Lvxferre

A compiler does it “good enough”, but AI = god in a bottle, thus it’ll do it “perfectly”. And for perfection you need to edit the raw metal using butterflies and cosmic rays, it’ll be the only real programmer to ever appear. Pressures like time and focus will stop existing. Why? Because AI = god, QED.

…or at least that’s the sort of crap that those Silicon Valley muppets believe in. The content itself doesn’t make sense, but why that pile of nonsense is uttered does - a fringe religious-like belief increasingly common among them.

That other poster is likely trying to deliver a point, that Musk probably never read a book, by clipping the sentence of the other poster.

Websearch “transhumanism silicon valley”, and it starts making sense: Musk has faith that artificial general intelligence is coming, Soon®, and that it’ll replace grunt labour like programming.

Musk being an assumer (note how he’s vomiting certainty on future events) doesn’t surprise me a tiny bit.

creating a label and checking the skip invoice box

That works great too, specially if you want to use less foolproof filters. Or even a mix of both strategies.

If you want, you could use GMail filters to delete those emails automatically. Here’s how:

1. click the engine button (settings), then “see all settings”, then “filters and blocked addresses”.
2. click “create a new filter”. Add “top of Google search” to the field “has the words”, leave other fields blank.
3. click “create filter”, then check the “delete it” box, then “create filter” again.
4. repeat steps 2-3 for other shit that SEO spam is likely to mention.

Important: never use as a filter anything that legitimate users might reasonably say. Only things that you’re fairly certain to come from a spammer.

EDIT: I repeated two steps without noticing it. My bad.

Android File Transfer for Linux. Here’s the release note from the OP.

My guesses:

• Toner’s role is being underplayed by the video. She’s potentially calling Altman out, for underrating the dangers of AI.
• At least Altman is lying about something - about how much OpenAI is going towards AGI in the short term. The above might’ve bought the bullshit fully, while Sutskever knows that it’s bullshit.
• I’m not sure if the board is also lying or not.
• The boiling point was likely OpenAI potentially receiving some cash grant from some scummy party, that would be in a moral grey area considering the "non-"profit goals of the company.
• Everybody will get a bit more of free popcorn for a while. 🍿 This mess is far from over.

Karma/age requirements in subreddits are the result of mods using whatever resources they can to do what the admins were supposed to do (curb down trolling, spamming, and harassment). I don’t like them either but I can relate to mods using this shit.

So hopefully they won’t appear on Lemmy because they won’t be necessary.

The groups listed as example (notice the “etc.”) are up to the admins, I’m suggesting mostly how to word it. It’s easy to include/exclude one if they so desire.

That said, I do think that “religious affiliation or lack of” should be included. It might boil down to opinions + a bunch of epistemic statements, but it’s consistently a source of persecution.

If your wording is adopted, it’d be nice to see the difference between attacking who someone is and an opinion someone holds made clear.

Personally I believe that this is usually easy - you look at the target of the claim. For example:

• “[religion] is full of bullshit” - probably attacking the opinions or epistemic claims, thus probably fine
• “[religion] is full of arseholes” - unless contextualised otherwise, probably attacking the individuals there, thus probably not fine

This is also up to the admins here though, not me.

Also needs to reference (dis)ability IMO.

I understand where you’re coming from with this, but note that complains about ableism, in social media, are often shielding abled people against criticism, not disabled people from prejudice. Stuff like:

• [Alice] Bob! You’re being a moron. Don’t do this.
• [Bob] Alice dis is ableism!

I’m not subscribed to lemmy.world but I got a proposal on a way to handle this. Here it is:

5.0.1: Before and when using the website, remember you will be interacting with actual, real people and communities. You cannot use Lemmy.World to attack other groups of people, regardless of their sex, sexuality and gender, ethnicity and race, country of origin and residence, religious affiliation or lack of, etc. Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment, bullying, violation of privacy or threats of violence.

I believe that this should be enough to clarify to those most people that no, bigotry is not allowed in your instance.

Please expand on “reddit-left”.

I cannot speak for someone else, but I’m still willing to chime in.

Slacktivists nominally aligned to social causes, and fairly vocal about them, but unwilling to lift a single finger on what matters.

Patronising towards marginalised groups. Often with an implicit “they shouldn’t empower themselves, they should rely on people like ME to defend them, poor things”.

Eager to defend corporations once they wash something in pink, black, or green, due to ignorance on the impact of the economic system on marginalised groups.

Assumptive as a brick and eager to witch hunt. Including distorting what others say to point fingers, or screeching at any sort of internal criticism as if it was a sign of allegiance to the other side.

Eager to employ Chewbacca defence and whataboutism when called out on blatant prejudice, in a way that sounds as irrational as “I have a black friend so I cannot be transphobic lol lmao”.

