monkeywork

yup - it's the users gooseus fault.

If you're wasting your breath talking about someone, it's not on them, it's on you. We live in a world where everyone should have realized by now that attention is the most valuable currency you have ... and yet people continue to use that currency on things they claim to dislike ... I have a hard time feeling bad for them.

Curious who is looking for "community" when it comes to their email hosting provider. The word "community" gets tossed around so much it's basically meaningless - but I mean, even in the loosest definition of it why would you want to interact with random people who simply use the same provider you do... like would you want a Discord server for your local gas station chain or power company?

The only other map that started in a non-CS game that I think has even a slightly close level of fame would be COD Nuketown.

It's not a discord problem it's an online culture problem. People now are addicted to trying to find things to be upset about and put people on blast for - make an off coloured joke in the old days and you may suddenly find your new best friend, now it's being clipped and shared on twitter and some one is calling your boss to try and get you fired.

It's not the tools it's the people

think you replied on the wrong post friend.

Recent and relevant video from Hank Green: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pThcIgJyNME

because there is no subset of our current culture that would go scorched earth on them over the removal.

They aren't so much picking sides based on their moral compass more picking sides to induce the least harm to bottom line.

That's the equiv of saying I don't need privacy because I have nothing to hide.

Just because you don't want anything to do with the type of people who would post pictures of you and slander / shit talk you doesn't mean that you should want that being out there to begin with - it's not like that sort of thing hasn't ever been weaponized against someone before.

The worst part is with this app there is a high chance you'd never find out that anything was ever said about you until the snowball is so big that it'll crush any attempt to slow it down.

because news articles and media are putting out this narrative that the site was a "safety tool" that was critical in allowing women to "protect themselves", instead of what it actually was: a gossip and hate-spewing site with zero oversight/recourse for anyone who is being slandered.

The app stores haven't pulled it because they are waiting for this to flow out of the news cycle and reduce the impact of this subset of our culture freaking out at them.

I don't look down on the leakers any more than I would with any other security breach being released (I certainly didn't hear people using this same language of disgust over say 4chan being hacked or back in the day when Ashley Madison was hacked).

For me the only people I'm looking at with disgust is those who were using said app... it was a gossip cesspool with no way to verify any of the claims being said and a breeding pool for hateful posts against people you dislike.

The meme floating around of "I joined a site to dox and spread personal info about people got hacked and now my personal information is being spread around waahhahaaa" is pretty damn accurate and makes me not feel bad for them at all.

There is an SWE on the other side of this API - and I imagine they are enjoying a government salary and pension for operating it... people accessing it for free wouldn't impact them.

>This is one I don't really understand why the change would be a huge deal in context

This is likely because you don't use the weather reports for anything of value/importance in your daily life - there are other professions / government departments / etc that DO use these reports and require them for safety reasons.

Just for a quick example anyone involved in aviation.

comparing me saying "nah" and describing something as "childish" to the types of things that Zaid-maker was saying in that comment thread is kind of a stretch isn't it?

The person I was referring to as childish:

>No one gives a shit, get out of here!

>BLAH BLAH BLAH

(and then when someone points out he is in fact NOT the maintainer and is a contributor)

>I am the maintainer of this project who says I am not. I only made changes to CI by my choice. Ask maze before making false exceptions to me otherwise you will be hearing from my lawyers next time for harassment.

Gemini is one of those things I see pop up and tell myself I should look into it more and then it fades into the back of my mind.

Anyone have any hints on getting more use out of it or ways to make it more present in my day to day.

Nah you still come off as childish when you reply like that no matter the validity of the claim. If the claim is nonsense then ignore or call it out as nonsense and move on ... but when you act like that you sour your image and if it is a legit claim you've now just made things worse.

Then frankly your being a child. The point isn't to shut down the project... It's asking them to change name due to trademark, and asking civilly without lawyers is nicer than most do up front.

You'd make that trade off? Do you swim competively or how many events do you watch per year?

I mean I'd make the tradeoff that there be no forward passes in the NFL but I'm not a follower of that sport so I'd likely not put that opinion out there because frankly I don't care.

