All of this user’s content is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
Tea (PG Tips Original) with milk and sugar.
Ah, right. I forgot that they’re based in Sweden. That’s understandable if it’s simply a lack of familiarity with the language, but, still, I would expect a company like Mullvad to at least have one native-equivalent English speaker to look over their public facing English stuff. None of this is the end of the world, ofc — I’m just mildly surprised.
Yeah, it definitely rehashed the trope, but I still think that movie is underrated.
There are a surprising number of grammatical errors in that blog post. Did anyone proof read it, I wonder?
Ha, I didn’t notice that in the thumbnail. Very interesting indeed, if it is a 22 degree halo!
Would you mind elaborating?
I dont know if they can see my content but I dont think they do.
From what I understand, they should still be able to see your content — you are still posting to the network.
You can always ask the folks on .ml for they make the software.
Ha, well, @[email protected] is a moderator of this community.
So, IIUC, you’re saying that if a user on A browses a community on C, they will never see a user from B?
What do you mean by “it’s standard”? As in that is the intended functionality? It shouldn’t be — the whole point of blocking instances is for the user to be able to, well, block an instance, ie content originating from it no longer shows up.
It’s breaking the stated aim of open federation by tampering with comments, posts and mod records, which in turn get propagated or de-propagated to connected instances, right?
I’m not convinced that this is in conflict with the aim of federation. The whole point is to give people the power to create their own instances with their own rules instead of having to rely on a single central authority. The network isn’t necessarily distributed — it’s decentralized. An instance can administrate their content as they see fit. An instance cannot alter the content produced by any other instance. An instance can only manage the content originating from itself.
but 1) one instance (particular a significant one like ML) affects other instances
Would you mind being more specific?
they’re breaking the spirit of their own software by shamelessly abusing admin powers, in turn helping to normalize that behavior to the Lemmy side of the FV.
Hm, well, it depends on your perspective. The whole point of the Fediverse is to give people the freedom and power to control how they interact with the service. A server has the freedom to associate with the users that they wish in the same way that you have the freedom to consume what you wish. The spirit of the software is to enable people to have this freedom that otherwise wouldn’t exist with a large central service. The way I like to look at the Fediverse is where each instance is like a country, and each community is like a regional/state/provincial government within the country, and federation between instances is like cross-border policies between nations.
a supposedly transparent […] social network?
I’m not sure what you mean by “transparent”.
a supposedly […] user-run […] social network?
It is user-run, in that any user can create an instance.
a supposedly […] P2P social network?
It’s not P2P. A P2P network would be distributed. The Fediverse is decentralized.
I agree with both statements.
Five Guys have better service that is free
It wasn’t free — they were charging money for it:
Jetflicks, which charged $9.99 per month for the streaming service
Empty on Thunder.
Yeah, take a look at the solution at the top of the post.
I would be curious what the actual political distribution is on Lemmy. Though, I think It would be very tough to accurately survey that.
Finally, a good meme utilizing the Gadsden Flag. That’s a fair criticism of libertarianism, imo.
I’m not sure if they count as underrated, but the band that immediately comes to mind is The Dear Hunter.
We’re constantly running out; but every fes years, we figure out a new way to extract more oil/make do with the addresses we currently have.
It’s a supply and demand situation. We run out of things not only when they are physically exhausted, but also when it’s not economically viable to find ways to make more. But when demand increases enough, it will eventually become economically viable again.
I don’t understand the downvotes that this post has received (Currently 8 upvotes and 27 downvotes). The post is just reporting on a finding. It’s not stating an opinion. Are people just unhappy that Trump’s polls have increased so they’re taking it out on this post? Is there something wrong with the article link? Is there some inaccuracy in the reporting? This feels like an example of shooting the messenger. Am I missing something?
I suppose there is the fundamental issue of people not collectively agreeing on what upvotes and downvotes should be used for.