tikitaki

yeah it’s still a sort of new frontier but the patreon model I think really should be the way going forward assuming it’s possible. everybody gets the content for free, but those who can afford to contribute do so. and to be honest, if you live in a 1st world country throwing a couple bucks here and there isn’t that much to ask. for the same price of a lunch at mcdonalds you can give $3 a month for nearly half a year to Wikipedia for example

but it’s not really viable for the internet as a whole right? Hoping for some spare change from a tiny fraction of your visitors

Why not? It works for kbin/lemmy instances. It works for Wikipedia. It works for Lichess.

Sure, some things like video hosting are going to require a lot more bandwidth / server storage so perhaps those need to be subscription based but I think large swathes of the internet could be turned into a donation/subscription model. it just isn’t done that way because it’s less profitable.

look at which video games are the most profitable - it’s always the free ones. fortnite, league of legends, etc.

Users don’t use adblockers because they don’t want to see ads at all; they they use adblockers because getting a usable web experience requires it.

Users don’t block advertisements; they block annoying advertisements. They block trackers. They block malware. They block privacy invasion.

I block advertisements because I don’t want to see any advertisements. They are poison for the mind and I want to eliminate any form of advertisement I can control. Obviously you can’t avoid a lot of it - but I can definitely avoid it in my web browser.

I would prefer a subscription based model or a donation based model. For example Wikipedia or Lichess I’ve donated to because I believe they provide a good service and show no ads. Or for example Kagi which is a search engine that charges a monthly fee.

I live in Florida and while this summer has been unusually hot… it’s not that bad. You just get used to the heat. Also make sure you have good A/C in your home & car lol

fatalities statistics are based on % not absolute number

i appreciate the strong passion and education about the poll on everyone’s favorite beverage

i probably first got started with linux back when i was around 12 or 13. would make a bunch of usb flash drives and install a new distro every week or two

longest i’d go with one distro was like a month and then i’d make some stupid move and break my system and re-install again.

after a while i went back to windows and then in my early 20s i went back to linux. used arch linux for a bit but then tried fedora and have been using fedora for years

right now my main OS is macos because I have apple silicon but as soon as asahi is more mature i’m gonna switch over back to linux. i do have windows & fedora installation through parallels

it’s a feature, not a bug!

Quem vive com medo de tudo não vive, cara

Tá coçando pra tentar algo, então bota pra quebrar, não fica nessa enrolação

Tenho certeza que você não fica pensando no risco toda vez que entra num carro; apenas o risco de se machucar é bem maior

Chega de frescura e come o ovo de uma vez

I vote Fedora

I’ve tried lots of different ones. Arch is cool if you really wanna set up your system how you like it. But Fedora works well right out of the box and updates don’t break the system. Keep in mind… I’m a Gnome-ist. I think it’s the best WM for Linux.

excellent post and something I think people aren’t fully considering

there’s an argument that it’s better to know rather than not know. i understand the ideological stand against Meta and everything it stands for, but it’s easy to judge from the outside looking in. we don’t know what he knows

you reduced my comment and favorited your own. lol

look - nobody has given me a concrete mechanism by which they could do damage. neither on here nor on mastodon where I’ve had similar conversations. @thesanewriter was the only one who attempted to give some sort of method - and his was that Meta’s platform could become so popular it steals users. That to me isn’t really unique to the fediverse

I’m not gonna hop over to Meta’s platform just because it’s nice and shiny.

