Wow - “you don’t attack me, I don’t attack you” - that's not how the government - free press relationship is supposed to work.

OMG, I feel so seen rn 😳

Thanks for reiterating this and posting a source. Every time I see an article on Snowden year over year, someone brings up the tired old "argument" that because he is now trapped in Russia, that somehow makes everything he did "wrong", and invalidates everything he exposed the government for doing. The media campaign against him was apparently quite effective, and these soundbites are ever ready to jump out of people's mouths without any research or critical thinking.

I'm a long time Mastodon user, and I've observed multiple cycles of user influxes (usually caused by some unpopular decision at Twitter) followed by slow but steady decline as these new users got frustrated, disappointed, attacked or something similar. Each wave however did leave a portion that stuck around. I can't tell you whether Mastodon or Lemmy will "succeed", but it's clear by now that both their respective user bases couldn't even agree on the definition of success.

This might sound like a negative, but if you look at corporate social media which has a pretty clear vision of what its own success looks like (is this fair?), it might also be partly positive. Also, while success might be hard to define and agree on in the Fediverse, I think that these networks are more resilient to total failure than traditional social media (though again, this statement hides some implicit assumptions).

Ultimately, I've learned to stop worrying about this. People will talk about what they want to talk about, and this will continue to change and evolve. Lemmy needs better moderation tools (as demonstrated by the recent CSAM attack), but I believe it will get them in time. If you want to talk about something different on Lemmy: do! Just post it, or create a community. It might not explode over night, but it might catch on.

Mastodon and now Lemmy are the only social media I actively use now (permanently deleted my Twitter account on the day the Tate interview was published "exclusively", but was less active there for years) , and I feel the better for it. I've observed tremendous progress in the Fediverse during the past six years and it's very encouraging in the long term.

"Will Chrome, Edge, and Other Privacy-Focused Browsers follow this move?"

And it's not The Onion.

This should be a big story. Very very big.

Dying to know what happened 👁️👁️

Not novel: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Prison_Industries

Different folks are at different stages of their journey. People are allowed to post about their thoughts and experiences.

Searching some of these Python Community discussions separately and reading how they handled these bumps in the road as a group has actually increased my confidence in that group as a whole:

https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-core-developer/60250

https://discuss.python.org/t/calling-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence/61557

On the other hand, the three month suspension of Tim Peters that started it all and how that was handled sounds problematic (the second half of the essay addresses each point from the original banning rationale in detail):

https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestration-of-tim

Finally, Chris McDonough (the author of the above article) drawing attention to valid criticism of his own defense of Tim Peters is a blueberry on top of the cherry on the cake:

https://chattingdarkly.org/@chrism/113020098915125686

I hope the community ends up stronger as a result of this.

“A few stakeholders were concerned that the release of the report would result in new legal action (criminal prosecution, citizen revocation, or otherwise) being brought against the individuals named in the report,”

Also known as "justice" and "law".

The title (click bait as it is) withholds the most important qualifier from the text of which AI we are talking about:

"“Overall, our model shows that the job loss from AI computer vision, even just within the set of vision tasks, will be smaller than the existing job churn seen in the market [...]”

Sure, computer vision is important for some jobs, but it's a much smaller subset of jobs that is really deemed protected as claimed by the study. If the knowledge has already been coded to text on the other hand, it's a different story.

This is evident in a few ways:

• How they subtly or glaringly misunderstand what it is and what it does
• How they call it "a company"
• How they pronounce it as GO-DOT

I thought this was about ending the practice of moving the clock back and forth twice a year, but no, it's just about soon moving the clock

I just ordered it after reading this. Thank you Barbara.

"To a request for comment, X only sent Ars an auto-response, saying, "Busy now, please check back later." (To be fair, in this case "check back later" is a good summary of what happened.)" 😂

I'm not surprised, but this finding would not have crossed my mind.

YouTube is slow on my smart TV, and I'm a YT Premium subscriber. I call BS.

I agree. I love Mastodon's calm columnar UI with lists and hashtags where I feel I'm in control of my experience, and that I can just stop whenever and come back in three days.

Yes, yes and yes (I contribute money).