Amju Wolf

…and that’s how it still works.

Protest votes are fucking stupid. They accomplish nothing. I will vote to keep trump out of office.

So you are voting in protest to Trump? :D Because that’s literally what you described.

The startup is absolutely more stressful for the motor. It’s a period of high current that also creates hotspots in the windings and such. It’s certainly not great for the motor.

Ah yes because the last ten times they did this it totally didn’t backfire and they had everyone else’s future in mind while selflessly giving up a lot of their own.

Oh wait…

Regular Fedora is more than stable enough for day to day use. I’d start there and then with use see if it’s a good fit.

Quite the irony; somehow not doing anything and getting people killed needlessly and destroying your own nation is an okay path forward, but trying to find a compromise that stops that would cost you your career… I mean, it’s not surprising, but also really sad.

Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections, but they cannot bend it to hold peace talks? It’s just an excuse.

It wouldn’t really be an issue if you didn’t need an extension for every single basic functionality…

Because of how stupidly opinionated Gnome is I switched to KDE a year or so ago and have been extremely happy with it. And what do you know I don’t even need any extensions, because sane stuff like tray icons are builtin.

I do use an extension for distributing windows in custom areas though, and it didn’t even break throughout the (I believe) 2 large updates there were since I started using it.

That’s what PieFed changes though. You can still track how someone votes, but you can’t tie it to a specific profile (without doing some extra analysis and even then you can’t be completely sure).

Or, with my suggestion, you could track how that specific account votes, but it would be easy to obfuscate who exactly it is and (hopefully) impossible to track to the user’s other identities.

I think this approach kinda fixes that issue though, no? You can use it the way it is now, and others can be anonymous.

I mean it would be also nice if you could log into multiple accounts and easily switch between them for each vote and comment, but this is also good, IMO.

It’s very easy to find my IRL identity, and even my online pseudonym (well, both of them) have so much stuff tied to them that they are effectively my real identities. They are very much public, and definitely not anonymous.

I don’t think dual boot has ever been a good solution (unless you also run one or both of the OS’s under the other in a VM).

Like, if you are unsure about linux, trying it out, learning, whatever, you can just boot a live"cd", or maybe install it on an external (flash) drive.

If you are kinda sure you want to switch, just nuke Windows; it’s easier to switch that way than to have everything on two systems, having to switch.

This means that it is impossible for them to make a patch or PR because it would conflict with the projects licence and fact its open source.

That’s not how it works. It just means the company owns the code for all intents and purposes, which also means that if they tell you that you can release it under a FOSS license / contribute to someone else’s project, you can absolutely do that (they effectively grant you the license to use “their” code that you wrote under a FOSS license somewhere else).

Thanks for being so upfront about how you run your instance. I think it’s disingenuous when people claim that there is “no agenda” or “no moderation” or whatever, because there is always some - even if unintended - just by the pure nature of people running it. So being explicit and opinionated about it is great.

…and it still doesn’t solve the issue that literally anyone can run their own instance and just capture the data.

On one end, if it’s my instance and I want to ban a user, I want the whole fucking user banned – not just remove their ability to vote anonymously.

I mean, is that truly the case? If a user only engages in vote manipulation, but otherwise they have insightful comments/posts, is it really that big of a deal that you will ban only their option to vote?

It could be mitigated further by having a different Actor per community you engage in, but that is definitely a bigger change in how voting works currently, and might have issues detecting vote brigading.

When you comment you make a conscious decision to put your opinion out there and sign it with your “name” (or alternatively you switch to a “burner” account and do it pseudonymously).

But when you vote for stuff it’s often without much thinking, and it’s private on pretty much every other platform. Where it isn’t it’s usually blatantly obvious that that is the case.

What difference does it make that votes can be viewed, other than for transparency during discussion?

There are many reasons that have been stated time and time again; one is simply that people may wish to stay anonymous when supporting certain opinions.

To me it feels like comments are what you can actually stand behind publicly, while votes also show what you think privately. And not everyone is willing to stand behind all of their opinions publicly, often for fear of backlash or harassment.

That’s never going to happen, and the reasons are twofold:

Brands want to push their own style on people, to make themselves recognizable, and to push their ideas about UX to their users (because they obviously know better than the OS/DE/compositor/whatever people).

It’s easier and cheaper to build a web app, because there are so many web developers. It also usually allows you to give an “app” to people who want that, while giving a (perhaps somewhat limited) browser version to everyone else, reaching the maximum amount of users while maintaining only a single codebase and keeping everything more or less cohesive and looking the same.

AGPL, to prevent streaming (while not sharing the code).