misk

Community has no control over who uses it except for federation policy. Random people browse communities through „All” which leads to random downvotes, ignoring community rules and so on. I believe that idea that makes Activity Pub so nice is that you can use various apps and platforms as distinct ways of browsing and communicating with people that want to do it differently.

They can change sorting and view but they will not get anywhere near their stated purpose. OP wants instances to gather people that share similar interests or beliefs so that his/her browsing experience is shaped by this choice in a natural manner.

As an very rough example, this could mean that in discussion-centric instances text posts would be ranked higher because users in those instances tend to upvote them more often. This would also mean that less interesting stuff is not filtered but lower in the ranking. Those seeking such experience (it does sound attractive to me) would have higher incentive to join smaller and more focused instances. Maybe they wouldn’t be so small then, or they’d have to vet new users and it’d be a terrible idea, or maybe it would lead to even more centralisation which would be even worse. Still worth considering imo.

OP still wants to see all federated content but through a local lens, hence suggestion it could be implemented as a sorting option.

That’s because there’s no algorithm but that’s not what OP is after, I think. We already have scaled sort which adjusts score based on community size. What’s suggested here is to have some sort of sort/scaling that would assign higher weight to votes from local instance. This is a great idea that promotes decentralisation and I wouldn’t discard it like that.

This we can expect but there’s also a trend to idolise solo developers or small firms. Reality is that everyone can be shitty and therefore everyone should be accountable. In this case a smaller developer steals user data do defraud Unity most likely because they think they’re too small to be worth investigating. When we were implementing GDPR in my country those small developers fought this law as oppressive and unnecessary.

Traditionally joining a gang or mafia requires you to commit crime that can be used to control you later on. There are rules, some unwritten and unspoken ones are now brought to the light, that’s all. This also means this overstepping of boundaries can be used against Musk once he falls out of favour.

Was Elon even sworn in into any departament head role? How is he even doing anything there? Sorry for possibly stupid question but everyone else is being interrogated and voted on during confirmation hearings, right?

My point was that insider trading is a way to make money for lawmakers and executives because they’re high enough to know real consequences of things being decided but they are not ones deciding. Those who decide have more efficient ways to extract power and money from the system.

Defence contractors are at that table and they got there by being recognised as important to the national security. That’s why „AI” is critical to national security. That’s why Democrat and Republican establishment has been courted by tech bros so much all these years - they want in.

If you think you understand the con double check if that’s not part of the con. Getting rich while having this kind of power doesn’t require market manipulation, ask defence contractors.

Ah, there’s also this piece in json:

    
"uc": "1", // User consent for tracking = True; OK what ?!

My guess is that developers are pretending to get user consent to get more money from the ads. Unity could be encouraging this somehow but good luck proving that.

Does this happen to users in the EU? It’s highly illegal to gather data without consent here obviously. Even processing other data to derive location (which is personally identifiable information) means processing data for purpose that’s different to one that was consented to (if they tried to get any consent at all). There are big companies implicated here so it’d be easy to fine them into submission in jurisdictions that allow it.

Or it could be that such trade wouldn’t have to appear in accounting :)

Some have allegedly paid.

“We’ve provided about 20-30 companies/teams with our entire dataset. It’s the same data as on our torrents page, but they get access to high-speed SFTP servers.”

“Usually, this is in exchange for a large monetary donation or, on occasion, in exchange for good datasets they acquired,” ‘Anna’s Archivist’ adds, noting that all data they obtain is shared publicly.

Google wants to look important to national security too and pretends someone is using Gemini.

Tech giants have been caught with their pants down because they preferred to outspend competition on hardware rather than trying to optimise for what they had already. It looks like their way out is to pretend nothing happened because investors can’t tell they’re being served bs.

SoftBank are masters of burning money. This might be their biggest bonfire yet!

Which Chinese tech company was forced to sell majority stock to a US domestic business before? I’ve only heard of TikTok which was also deemed national security issue recently.

This thing has bipartisan support, local business support and seems to be supported by wider general public thanks to scare tactics and lobbying from Meta. I understand that Democrats conditioned their voters to ignore things they agree on with Republicans but they’re not in charge anymore. It’s like the whole country went on a carnival ride, got stuck and are now trapped in this weird loop.

I do wonder why do they bother with pretences like this. Would Americans not buy „hey, we’re going to do to Chinese companies what they have been doing to ours for years now”?