That’s a wild interpretation of what they said.

Dude described a branding problem, not a technical problem.

Omg mine too (too embarrassing to share).

I forgot how much more patient with pacing we all used to be back in the 00s. Just trusting that the video would go somewhere and there’d be a payoff.

Looking at some of the popular videos from back then, people these days would just scroll away because nothing hooked their attention quickly enough. Myself included. We’ve been trained to expect such quick payoff 😭.

Fuck, now I’ma have to go check on my old deviantart account.

Sorry, the best I can do is passive aggressiveness and righteous indignation

The data needs to be sent from the voter to the server that owns the post. But the server that owns the post can anonymize the data before it sends it to clients or other servers.

That said I don’t have deep understanding of activitypub. Its possible that something would prevent this, like if votes made their way to the server that owns the post by way of telephone game rather than directly from the client or the user’s home server. But that seems like an unreasonable design, so I doubt (hope not) that is the case.

Yeah, and I think that’s the argument about making it public.

But access rights to stuff seems like the kind of thing that should be configurable, even if it requires a change and isn’t backwards compatible

And that should probably be configurable

Allow it to be configurable by server or community. Some communities may benefit from allowing the public or mods to see votes, while others would be hurt by it.

Servers can see who voted on what, even if the vote is on another server.

So if you view the vote from a server that makes the views public (like a kbin server) or you run your own Lemmy server, then you can see it.

Most clients make having multiple accounts super easy.

Not that I’d know anything about that 🫣

I’m thinking about getting a handheld and putting Chimera or Bazzite on it. It’s gonna replace my main gaming PC (so it needs to support egpu) once it bites it.

IMO I think that’s more a reflection of business decisions rather than innate programmer skill.

Programmers used to do that because they had to do that, so the businesses valued it. Now they don’t have to do that, so businesses don’t allow them room to develop those skills.

I think that rate that people actually developed unnecessary skills outside of work likely remains the same, just the skills that people desire are different to the ones from back then.

I’ve not been a dev for that long, but I’ve been a dev for 15y or so. For the most part it seems to me like that is an effect of business decisions; workers will learn the skills that get recognized. Which skills those are has changed over time.

I don’t see older devs have that quality particularly more then younger devs, what I see is businesses that don’t value that type of behavior. And having worked with “wild West cowboy” coders before, the businesses may be right; they often make a real mess things and just rely on other people to clean up after them.

From what I’ve seen, there are lots of young people who invest in themselves and have passion for the craft, when the business allows them room to grow and doesn’t treat them like a code-producing machine.

That’s true, but that’s also just the general populous, who weren’t ever contributing to open source anyways.
I don’t think the quality of coders (professional or hobby) has really declined that much.

Young people today are struggling to make ends meet - they don’t have enough comfort and free time to be able to donate their labor.

I’m not familiar with those protections, but I’m not confident in them actually holding up in court considering the technical sophistication of the network compared to the technical competence of the courts.

But it’s good to know that there are at least protections in theory.

The problem is we’re not there yet.

There are no protections for me if I unknowingly let some stranger use me as a host or router for CP or some pedo shit. It’s not a risk I’m willing to take. There need to be legal protections in place, like there are for ISPs.

I’m ok with living in a world where liberties are sometimes abused, but I’m not ok with a world where innocents get punished for the actions of strangers.

Do you mean monetization so that instance hosts can recoup costs?
Or do you mean monetization so that content creation gets paid?

I think part of the problem is that many of the p2p tech are caught in a tradeoff between giving hosts control of what they host (and therefore there is content that gets lost), and ensuring content availability (risking alienating hosts).

No way would I participate in a p2p network where I don’t have full control over what I host, for the same reason I won’t use p2p VPNs nor will I host a TOR exit node.
But then who is going to host the unpopular content?

I don’t necessarily agree that decentralized is fractured by design, nor that “working as intended” means that it’s the best solution for this/every situation.

I’m saying that as we decentralize, we get both advantages and disadvantages. I’m saying that this is a situation where we can’t both have our cake and eat it too.

For example:
We could decentralize communities themselves, preventing them from fracturing. Instead of having communities hosted on a single instance, communities could be feeds aggregating all posts tagged as belonging to that community. Then if you defederate an instance you simply stop seeing posts from users in that instance.
But then good-faith mods are defanged and can no longer protect vulnerable community members from antagonistic actors.

I think my straw example tradeoff is a bad one, that’s too much decentralization of power.

I actually already discussed that if you go back and read the comment that you’re replying to