Those items exist yes, however they aren't required nor are they tied to the service nor universal so the again the DEFAULT expectation is that anything put onto the platform was ephemeral.

Being able to get a text file log dump easily is also light years ahead of what most people are able to do on discord.

In order to get log bots or bouncers up and running it required some technical know how (meaning most people didn't do it, thus staying ephemeral as default) but those that did do it were well aware how to get and export those log files for archiving etc (thus why we have things like bash.org).

On Discord it's default and while yes someone could setup bots or something to export some of the content - that requires some technical know how (meaning most people won't do it). Thus everything in there goes away when the service closes.... even though the DEFAULT EXPECTATION is that information there is forever.

The massive nuance you are missing is that IRC had a default expectation of being ephemeral in nature. Sure you might use IRC for chatting and have some bots around that - but typically your long term storage of information would have been handled in something like a forum, website, email list, file repository, etc - so that even if an individual IRC server went down it wasn't a big deal to move along. IRC was/is less a platform and more a protocol.

Discord on the other hand does everything IRC does but people have made it take the place of forums, blogs, file repos, etc etc. All this information is locked up in a platform that can't be searched or often even accessed without signing up for the platform. Unlike IRC however Discord is not a protocol that others can tie into - it's a platform and they can/do actively lock people out of it.

Any suggestions for models ppl can run locally that are close to deepl

Ok so in this case what is not correct

Name 3 succesful companies running under such restrictions?

Jim Bean competes with other beverage makers who also operate out of different jurisdictions that may have different regulations ... not sure your point is as much of a "gotcha" as you think it is.

could you list 2 or 3 of the ones you think are best quality to $?

>it bothered me because I come here to get away from all the propaganda.

Somehow, I doubt this statement is true, given the rest of your post, which was in no way adding to the conversation, is exactly the sort of propaganda you claim to try and get away from.

>We have to educate and inform.

Which you did not do in any stretch of the words - all you did was add noise.

Would love to be able to self host this tool - I'd be fine with purchasing a license to do so but I'd really rather not have this running on hardware that isn't mine - wrapping this up in a docker container that I can deploy would be mint.

The problem is that the "spirit" of what you said was pretty confusing.

You seemed to imply that a social contract requires people to take actions they may not want to do because by not taking those actions, they impact "others" and then said abortion doesn't fall into that because apparently that "others" group is so small it doesn't count as "others"?? Yet you included people using incorrect pronouns to an INDIVIDUAL... so your entire argument feels pretty arbitrary.

The pedantry response was to hopefully make you realize that your argument was arbitrary, I had hoped you'd come to that on your own - but here we are.

the reason I only stated Canada is because my knowledge of the other two is lower thus I didn't feel qualified to make a public opinion on it.

no - what you said is:

>The contract being common decency. Vaccinations are part of that contract (it affects others), pronouns are part of that contract (they affect others), abortions _are not_ (the only affect those having them, and potentially the medical professionals).

You say it only affects those having the abortion (ie, female), I was pointing out that there is AT MINIMUM the other parent involved, and there are tons of arguments a person could make about it impacting a much larger portion of people due to the societal/social impact this option brings out.

The female has asymmetrical power in this situation regarding the two parents.

Example:

- Most pro-choice supporters would support the female deciding that she was too young to become a mother and terminating a pregnancy not because of any medical reason, but because of the changes to her life it would cause (ie, "I'm not ready to be a mother yet"). This same option is not available to males. If the female has decided to keep the child, the male in most countries is now automatically bound to this decision and generally, at least financially, will have their life impacted even if they have the same reasoning (ie, "I'm not ready to be a father yet"). Alternatively, if the female has decided to terminate and the male desperately wants the child, there is no recourse.

I say asymmetrical because the results/responsibility of the decision are forced to be shared, however, the power to make said decision lies only with a single party.

I do not propose a solution here or make a judgement I'm simply pointing it out because the person I replied to made it sound like this decision is a simple and doesn't impact others.