The methodology to answer the question is pretty clear. Go through some ‘experimental philosophy’, and see if that question could have obtained a grant in the Psychology department.
If the answer is ‘no’, then ‘no’.
If the answer is ‘yes’, then it looks like the disciplines have some overlap.
I’m not sure what this really adds. If someone’s only reading Lemmy through Mastodon, why not just stay on Mastodon? It’s nice to crosspost, but I only get Mastodon posts I want to see. But I see all the Lemmy posts on a given community, so it seems vulnerable to spammy @'s.
At the very least I’d say ‘wait until a few lemmies federate’ before lumping that on the admins. I have no idea what the fallour or additional work might be.
This is a title people give to you, not a registered profession. Linus, from Linux Tech Tips is an influencer insofar as he influences people.
While a lot of kids saying “I want to be famous” are a little cringe, if we want to be more charitable we should understand people who say ‘I want to be an influencer’ simply as ‘I want to do well at this job’, which isn’t a bad thing, unless the job is bad.
Less and less since I’ve found you can follow a lemmy channel from Mastodon.
I’ll be back when /r/latex isn’t dead.
It’s not December. I’m calling the cops.
You’re asking about compromises, I take it?
Best to stick to individual examples. With a question this broad, it’s easy to say ‘yes’ by ferreting out some historical cause, but the answer’s not useful, so the question’s not useful. Best to look at which compromises to take for a specific movement.
From their site:
Molly, like Signal, uses Google’s proprietary code to support some features.
It’s Signal, with fewer users.
That has the same fundamental problems, with a smaller network (fewer people use it). If you’re looking for something which will never have those issues, I’d recommend anything on XMPP. Yax, for example, will let you chat with anyone on the xmpp protocol (like conversations, profanity, et c. et c.). It’ll never disappear, and if some problem arises, you can just change the client and keep your account and contacts (basically it’s e-mail but for IMs).
I think the pros/ cons are fairly standardized at this point - we all know the same things:
I suspect some of the hate on Reddit is simply due to size, though some might be about money - more users means more cash, whereas with self-hosted platform, there’s little cash incentive.
Another use of federation is notification - you can follow @asklemmy@lemmy.ml from Mastodon, and you’ll see posts come up in your feed, so there’s no requirement to continuously check or get an email notification.
Does Discourse federate? Can I follow a group from a Mastodon account?
How do you know #2 on your list won’t cause problems later
Same attitude as a blocklist, broadly. Once someone’s on the shit-list, you just need to be okay with those messages lying in the bin, unseen.
That goes against the fundamental “push” nature of email,
Yea, that’s what I’m going for. It seems to work for IMs. And if someone emails me from nowhere, offering wonderful things, I’ll get back to them late, but don’t have to get a ‘ding’ from all the random crap.
I learnt Gregg’s shorthand, because it’s beautiful.
I think progress has to look like it’s being made, most of the time. If you prefer modern norms to 70’s norms, then you’d say things have improved.
Clearly, standards in Europe have improved over the last few centuries, but I’m not sure how much of this relates to ethics - a lot of improvements come directly from technology. Women’s rights are much easier to sell when big-paying jobs are in tech, which doesn’t require much grip-strength.
On the other hand, technology hasn’t done any favours for animal welfare, so swings and roundabouts.
I’d say ‘no’, and that this is a category error (like asking what the colour of ‘up’ is).
If I owned by body, I could legally sell it, but I can’t sell it, and wouldn’t want any legal structure allowing people to sell their body-parts. I think bodies aren’t the kinds of things one can own.
Philosopher Solomon pointed out that emotions follow reasoning hand-in-hand, quite reliably.
If you think someone’s stolen from you, you feel angry. If you find out they didn’t steal from you, you stop being angry at them. Perhaps you become angry at yourself for losing the item, but again -that’s reasoning coming into play.
Emotions seem part of a judgement at every point. When your friend starts talking about how great someone is, you might conclude they’re having romantic feelings, because part of loving someone is thinking they’re great (if things are going well).
Even when someone’s feeling ‘just generally irritated’, this usually translates to persitently judging things to be bad - thinking their government, or the kids’ music, and the latest TV shows are bad.
Judgement can be irrational, and the emotions will follow suit, but to feel happy that you’re going to see an old friend doesn’t seem at all irrational.
I’ve never met anyone who had opinions about 18th century clubs.
Or it’s like my great-grandmother, who used to switch off her hearing aid if someone was boring.
I wish I could do that sometimes.
In a deep cavern, tricking zombies into following me into a trap, I find out ghasts run faster than the usual shamblers and get eaten.
Hopefully it’ll bash my head in before munching on my limbs.