Except it’s not that they are finding the expansion rate is different in some directions. Instead they have two completely different ways of calculating the rate of expansion. One uses the cosmic microwave background radiation left over from the Big Bang. The other uses Cepheid stars.

The problem is that the Cepheid calculation is much higher than the CMB one. Both show the universe is expanding, but both give radically different number for that rate of expansion.

So, it’s not that the expansion’s not spherical. It’s that we fundamentally don’t understand something to be able to nail down what that expansion rate is.

I’ll agree and go one further: the idea of wanting to recreate Reddit is bad.

Most of us left Reddit because of the API crap, but I suspect most of us have not been as happy with the Reddit experience as we once were. The more you recreate a system that’s close to Reddit, the more you make it easier for influence campaigns, spam bots, and disruptive trolls to operate.

Federation, with separate but similar communities, makes it tougher for a massive bot operator to run a monolithic influence campaign. My hope is the design of the fediverse helps to defend against these types of attacks. My fear is the inexperience of server operators with these types of coordinated attacks makes it difficult.

Yeah, my hope is the small learning curve to join the fediverse means we don’t end up with the bulk of the active posters on reddit.

My fear is that Lemmy is about to see some attacks the fediverse isn’t ready to defend against.

Just want to say, thanks for this instance and thanks for this type of transparency. I’ve never given Reddit money, but if you do get to the point of wanting/needing help with keeping this going, I’m ready.

I was involved with moderating a listserv of around 15k users in the early 90’s. Most of you won’t know what a listserv was or that the early 90’s was pre-web. I can only imagine the issues you’ll soon be dealing with.

Thank you!

As a guy responsible for a 1,000 employee O365 tenant, I’ve been watching this with concern.

I don’t think I’m a target of state actors. I also don’t have any E5 licenses.

I’m disturbed at the opaqueness of MS’ response. From what they have explained, it sounds like the bad actors could self-sign a valid token to access cloud resources. That’s obviously a huge concern. It also sounds like the bad actors only accessed Exchange Online resources. My understanding is they could have done more, if they had a valid token. I feel like the fact that they didn’t means something’s not yet public.

I’m very disturbed by the fact that it sounds like I’d have no way to know this sort of breach was even occurring.

Compared to decades ago, I have a generally positive view of MS and security. It bothers me that this breach was a month in before the US government notified MS of it. It also bothers me that MS hasn’t been terribly forthcoming about what happened. Likely, there’s no need to mention I’m bothered that I’m so deep into the O365 environment that I can’t pull out.

I believe you are correct. Any paying Red Hat customer consuming GPL code has the right to redistribute that code. What Red Hat seems to be suggesting is that if you exercise that right, they’ll cut you as a customer, and thus you no longer have access to bug fixes going forward.

I suspect it’s legal under the GPL. I’m certain it violates the spirit of the GPL.

This poll tracking is showing Harris barely ahead on national polls. This millennium, Republicans have won the presidency in 2000, 2004, and 2016.

In 2000 and 2016, the Democratic candidate won the popular vote.

Winning the popular vote doesn’t mean shit. The electoral college is what matters.

That same NYT poll link lists 9 tossup states: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Minnesota, North Carolina, Nevada, and Virginia.

You’ll notice all but the first three are in alphabetical order. That’s because all but the first three don’t have enough polling to make a prediction. Of those first three: a statistical tie in Wisconsin and Michigan with a Trump lead in Pennsylvania.

If you include Kennedy, Harris is ahead by 1% in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania but still tied in Michigan.

National polling trends are going in the direction I want, but they really don’t matter.

I write this from a state whose electoral college votes have never gone for a Democrat in my lifetime and won’t ever before my death. I’ll be voting for Harris, but that vote is one of those national votes that won’t actually help my preferred candidate.

The only way I can help is via monetary donation.

And if you’re a Harris voter in a solidly blue state, your vote means as much fuck all as mine does. Yes, it actually makes it to the electoral college, but, like mine, that’s a forgone conclusion. You should be donating money too and hoping it’s used wisely to affect those swing states.

Hardly surprising. Any popular app is going to have enough users that it doesn’t make economic sense to stay. A niche app that’s halfway decent will soon have enough users they’ll need to fold to.

Under the CMB method, it sounds like the calculation gives the same expansion rate everywhere. Under the Cepheid method, they get a different expansion rate, but it’s the same in every direction. Apparently, this isn’t the first time it’s been seen. What’s new here is that they did the calculation for 1000 Cepheid variable stars. So, they’ve confirmed an already known discrepancy isn’t down to something weird on the few they’ve looked at in the past.

