Like I mentioned, just because you dislike something, doesn’t mean it’s actually unfavourable, or that other people shouldn’t see it, and that holds true a lot of the times, unless you’ve sort of geared yourself such that what you dislike is also something unfavourable. But even so, you can’t assume that other people would be or do the same.

And yeah, they’re functionally the same, but the intent is different. The point here is that votes have intentions behind it, and what we’re telling you is that it shouldn’t be a self-centric intent.

For your last question, I actually don’t really have a good answer for you. I’ve seen many people react in similarly clueless ways in order to rile others up. I’ve also seen too many who can’t look at things pass their own lenses, can’t properly put themselves in someone else’s shoes (despite claiming they do, but what actually happens is that they’ve set up a convenient strawman of the person and put themselves in that instead), and can’t think for the sake of others, and how this shows through how they use social platforms. So I guess I’m being wary.

There’s likely no such thing. How you interpret upvotes and downvotes is up to you. But don’t you think that’s a more much more useful measure than “I like this” and “I don’t like this”?

1. Nobody knows who upvoted or downvoted, at least if you don’t get to see the database or server logs. This means nobody would really know if you in particular liked some post or comment or not. IIRC Lemmy doesn’t even show you what your upvotes and downvotes are. This means you wouldn’t remember what you upvoted or downvoted.
2. What we like or dislike has nothing to do with what is good for more people. We can dislike something, but it doesn’t mean that that something isn’t good for ourselves, or everyone else.
3. Votes can sway where a post/comment appears depending on the sorting option.

Given all that info, you should know that votes matter not for yourself, but for others. Want something to be more visible up top in the Top sorted comments? Upvote. Up in Hot? Upvote. Want them down the list? Downvote.

So then the final question is, well how should I decide what do I want to be more visible and what do I want less? That’s really up to you and what you think your relationship with other people and your world is. You want chaos and like watching the world burn and have yourself caught in that too? Upvote crazy takes and downvote the sane voices of reason and care. Want to promote a healthier world where people have useful conversations that help each other in their lives? Upvote those good comments that do so.

Get your mind off the kind of Facebook voting treadmill where it’s your own visible voice and that everything is just about “me, me, and me” and focus on others for once.

Ofc, if you want to be a troll, have at it and do whatever you want. I’ve wasted my words on you, but I’ve at least left some words for other people.

Uneducated 2 cents. afaik the publishers have some kind of “part ownership”, where they can pull it out from the store whenever. The “anti-piracy” feature you get with DRMs is why many publishers actually like them tho. The part ownership thing is just icing on the cake. So no, a good chunk of publishers won’t be furious at all. DRM gives what publishers want and more, at the expense of the consumers in a way that most wouldn’t realize.

And if anything, I think it makes more sense to think that these publishers are also just granting Amazon some kind of “license” to sell their e-books.

Amazon would absolutely be destroying their relationship with a publisher though, if they decide to block the selling or access of a book to large group of people who are would-be buyers. But, at the end of the day, publishers want to know how much they’re making from putting their e-books on Amazon, and as long as that revenue is enough to satisfy their needs, they don’t need to care too much about the odd customer who had their book revoked, and they would generally be pretty shielded from any sort of disputes as long as Amazon is making those revoking calls.

This was pointed out in another comment but I will basically echo it to just give that call a boost: Point your instructor to well-regarded sources for introversion and extroversion, and let them know that the labelling in their note is not only inaccurate, it falsely attaches a wrongly defined word onto problematic behaviours that have nothing to do with what introversion and extroversion is, which is not good because it propagates a false narrative.

If your instructor doesn’t seem cooperative and insists on being correct, talk to other instructors that you trust, or even go to those with more authority to tell them about the issue. If you can’t get anyone to actually do something, I suggest you change schools immediately, and call the school out for what they did.

Maybe it’s just one of those days, but I have no tolerance for this sort of false narrative being spread, even if the original intention is innocuous, and especially in a school. Being forced to act in a certain way that deviates from one’s personality to not be perceived as a problematic person, especially over a badly-informed opinion, can have lasting negative consequences to children and adolescents. I’m tired of seeing introverted friends and family members suffer over the fact that they’re introverts, to the point where they will deny being an introvert and even echo these sorts of statements in order to blend in.

$60 can buy you a lifetime license for the Affinity Designer 2, which is a fantastic alternative to Adobe’s Illustrator, which some people can’t live without. AFAIK, Serif isn’t backed by a venture capitalist as well. So, are you still happy paying $20 more for a social media app?

Like, look, I get that we should support devs for what they do, especially if they don’t take venture capitalist money to sell their products for cheap to gain market share. But this seems really overpriced. What are you getting with an $80 app for social media?

