, PS: I'd be glad to be proven wrong here. It's a great project!
Reading this conversation reminded me of something Steve Jobs once said: "Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you and you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use. Once you learn that, you'll never be the same again"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those scared of all the links, here's a simple summary from someone who runs a server with an instance of one of these applications. * ActivityPub is just an open, flexible protocol for sharing content * The fediverse is a nice, human friendly way to describe all the various services using activitypub to talk back and forth to each other. The value in this is that these projects are diverse, it's not all twitter…
I had not heard of Pleroma before, it looks nicely lightweight: https://pleroma.social
Why do I get the feeling this is where everyone who got banned from twitter goes to hang out...
It's like leaving Reddit for Voat, you'll just end up in the midst of the worst fringe groups because they can't exist on the main platform where normal people are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Upvoting messages with currency" is literally describing what advertising is.
Except that you can limit to 1 upvote per account, and use (centralized) moderation to handle sybil attacks by removing upvotes with discretion.
I think the key is to have individual sets where each user has particular people whose upvotes and downvotes count for more and use that to filter content. This would be transparent at least to the users involved so there’s no black box algorithm.
It kind of reminds me of overlaying vectors and for any given user there would be particular vectors to overlay to rate every thing according to its value to the user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can mean that or more likely means "We have gone past the usefulness of async short texts as a means of conversations." Text/tweets are useful but are sub optimal for actually discussing stuff like this. Voice is so much better in this case.
What? I've literally never felt this way. Every time someone wanted to have a call with me, it was so they could push me into something with their whining, or so they could misinterpret what was said without me being able to point at a timestamped sentence. For these reasons I always refuse calls about anything important - and never had any problems solving various business issues over text. How specifically is text…
Reading this conversation reminded me of something Steve Jobs once said: "Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you and you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use. Once you learn that, you'll never be the same again"
While I believe this deeply. Putting really smart people into a room to work on big things is optimal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He may not be clear of Twitter enough to do something like this. I’m wondering if a public action like that coukd open him up to some legal jeopardy. Just a guess.
Yeah, seeing these texts where a board member discussed starting a competitor certainly raised my eyebrows
Does gmail compete with smtp?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can mean that or more likely means "We have gone past the usefulness of async short texts as a means of conversations." Text/tweets are useful but are sub optimal for actually discussing stuff like this. Voice is so much better in this case.
What? I've literally never felt this way. Every time someone wanted to have a call with me, it was so they could push me into something with their whining, or so they could misinterpret what was said without me being able to point at a timestamped sentence. For these reasons I always refuse calls about anything important - and never had any problems solving various business issues over text. How specifically is text…
Above signal flags, text is almost the lowest possible bandwidth form of human-human conversion. It will take you an hour to write something that you could explain to someone in 5 minutes via voice.
Even if you do manage to find the time to write all down, you quickly hit problem 2.
Text is shit for communicating any form of sentiment or emotional valence, which is a pretty critical part of communication, especially when you’re getting into the nuanced ends of any particular topic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can mean that or more likely means "We have gone past the usefulness of async short texts as a means of conversations." Text/tweets are useful but are sub optimal for actually discussing stuff like this. Voice is so much better in this case.
What? I've literally never felt this way. Every time someone wanted to have a call with me, it was so they could push me into something with their whining, or so they could misinterpret what was said without me being able to point at a timestamped sentence. For these reasons I always refuse calls about anything important - and never had any problems solving various business issues over text. How specifically is text…
Texts do not convey emotion. Allow verification of nuanced points with simple interjections and interrogatives. The limitation of threads of conversation to simplify discourse through a more direct dialog and rebuttals.
I have had relationships due specifically because texts are really incomplete and poor means of conversation and the other side fails to pick up and acknowledge the severity of the situations I was trying to describe.