But look at the potential benefits of Meta investing heavily into the fediverse… we’re talking millions and millions of dollars in development. i say milk meta for all they are worth, they’re a failing company anyway, this is a desperate attempt on their part

I understand the concept of embrace extend extinguish

i just don’t see a significant chunk of fediverse user giving up on open source instances and flocking to Meta’s instance. I can’t imagine what kind of features they could add that could accomplish this. Sure, they could make a site that’s more polished but if Meta enters the game, we’re going to be seeing a huge influx of both users and development. open source alternatives will likely be very close in parity

i think when considering this whole situation we need to calculate the potential positives and calculate if it’s worth the risks - and those positives include huge amounts of money and people. this could be enough to push the fediverse to the next level of adoption… the dream of having a decentralized social media system could become the standard in such a future.

ok i’m not saying they won’t but i’ve asked this before and nobody seems to be able to provide some mechanism by which they would destroy it

is the system not federated? if meta starts acting up, can’t everyone just defederate them? this is what i’m not getting

if someone can explain to me what exactly is dangerous, i would appreciate

i think there’s merit to sarcasm depending how it’s done. satire can be a powerful tool to poke holes into ideas.

but like many things in life, you need tact and a bit of self awareness

It doesn’t need to be said that Meta is purely driven by profit - that is any corporation. But Meta is incompetent and failing - yet still a behemoth. If they want to pour millions of dollars into the fediverse, then we don’t we let them? They would presumably just be another site on the fediverse.

I totally support them joining on assuming it doesn’t change the fundamental structure of the system.

No real way to know. If we assume technology keeps advancing at the exponential rate, we’ll all be in the metaverse or bionic cyborgs or something. 100 years ago we had just finished WW1 where airplanes and tanks were a new technology. We went from telegraphs to near- instantaneous communications across the planet. We went from the old Fords to having self-driving cars. The internet was created and then eventually popularized and now we all have constant access to the internet in our pockets no matter where we go.

There are some things we can know for certain and others we can guesstimate. For example carbon emissions will have a noticeable impact in 100 years. The temperatures will be higher, there would have been some amount of sea level. Probably not enough to drown Miami but enough to cause serious problems for people all across the world. Our agricultural systems will be put under serious pressure as temperatures change and lower productivity in certain areas (and increase it in others).

I think the future will be good for countries like Canada / Sweden / Russia because global warming will more or less only help them. A lot of land will become better for agriculture / more habitable. Of course they will probably have to deal with some sort of refugee crisis from the global south.

That’s of course assuming human society doesn’t totally collapse / change because of nuclear war / some sort of terminator AI.

debate bro and own you online

don’t worry this is the type of stuff i go on reddit for I’m glad there are people willing to go into long form discussion here

so ultimately I think we have to agree to disagree a bit here although I respect your opinion. You’re absolutely right that there are organizations out there, both governmental and billionaire funded, that astroturf the shit out of the internet ( and you didn’t mention AI like chatgpt, which will make this problem exponentially worse since it will become increasingly cheaper to astroturf).

I agree that I’m not personally going to debate a holocaust denier - they can more or less get fucked. I just don’t think they should be sent to jail or otherwise censored. And this more or less lines up with Chomsky’s beliefs. I’m a huge fan of him and I am 100% behind his free speech absolutism.

Anyhow, if you want more detail about the whole thing with Chomsky… there’s a page on Wikipedia that goes over it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faurisson_affair

Here’s what he had to say to critics of his decision to support the holocaust denier

Let me add a final remark about Faurisson’s alleged “anti-Semitism.” Note first that even if Faurisson were to be a rabid anti-Semite and fanatic pro-Nazi – such charges have been presented to me in private correspondence that it would be improper to cite in detail here – this would have no bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy of the defense of his civil rights. On the contrary, it would make it all the more imperative to defend them since, once again, it has been a truism for years, indeed centuries, that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended; it is easy enough to defend free expression for those who require no such defense. Putting this central issue aside, is it true that Faurisson is an anti-Semite or a neo-Nazi? As noted earlier, I do not know his work very well. But from what I have read – largely as a result of the nature of the attacks on him – I find no evidence to support either conclusion. Nor do I find credible evidence in the material that I have read concerning him, either in the public record or in private correspondence. As far as I can determine, he is a relatively apolitical liberal of some sort

I think the line that sticks out to me the most is- that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended

If we give up the principle, we lose everything.