So, the conflict here is likely down to our understanding of ether the CMB or Cepheid variables.

Upvotes and downvotes.

Right now, I can browse by New on my subscribed communities and see every post since the last time I did that.

I can view or re-view posts and read every response. If the responses are legion, I can play with hot/top and get the meat of the discussion.

Did you notice that last sentence? On the few posts where there are too many responses to view all, I’ll try to get at those that are relevant.

If the Lemmy community grows large enough, I’ll need to do the same for posts. I will no longer be able to regularly view by new and have time to see everything.

So, I’ll need to rely on some sorting method to make certain I see relevant stuff.

Someone with millions of bots that never post have millions of upvotes and downvotes to influence the score used by the sorting algorithm that I’ll use to decide what to read.

No. They can be used in influence campaigns. They can upvote the posts and comments the controllers want you to see and downvote those they don’t.

Spam’s obvious and can be dealt with. Bots altering what shows up in your feed is impossible to combat as an end user.

In some ways, this shows Lemmy is winning. It means Lemmy’s important enough to start trying to influence. It also means we’re about to go through some interesting times.

Does the GPL cover having to give redistribution rights to the exact same code used to replicate a certain build of a product?

It does, and very explicitly and intentionally. What it doesn’t say is that you have to make that source code available publically, just that you have to make it available to those you give or sell the binary to.

What Red Hat is doing is saying you have the full right to the code, and you have the right to redistribute the code. However, if you exercise that right, we’ll pull your license to our binaries and you lose access to code fixes.

That’s probably legal under the GPL, though smarter people than me are arguing it isn’t. However, if those writing GPLv2 had thought of this type of attack at the time, I suspect it wouldn’t be legal under the GPL.

Because most people aren’t technical enough to understand there are alternatives, particularly if those alternatives involve removing a scary label telling you not to.

It doesn’t stop you from being hacked, but if you are hacked, it helps you to understand how so you can defend against it. So, I agree it doesn’t improve security for your instance, but it can improve security for your future instances.

Me too, but I’d put Usenet in there before Slashdot.

Spock, Uhura, Chapel, heck even M’Benga don’t make it a prequel, but a lieutenant Kirk does?

I migrated to Reddit after Digg imploded. Here’s a few things I think were better.

Feeds weren’t filled with meme posts. Comments weren’t filled with quick one-liners to get upvotes. Back then, there was much more substantive commentary.

Now, over the years, I’ve subscribed to subreddits that contained the type of content I wanted, plus the default subreddits I was subscribed to as a new user back then are much different than today. Open Reddit using a different browser or a private browser window, so that you’re not logged in. How does that compare to your experience of 12 years ago?

Honestly, much of the things I don’t like are because of large entities wanting to influence social media. That same thing will happen (likely is already happening) to the fediverse. I just hope the distributed nature makes it more difficult.

Thanks. Based on some of the other answers, particularly in https://sh.itjust.works/comment/12511, I know understand better.

I appreciate everyone helping to explain some pretty basic questions in such detail.

And the article content posted is just an excerpt. The rest of the article focuses on how AI can improve the efficiency of workers, not replace them.

Ideally, you’ve got a learned individual using AI to process data more efficiently, but one that is smart enough to ignore or toss out the crap and knows to carefully review that output with a critical eye. I suspect the reality is that most of those individuals using AI will just pass it along uncritically.

I’m less worried about employees scared of AI and more worried about employees and employers embracing AI without any skepticism.

I’m also curious about how it works with a mix of subscribed communities. When I sort my subscribed comments, Hot seems similar (identical?) to New. Active does give me interesting stuff, but hides things I’d be interested in from smaller communities.

I’d like a mix that gives me those more popular posts I’m interested in, but also gives me the less active posts from smaller communities.

You’d need some way of calculating a scaled score of each post in each separate community, then providing a method of sorting all posts using that scaled score. That is, some way to realize a post in a 100 member community with 25 upvotes and 200 comments may be more relevant in a subscriber list compared to a post with 200 upvotes and 100 comments in a community of 10,000.

Of course, I’m not sure I’d want the same scoring mechanism used in all as opposed to subscribed. I want to see the niche but interesting stuff in my subscribed communities. I’m not sure I want that when looking at all, or at least not to the same extent.