[–] 19 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

I really don't see that happening. The internet and the real people that build it tend to be innovative tinkerers and hackers. Things get built because there's a need and someone tries to say they can't. P2P, darknets, proxies, VPNs, heck the whole concept of the fediverse defies the idea of control by an external entity. So they may try, but the chances are slim it works.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It's been observed that the porn industry is often one of the first adapters of new media tech before they become commonplace, but I'm not sure some things need to be shown in that high a resolution.

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Maybe, but immortality also tends to come with things like extraordinary capabilities for self repair and by extension disease resistance, so maybe they get some sort of error correcting code in their DNA replication to go with it.

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It happens, the 'did I miss a cue' can be brutal if it keeps replaying. Only real answer I know is being content with your own self and if someone also happens to fall into that same space all the better. People get so inundated with images of what's 'possible' which a good chunk of it's enhanced with selective posting and filters, so we get some unrealistic view of what a normal happy life is supposed to be.

    As for the sending pics, shitty people aren't worth the brain space to stress over, you dodged a bullet there.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 60 points 1 year ago

    So it really has come to blatant "fuck you we're not pretending to play by any rules of courtesy and custom anymore", and yet it goes on largely unopposed.

    Decorum is dead, by most reports I see the left outnumber the right by a sizable margin, stop playing nice.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Staying an order pending judicial review isn't uncommon, particularly if it's on matters far beyond the influence of that court.

    That said, it's not like this admin cares what any court says anyhow. The scotus could say in plain as day language 'no you for sure can not do that' and it'd get brushed off as irrelevant somehow.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (23 children)

    Not sure I dig baking it into the code, that starts walking into the broken by design space. Feasibly the tankies developing Lemmy could do the same to any instance not painted the right shade of red.

    I might propose instead a step in setup, or on demand, to select major instances to allow/deny federation from with a description of them. Impossible to keep a list of every new instance up to date, but catching the major hubs shouldn't be impossible.

    Edit: For all those who replied along the lines of it being optional not a hard coded block, point noted. I should expect no less misleading a post from a pool of people prone to leaving out vital facts.

    My understanding as it being an opt-out default defederation is still a bit grating since I tend to think of software as a neutral tool rather than promoting specific ideals, but it's far better than a fixed in state and does serve some purpose to shield new users from some of the most egregiously bad actors.

  • source
  • view more: next ›