You could create an account that blocks off communities for news and technology, and any other communities that have a high likelihood of reporting on current events. Just switch to the account on days where you just don’t want to read such news, for any respectable reason you may have (it’s understandable, it can be draining).

This should be a no-brainer, but Lemmy doesn’t really filter stuff out by default, unless the admins decide so. So as long as you’ve created an account on a fairly managed instance, and given that the current news cycle, especially in the Western & English-speaking world, you won’t be able to escape Trump and Musk, especially when they’re dominating headlines due to how they are literally affecting the lives of millions, if not billions, of people.

For some, human pride and dignity have literally no value, or is something they will hold simply to trade it off whenever convenient, especially in a world that can value it, so it’s just like a commodity.

Says the company that literally crawled the Internet without anyone’s permission to train their damn model.

Rules for thee, not for me.

This. Any time someone’s tries to tell me that AGI will come in the next 5 years given what we’ve seen, I roll my eyes. I don’t see a pathway where LLMs become what’s needed for AGI. It may be a part of it, but it would be non-critical at best. If you can’t reduce hallucinations down to being virtually indistinguishable from misunderstanding a sentence due to vagueness, it’s useless for AGI.

Our distance from true AGI (not some goalpost moved by corporate interests) has not significantly moved from before LLMs became a thing, in my very harsh opinion, bar the knowledge and research being done by those who are actually working towards AGI. Just like how we’ve always thought AI would come one day, maybe soon, before 2020, it’s no different now. LLMs alone barely closes that gap. It gives us that illusion at best.

Somewhat unfair judgement against emails IMO, especially cause it’s the “trust list” that’s in the control of a few, with no open manner to add more people to the trust list. The protocol isn’t at fault for failing to prevent problems; it’s the ability for corporations to gain significant market share without control, before they are then allowed to put barriers down to disallow or discourage interaction between those in and out, forcing those within to stay in, while those outside to give up on others in order to gain usability.

That’s fair.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing and I’m sorry to hear that it’s been what seems like a lot of trouble for you. I don’t use Mint, but it’s what I hear a lot of people recommending to new people, so I’m just curious how things have been.

Have you tried getting support from their forums?

It’s pretty rare hearing that Mint is worse than Ubuntu. Genuine question to just know what people may think about it: what made you think it’s worse than Ubuntu?

As a poke at Emacs’ creeping featurism, vi advocates have been known to describe Emacs as “a great operating system, lacking only a decent editor”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war

:P

Haha, y’all are welcome to try that ;)

Because unlike emacs gang, we don’t need to build an OS to browse Lemmy.

How bout you go back and let your friends know that if they’re in need of a good editor, try Vim ;)

Zuckerberg said Meta’s “factcheckers have just been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created”.

Well which side of the political spectrum’s just been spewing bullshit after bullshit to make fact checkers look like they are acting more heavy-handedly towards one side?

Not that logic matters to these people anyways. The idea has always been “I don’t like what these people are saying”, and they’ve now reached a point where they don’t even care if people call em out.

I’m sorry but I fail to see how these problems would be tied to having a long uptime (note the inline code block, as I mean the output of that command instead of uptime in an SLA, which is typically described as high or low instead of long or short). I have yet to find mentions where long uptime leads to higher chance of hardware failures as of recent. If some critical library or the kernel was removed some weeks prior to a reboot, I don’t think long or short uptimes would change your encounter of these issues.

And security patches are good, I agree. But there are instances where you don’t need it, eg in an airtight infrastructure, meant just for internal users, of which has no access to the Internet. You fall back to more traditional approaches to security in such cases.

As far as whether a service is properly restarted due to library updates, in a containerized environment, you wouldn’t have issues with library version mismatches, or missing libraries, or any sort of failure to restart due to dependencies getting changed without human attention (note that you can automate container updates, but you are then putting trust into whoever is publishing that container).

I’m not sure if it’s a lack of understanding of what my question is asking, or some other reason, but if you would please take the time to carefully read my questions and answer more appropriately and with clarity, that would be much appreciated.

Could you elaborate on it not coming back up after a power loss? Assuming these services can get restarted after booting without the need for a user login, why and how would a previous long uptime lead to a possible failure of these services to be spun back up? I apologize if these questions sound dumb and have obvious answers, but I genuinely do not know, and it’s why I’m asking.

And I’m not in any way trying to say I don’t want security updates. I’m asking that aside from security updates and bug fixes, are there any downsides to a long uptime? Please treat the question as one of curiosity.

I just have docker containers serving up some self-hostable service for myself.

I don’t think I’ve seen or heard of issues not rebooting for too long recently. Aside from not getting security updates or bug fixes, what would be some problems that could happen if a system has been running for too long?