They’re the living proof that even a broken clock is right twice a day. Because, even if the alt right is idiotic, idioticising, morally repugnant and epistemically laughable, they might have a point when they say that those guys are “virtue signalling”. They don’t genuinely care about the marginalised groups, and they don’t want to change shit, they care about their own precious OH SO PRECIOUS feelings of “being the good guy”. (Except that the alt right is unable to recognise that their own ranks stink the same putrid smell as those guys, plus everything else.)

This sort of “nominally left-wing, but effectively right-wing” individual is by no means exclusive to Reddit, mind you. And there are plenty exceptions to it, even in that shithole. Even then, if you hit someone claiming to be “left-wing” in Reddit, there’s a good chance that the person is like this.

The problems with “let votes decide” are that most people won’t vote on the best interests of the community in question, and that it increases the impact of brigades. It’s specially bad when dealing with marginalised minorities - because even if “outsiders” don’t underestimate the impact of the mean-spirited meme in question, people put their own enjoyment over the well-being of the others.

As such, even if I’d usually agree with you (moderation should be light-handed), I don’t think that relying on the votes is a good idea.

Instead I think that mods shouldn’t jump at the gun and assume. Context is king; a meme about the LGBTQIA+ acronym being too long can go from anything between “it’s fine” to “it’s prejudice”, depending on:

• how it’s worded
• presence/absence of similar memes in the same comm
• how OP presents oneself (e.g. a trans person posting a meme about this would be interpreted as self-humour)
• other things that OP posted (e.g. does OP target those people?)

Also, sometimes mods should talk officially with the users. Speaking officially is seriously underused, even if it defuses issues before they even happen. Simply commenting “I’m leaving this up because it’s about the acronym alone, but I don’t want to see bigotry here, OK? Everyone, please be excellent to each other, including the LGBTQIA+ members of this comm.” and then watching OP’s reaction is often enough.

Relevant detail: the modlog shows who did what, but only if you’re a mod of that comm. Based on that, I think that it doesn’t show it to the rest of the userbase to avoid mod harassment.

However I think that it should show to the rest of the userbase, at least, “[comm name] mod” or “[instance name] admins” instead of simply “mod”. And there should be an easy way to contact the relevant group behind a certain mod action, that does not involve direct messages!

Another thing that I feel like missing is a proper channel for comm mods to “upstream” reports to instance admins, when the content fits the community rules but may or may not be in violation of the instance rules. That would indirectly help other users because there’s a clearer division of responsibility, and you won’t get situations like “comm mods need to take an educated guess on how to enforce instance rules that they did not set up”.

People here are focusing too much on the examples and too little on the core complain (that Lemmy moderation is inconsistent and this frustrates users). I think that the later is worth investigating, IMO for two reasons:

1. The way that federation works, up to three groups can moderate your content: comm mods, admins of the comm’s instance, admins of your instance. As such it’s possible that users find mod problems far more often here than expected. And, while all those three groups are avoidable (unlike in a forum or Reddit), it’s possible that users are having a hard time settling down in instances that work for them.
2. Lots of mods here were previously Reddit mods (inb4: myself included). It’s perfectly possible that we brought Reddit’s idiotic moderation culture into Lemmy, without even realising it. And… well, Reddit mods aren’t exactly known for being transparent, smart, or consistent.

Thank you, and sorry - I made sure to read the FAQ, but I couldn’t find the answer for this specific question.

Why do jc141 releases use DwarFS, instead of more typical compression formats like tarballs?

Here in Paraná there’s a rather old law against that too, from 2007. Back then the concern was phone companies and credit card companies doing it, but the law was worded in a surprisingly sensible way, so it protects customers against online roach motels too. I’ll coarsely translate it from Portuguese, (sourced from p203):

It seems that the governor back then was already expecting companies to rule-lawyer and say “ackshyually we aren’t offering [service], we’re offering [same service under different name], so it doesn’t apply to us”, so the way that article #3 was worded basically lists examples, not an exhaustive list. As much as I hate that specific governor I can’t help but think that he did a good job with this law.

For those not getting it:

• Album title in the pic - capitalised as a plain sentence; “Como te voy a dejar”. The producers follow RAE’s guides!
• Song title - camel case; “Como Te Voy A Dejar”. Someone got to run the names through a script That Capitalises Every First Word Of A Sentence.
• Album title - capitalised in a weird way; “Como Te voy a Dejar”. Likely how the artist himself wrote it.

This would fit well a mildly infuriating comm.

people should always be told why they’re being banned, post removed, etc.

Fully agree. And a lot of times simply saying “don’t do that” works better than a ban or post/comment removal.