Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A

anarchiddy

@ anarchiddy @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts
2
Comments
202
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Forced Out of DNC for Criticizing Party Leaders, David Hogg Speaks Out: 'I Wasn't Wrong' | Common Dreams

    Jump

  • Michigan is certainly not a deep blue state

  • ‘I made them do it’ – Donald Trump takes credit for FIFA decision to overturn Folarin Balogun ban

    Jump

  • It still amazes me that you don’t see how dangerous Balogun’s challenge was. Did you not see the dude’s ankle? Could have got broken

    I don't think we're using 'dangerous' in the same way here. I'm saying there is no reasonable expectation that Balogun's play could have resulted in a serious injury, regardless of what injury almost did occur. Just because Muharemovic's ankle almost did get broken, doesn't mean that was due to any risky, aggressive, or malicious move made by Balogun to begin with. That the foul didn't even initially merit a yellowcard at the time points to the same conclusion.

    When I was taught to be a referee (granted, that was 15 years ago), they urged us not to issue red cards unless the play itself was uniquely dangerous, where that if another player committed the same foul there would be the same high risk of injury. The two other remedies for keeping this type of play in-check are more reasonable and less likely to cause chaotic discontent from the bench, and sending the player off doesn't make anyone else on the field any safer.

    Your job as referee isn't to doll out justice or retribution for harm committed on the field, it's to keep the players safe and the game fair to the extent reasonable.

    Quansah didn’t even touch the guy with studs and won the ball.

    That's not the point - he made a needlessly aggressive tackle against an attacker that wasn't an immediate threat on goal, and hit Gallardo midway up the shin with studs up. If someone else on the field made a similarly needless and dangerous tackle, the risk of serious injury would be just as high. It could have just as easily been a yellow card, but what made the tackle worse was that it was done without any apparent strategic advantage over staying on his feet, which made it seem like he did it in part because there was a risk of harm.

    If the ref didn't take action, it was likely that the two would continue escalating their challenges until someone did get injured

  • ‘I made them do it’ – Donald Trump takes credit for FIFA decision to overturn Folarin Balogun ban

    Jump

  • Either way, Belgium's hammered the USA even with Balogun. Tis a lol.

    No question - they shouldn't have even made it that far

    A red can be given for serious foul play.

    The ref is intentionally given leeway to make whatever calls necessary to keep control over the game (which is why the reversal is so damaging to the tournament broadly). He had every right to send Balogun off, I just dont think it's was a good one.

    Quansah got a red card for England despite playing for and winning the ball

    A bunch of reasons why this comparison is bullshit:

    • Quansah went into a sliding tackle against a player in control of the play, not after a 50/50 challenge
    • despite there not being intent, sliding tackles are held to higher scrutiny because they're dangerous even when done correctly
    • The tackle was unnecessarily aggressive. Quansah could have stayed on his feet and defended without risking a tackle

    You obviously don't know enough about "soccer". You been listening to your presidents definitions?

    I love how catty this is

  • ‘I made them do it’ – Donald Trump takes credit for FIFA decision to overturn Folarin Balogun ban

    Jump

  • They shouldn't have fucked with the ruling at all, but lmao at "dangerous"

    It could only possibly be considered dangerous if you thought he intentionally stepped on Muharemović's ankle. Straight reds are typically reserved for aggressive plays that are either clearly malicious or willfully reckless.

    Balogun was playing the ball without looking where he was stepping - at worst it should have been a yellow. Careless? Definitely. Dangerous? Lmao, I guess taking a reaching step is dangerous now

    But thats really not the problem anymore - the league overriding the decision reaks of corruption and does a disservice to everyone involved, including the USA team.

  • Democratic socialist Melat Kiros defeats 15-term incumbent in Colorado House primary

    Jump

  • Yea, honestly I think 'insurgent' is complementary in this context

  • Massive breach spills credentials for thousands of sensitive networks

    Jump

  • How many firewall hardware manufacturers have had these kinds of vulnerabilities? Feels like a couple times a year I hear about another one.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Im not suggesting you delete one, just letting you know how it's coming across.

    Lemmy is a pretty small place still - a politically charged and loaded question is going to get a lot of attention, and posting the same one twice is going to come across like you're fishing for controversy.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Answered your other post on this topic, but I'm getting the sense this isn't a good faith question anymore

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Sure, but even with something like online political discourse you can do better than getting obsessed over a bastardized provincial political term (liberal which means something completely different outside of the US)

    Sorry, I'm having a hard time following the train of thought - are you referring to my use of 'liberal-democratic institutions'?

