I think it's slightly misleading saying they've added a new hero on the title, when in reality they've just added a very very pre alpha stage hero to the hero labs
The game is still unreleased. The whole game is pre alpha
I think it's slightly misleading saying they've added a new hero on the title, when in reality they've just added a very very pre alpha stage hero to the hero labs
The game is still unreleased. The whole game is pre alpha
Self hosting isn't really compatible with viral content
The post I was replying to claimed virality and self hosting are at odds with one another because it causes skyrocketing expense. My point was that maybe someone selfhosting a server in the fediverse is not as interested in virality. And I doubt even the most viral posts in the fediverse would break the bank of a selfhoster
That's not a contradiction, it's maybe an incomplete argument. And I was relying on my previous sentence that mastodon has a history of steamrolling other implementations to imply that they would do it again and were already warning about that. But none of this even matters; I've made a follow up comment that lays it out more explicitly.
My ponytail palm
Relying on the competence of unaffiliated developers is not a good way to run a business.
This affects any site that's posted on the fediverse, including small personal sites. Some of these small sites are for people who didn't set the site up themselves and don't know how or can't block a user agent. Mastodon letting a bug like this languish when it affects the small independent parts of the web that mastodon is supposed to be in favor of is directly antithetical to its mission.
What legislation like this would do is essentially let the biggest players pull the ladders up behind them
But you're claiming that there's already no ladder. Your previous paragraph was about how nobody but the big players can actually start from scratch.
All this aside from the conceptual flaws of such legislation. You'd be effectively outlawing people from analyzing data that's publicly available
How? This is a copyright suit. Like I said in my last comment, the gathering of the data isn't in contention. That's still perfectly legal and anyone can do it. The suit is about the use of that data in a paid product.
I would argue that overriding methods on a prototype is not a hack. It's equivalent to overriding super methods in Java classes, but using javascript's prototype-based inheritance instead of class-based inheritance.
But I agree with your main point about choosing a language that lets the developer implement their solutions freely.
If you break that up you end up with only a few large and likely advertisement funded instances being able to survive.
I'm not saying I don't think instances should be able to use that model, only that I think that model should not be the dominant way of building a community on the fediverse. But I don't see why a user would be less attached to a community just because its hosted on a different server from them, especially on the threadiverse which is topic based and where users are most likely going to engage in multiple topics.
I think you missed a key part of the article. Content Nation was not harvesting data from the fediverse; it was just federating. It was a new project that had just spun up and didn't have a full feature set yet, but other than those missing features it was a normal fediverse instance.
for profit corporation being able to suck up your posts is probably what has many upset
They can already do that without a bridge. And it doesn't "suck up your posts". It works just like any other instance. They have to search for you and follow you. Then they receive posts going forward, but they won't get historical posts.
I personally would block such a service
Good! You can do that and that is a perfectly reasonable solution. That's part of what has ppl upset on the other side of this argument. All of this arguing and vitriol is happening over a service that you can block like any other fediverse actor.
How? The call to sabotage was against fascist programs, like surveillance, illegal arrests, etc. How would sabotaging those hurt people who could have been allies?
That is nowhere near what is happening here. We have a system of laws that is being broken. Nobody was calling for sabotage when those laws were followed. But people who use less aggressive methods to combat fascism, i.e. writing op-eds, speaking publicly against administration policies, leading protests, have started facing punishments. They are preventing the normal exercise of civilian power, so we have to escalate to sabotage or similar actions. That doesn't make us like fascists because we are not the ones defying and breaking existing social norms and laws. This is a ridiculous argument.