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
Posts
4
Comments
820
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • And the fault of the parent who is the only one who can do anything about that child having unrestricted access to the internet of a phone. This is adding to the responsibilities and liabilities of the schools without solving the problem in a meaningful way and this is exactly what I'm being critical of in my statement.

    If nobody has a phone you can implement other technologies to alarm if such a device is brought into the property etc. You can actually jam cell phone use in the area too. There's solutions that would mitigate a school having to take on hundreds of confiscated $1000 phones which would be a huge liability and make them a target.

  • And that is the fault of the parents who chose to hand phones to these kids. It is not the fault of the school, nor is it something the school should have to do anything about. (Edit for clarification: what I meant by "so anything about it" was schools aren't responsible for teaching good and responsible phone use and self control, nor is it their job to step in when the parent is doing their job with teaching these skills).

    I'll also point out the argument that there was a push back then for outlawing video games and violent music because of its effect on young children and regardless of the validity of the danger to kids, it's still the fault of parents who were allowing their children to listen to that music or play those games. Schools already likely have policies about cell phones, or at the very least policies about confiscating distractions.

    You seem to have taken this as not support for banning phones in schools rather than what it really is. A criticism of this method for the deficiencies that it creates without solving the problem or even (more than likely) changing anything about the protocols already in place for handling distractions in schools except potentially creating a worse situation for the administration who have to now be responsible for these items en masse because students and parents are going to ignore this until it hurts them personally.

    It also doesn't teach students anything at all about moderation or the dangers of the internet, nor does it teach them anything about this tech which they will end up having to use as adults. And if you have seen adults with this tech you know it's not just a danger to kids.

  • Does anybody but me remember when schools banned walkmen? What about portable CD players? Gameboy? This happens everytime a new technology becomes popular and schools don't know how to regulate it they do this.

    The downside is, a fair few student will have their phones confiscated by the school. But it won't dissuade them from bringing them in. You make them better at hiding them instead of creating tools and protocols to enforce for when they can and can't use them.

    The crazy thing is, this should be about schools not wanting to be liable for or responsible for these pieces of tech. But Everytime I see legislation like this, it's to do with "children's mental health", or these devices being a distraction.

    Model it. Nobody should be allowed to have a phone in schools by this metric. No phones for students? No phones for teachers and administration.

  • How's fractal? It comes up as a recommendation for Linux matrix a lot and I was wondering.

  • Just as I said. Perfect in every way. That's how you know. Couldn't bear to give him up. Say hi to Bob and Jack for me.

  • Bill Gates doesn't run Microsoft anymore. He's not the CEO and largely not responsible for the change in their business model.

    Also, I game on Linux more than I do on windows (though I do have a partition in my drive to run windows for games I couldn't get working on steam OS/ Bazzite. It's literally 4 games out of over 100.

  • Bob is perfect. 10/10.

  • Or their Best Friend.

  • So you don't think having a mental illness or malady can detrimentally affect the physical wellbeing of the person with the malady despite multiple studies that say otherwise. Good to know.

  • If that's the only language you have to communicate, I'd say more power to you. If you can translate what you're saying using online tools, that might better facilitate communication and conversation.

  • So, are you one of the "mental healthcare isn't real healthcare" people, or are you just butthurt and unable to be objective because some mod banned you one time?

  • My biggest problems with Teams are system slowdown (this was a big issue before I got my new work laptop), and different versions of Teams launching at startup (personal as default and then you have to choose professional or whatever and wait for it to reload everything). Back during the pandemic I had two different Teams (one for my reserve component, and one for my regular job) and it was a nightmare.

  • It's searchable but information doesn't stay pinned and available. It's meant to be a chatroom style place for gaming and as that it's fine but when you want to build a community for something like a video game or a product, what ends up happening is you end up making a channel for every single announcement etc. Say you have a channel for FAQ? You either lock it so only moderators and admins can use it or you end up with a constantly ballooning channel where everyone can contribute. There's no in-between and because each post isn't really collated the way it would be here or on a forum the information is hard to navigate without search which often only gives a truncated section that you can't even navigate to. There's no context more often than not when you use the search function and it's a very poor substitute for a forum as a result.

    I don't think discord is a good substitute for a website and I don't think it's a good substitute for a forum but it's being used as both fairly frequently.

  • I did ask. Why is it like pulling teeth to get answers? I don't use WhatsApp. Never got on that bandwagon. Something being free and open source doesn't mean it's good. Something being trustworthy from your standpoint doesn't explain why it's trustworthy to a layman who doesn't understand why you think FOSS = trustworthy or good. It's FOSS and you've looked at the code and found it to live up to its claims of being secure?

    I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from here but I'm more pointing out that I can use a search engine to find out about matrix to some extent, but people who use the platform and have a better understanding of its pros and cons have valuable information to pass on. But when you ask them about it they're full of recommendations but those recommendations often don't have much in the way of information about what's good about the user experience or feature set or even the code. I'm trying to show that the particulars of why you like or prefer something matter.

  • Not everything has to have a direct correlation to what you say in order to be valid or add to the conversation. You have a habit of ignoring parts of the conversation going around you in order to feel justified in whatever statements you make regardless of whether or not they are based in fact or speak to the conversation you're responding to and you are also doing the exact same thing to me that you're upset about (because why else would you go to a whole other post to "prove a point" about downvoting?). I'm not going to even try to justify to you what I said in this post or that one because I honestly don't think you care.

    It wasn't you (you claim), but it could have been and it still might be you on a separate account. I have no way of knowing.

    All in all, I said what I said. We will not get the benefits of Generative AI if we don't 1. deal with the problems that are coming from it, and 2. Stop trying to shoehorn it into everything. And that's the discussion that's happening here.

  • So, I'm going to say that I don't use telegram and only know it as being presented as a secure messenger platform. As a result, I am just asking follow-on questions to further discern what makes Element preferable. And this is no different because I feel like this is exactly the problem lemmy and other platforms like it have. There are people who love them, but when people ask about them, they don't offer any really informative data to support why they like them.

    What makes Element (matrix) a secure platform, and how does that differ from telegram or signal or whatever. Like. What is matrix good at? That's what I'm asking. Why suggest it over something else?

  • What are its pros and cons? What does it offer that telegram or similar don't offer? Is it good for group chat? Is it available on multiple platforms?

  • lol. I was just saying in another comment that lemmy users 1. Assume a level of knowledge of the person they are talking to or interacting with that may or may not be present in reality, and 2. Are often intentionally mean to the people they respond to so much so that they seem to take offense on purpose to even the most innocuous of comments, and here you are, downvoting my valid point, which is that regardless of whether we view it as a reliable information source, that's what it is being marketed as and results like this harm both the population using it, and the people who have found good uses for it. And no, I don't actually agree that it's good for creative processes as assistance tools and a lot of that has to do with how you view the creative process and how I view it differently. Any other tool at the very least has a known quantity of what went into it and Generative AI does not have that benefit and therefore is problematic.

  • Tell me about Element. This is the first I'm hearing about it.