    I don't want to word-vomit on you unnecessarily if you're pointing to something else or speaking broadly about leftist discourse on lemmy (i've seen plenty of debates like the one you're describing)

    and providing cover for promoters of russian and Chinese genocidal imperialism and propaganda

    Ok well now i'm even more confused - where is this jab coming from?

    Maybe you're taking issue with my categorizing db0 as a leftist space and are speaking broadly about the perspectives about china and russia from that instance? What are we talking about here?

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • It's absolutely wild that the obvious needed to be pointed out at all, and that the reaction to it was 'you just made my list, buddy'.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • The worthiness of a discussion has no bearing on the intent and framing of the person prompting it.

    The questions are being raised by the same person who included global reputation scores in his backend piefed code for the purposes of suppressing his personal pet peve behaviors. I find that to be informative context for considering the intent of the discussion being prompted.

    edit: Oh look, here he is saying exactly what I was just pointing out was likely the intent

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Right - which is why it was quite interesting watching Fox news have a 20 minute power struggle over the sudden popularity of May Day in the US and the rise of ""extreme socialist sentiment""

    All online political discourse is performance - feel free to speculate how well it is representative of IRL leftist spaces in the west.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Is this a negative db0 experience for you?

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Although maybe Rimu should have been more clear in pointing out that this seems to be not an official instance tool, but rather something some moderators have cobbled together themselves.

    This isn't an issue of clarity. His closing call to action is to 'develop awareness so that people can choose which instances to join and interact with'. There aren't any practical administrative solutions to the problem being called out, with the exception of defederation or the threat thereof. Any single user on the entire fediverse can copy-paste user activity into any LLM and use the output to make moderation decisions, or craft personalized agitprop or whatever else, but centering the focus on instances that allow their usage turns the issue into a nail that can be solved with a hammer.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I don't see a technical or practical way to limit - let alone render impossible - AI moderation tools that is not at odds with decentralized open-protocol social media.

    If you can copy-paste user activity into a textbox, this remains trivial.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I don't doubt it even for a second.

    I'm lowkey kind of fascinated this morning with what feels like a moment of real panic among western liberal-democratic institutions (projecting a little from my morning news and coffee). That an anarchist instance is getting this much targeted harassment feels like a microscopic extension of that (if I allow myself to be so bold)

    As far as I can tell, dbzer0 isnt even being explicitly called out here, but it has an undeniable bdzer0 flavor to it. If it doesnt come out that this was one of our mods at this point, I'd almost be disappointed.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Aside from the ethical implications of profiling users or of using a corporatly owned server and model to execute this, I see nothing uniquely concerning about this practice that isnt already a risk of federated social media generally.

    Every mod on every instance is free to use whatever tools or standards for moderation they want - that's an intentional byproduct of federation. Similarly, the collection of this data for use with llms is a bygone conclusion at this point - there was never any way of preventing that from happening with a federated network.

    I think the only thing here to talk about is the way these questions are being framed as a question of intra-instance policy. We already have communities where moderation abuse can be called out and adjudicated- why pose this as a question of instance administration when there doesnt seem to be any evidence for it?

  • Federal Surveillance Tech Becomes Mandatory in New Cars by 2027

    Jump

  • What's with all the faux accelerationist shit on here the last few days?

  • Linux lays down the law on AI-generated code, says yes to Copilot, no to AI slop, and humans take the fall for mistakes — after months of fierce debate, Torvalds and maintainers come to an agreement

    Jump

  • Kinda, but they're specifically saying the the AI agent cannot itself tag the contribution with the sign-off - like, someone using Claude Code to submit PRs on their behalf. The developer must add the tag themselves, indicating that they at least reviewed and submitted it themselves, and it wasn't just an agent going off-prompt or some other shit and submitting it without the developer's knowledge. This is saying 'the dog ate my homework' is not a valid excuse.

    The developer can use AI, but they must review the code themselves, and the agent can't "sign-off" on the code for them.

    Also - what will holding the submitter responsible even achieve?

    What does holding any individual responsible on a development team do? The Linux project is still responsible for anything they put out in the kernel just like any other project, but individual developers can be removed from the contributing team if they break the rules and put it at risk.

    The new rule simply makes the expectations clear.

  • politics @lemmy.world
    anarchiddy @lemmy.dbzer0.com

    Democratic National Committee blocks release of its 2024 election autopsy

    www.politico.com /news/2025/12/18/dnc-kills-its-own-public-2024-autopsy-00697403
  • politics @lemmy.world
    anarchiddy @lemmy.dbzer0.com

    Democratic establishment melts down over Mamdani's win in New York

    www.axios.com /2025/06/26/democrats-zohran-mamdani-meltdown-new-york