missed one from before :

If anybody actually tries to make this a hard requirement (which isn’t going to happen), then you can bitch about it at that time.

You mean aside from the laws this change was specifically implemented for....the ones you mentioned....those ones ?
Is there some other example of a hard requirement you need ?

I was already bitching about it, but now i have your permission it feels extra special.

Referring to the underlying software, not to moderation. Which is sort of a corollary to federation, but not entirely when you look at something like Bluesky where you can federate but don’t truly run your own “Bluesky”. Sure there’s implicit trust in what the instance is running since you aren’t auditing it, but I’m willing to see shades of grey and that this is better in that regard than corporate social media.

That's fair.

Not really (although a number of people on Lemmy put in the effort to make clever, homebrewed shitposts, which is beside the point). Sometimes Lemmy Shitpost just has funny stuff that makes for a more well-rounded social media experience. I never said I’m only looking for thought-provoking interactions; intelligent company doesn’t have to be self-serious. The whole reason I even made my original comment is that I’m persistently disappointed that I can’t walk into a thread about an obvious fiction made as a joke and think that Lemmy collectively understands the difference. Something that is funny turns into a source of frustration when I consider user behavior I’ve seen on Lemmy before.

Perhaps people's definition of funny differs from yours, not everyone is looking for intellectual gold in a community made specifically for shitposts.

Though i will concede that there are a lot of cases of mistaken intention, i would know, i'm like 50% mistaken intention.

2/4 ain't bad.

I like the fact that it’s free as in freedom.

Freedom subject to the instance you are signed up to (and posting to) , unless you run your own, but if you do that why are on .world ?

I like that there are intelligent people; the collective is extremely frustrating and intellectually lazy, but there are actual thought-provoking interactions by people who put in actual effort.

If you are looking for this in a community called "Lemmy Shitpost" i have an exciting bridge based opportunity in which i think you'll be interested.

Being a person of evident intellect, I’m sure you'll recognise an opportunity when you see one.

The problem with automated tests is that they only test for the narrow slice of things you actually think to test for. They don’t cover the gamut of things you didn’t think to test for.

They also only test how you write them to test for, which means if you make a bad assumption somewhere along the way your tests can’t help you find it.

Indeed, which is why it's an ever evolving suite of tests, as and when you come across problems and things that were missed, you add automated tests for them.

It's not magic, you only get out what you put in, but it is automated, which means that if you do a reasonable job you have a lot less to worry about from that particular issue in the future and now you have a much quicker way of checking for it.

Peer reviews cover two very important things:

1. Knowledge sharing and de-siloing
2. Logic and assumption checking

A fresh set of eyes and a different perspective is just so important to writing robust, quality code.

Also agreed, and automated testing is a way to partially formalise that knowledge into something that can be checked quickly and deterministically (if you are doing it right).

As i said before it's not magic and it's not a replacement, it's more of an augmentation to relieve some of the cognitive burden.

As with any other approach, it also has it's downsides, there are ways to go about it that can be actively detrimental.

In my experience a well done (and maintained) automated suite is a boon to ongoing development.

So......not a comparable situation then, ok.

but hey, if you want to argue with yourself about a slippery slope no one mentioned, who am i to stop you?

It seems you are having a good time with it, congrats.

edit : salty downvotes aren't a replacement for a coherent argument, they are however, entertaining.

That seems like a particularly shaky foundation for a blanket statement like that, given the current state of police forces across the globe.

A nice idea though.

ah, so questions about logic aren't good questions?

or just that one ?

edit: i replied before your edit.

I’m....not sure how much better i can phrase that question ?

It was concise, contained all the information needed for an answer, it could even be a single yes or no.

If you have an example of how that could have been asked in a better way, I’d be interested in seeing it.

There was no reference to my thoughts on the overall theme, the question is only loosely related to that theme.

If it helps, i don't care at all about the overpopulation classification or anything to do with it.

Is it easier if i remove all references to the theme? Let's try this :

Doesn't directly proportional mean both metrics being compared need to track each other?

I'm not the same person btw.

Genuine question, wouldn't a directly proportional link require that sustainability efforts go up in a direct mirror to population?

edit: a downvote isn't particularly helpful here, is that a downvote of "yes, but i don't want to admit it" or "no, because reasons" ?

If you’re going to cherry pick at least cherry pick from the text being mentioned.

Your whole comment was :

If we cut beef consumption by half, literally oligarchs would not have an economic reason to deforest the Amazon, because of the price drops. But no one wants to do that.

and wasn’t the comment to which i was responding.

Beef is the major factor in the amazon, by a large margin, as in my original comment. Palm Oil is not a significant part in Brazil, nor real state. Mineral is mainly in Roraima, but not as big as beef, because it’s based on small operations, there are a lot of sources on this for gold mining and the local Yanomami indigenous population that fights agains this (as this is done on their land).

Cool story, still irrelevant to my point which was:

Oligarchs gonna oligarch

Create a revenue vacuum (like removing the biggest value stream in a region) and oligarchs gonna oligarch right in and expand another value stream to make up the difference.

I’m not advocating for this to happen, I’m saying that expecting beef reduction to remove oligarchs from the amazon is unrealistic.

edit: dammit, real-time updates kicking my ass