Ah, yes. A private method for working on a public field.

Third - drop the banana peel on the floor and make him slip on it.

Store had a big stock of that game that nobody wanted to buy, and Anon managed to get rid of three copies from that stock.

Well, yea. You won’t be able to, seeing how she holds your nose.

In Hebrew, the word for “stone” is male-sounding while grammatically female, and the word for “rock” is female-sounding while grammatically male, you know, for simplicity.

The heck is “instant opt-out”? As opposed to what? Not being able to close the ad unless you buy the product?

Doesn’t MS Access still use SQL?

All government data is processed using sed.

I don’t know whether or not this is sarcasm, and frankly - it doesn’t matter. Science provides the facts - it does not provide values. You need to combine facts with values in order to come up with an ethical verdict.

If the resulting verdict is not what you wanted, you can always rethink your values. This is essentially what philosophers have done for millennia. It does mean you’ll need to defend your new values, of course, but you don’t have to stick with old values when it turns out they have bad implications.

What you don’t get to do, is decide to ignore or twist the facts. The facts don’t change just because they’re inconvenient. If you lie in order to get the ethical verdict you desire, then you are tautologically in the wrong.

1. Ask ChatGPT for a solution.
2. Try to run the solution. It doesn’t work.
3. Post the solution online as something you wrote all on your own, and ask people what’s wrong with it.
4. Copy-paste the fixed-by-actual-human solution from the replies.

Actually… Yes? People’s health did deteriorate due to over-reliance on technology over the generations. At least, the health of those who have access to that technology.

Lemmyers

The official term is Lemmings.

The best solution I found for the Paradox of Tolerance (or, more accurately, for a bigger class of problems that contain that problem) is https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/24/nominating-oneself-for-the-short-end-of-a-tradeoff/

The gist of it is that we decide on the following maxim: in conflicts of interest we should favor that cannot easily back off over the side who can.

For example - we want to tolerate a black person existing and we also want to tolerate^[1] a racist person being racist. These two toleration are conflicting. The black person can’t stop being black - they were born that way - but the racist person can choose to stop being racist. So we favor the black person’s existence, and do not tolerate the racist person’s racism.

This maxim is not perfect, of course. It does not apply to all cases, and it does leave up to debate the question of who is forced into the conflict and who is doing it out of choice (e.g. - a conservative may claim that LBGT people are willingly choosing to be so while they are forced, by word of God, to hate them). But I still think it’s an improvement:

1. It’s morally arguable. As long as we don’t go into the details, it’s easy to defend as a principle.
2. The question of who if forced into the conflict and who is willingly entering it can be discussed more objectively than the question of what should be tolerated and what shouldn’t (I’m not saying it’s always easy to agree - just that the discussion is more objective)
3. Even in cases where both sides are forced or cases where both sides are willing, looking at it through the lens of this maxim allows to point at the true perpetrators and/or the true victims, instead of arbitrarily picking one side to blindly side with.

I feel like I didn’t really recognize having different “platforms” like Mastodon, PixelFed, etc would give multiple opportunities for the fediverse to make a “first” impression with people.

Corporations have learned long ago the importance of properly identifying your audience, and the Fediverse is not exempt from that rule. Lemmy is the Fediverse version of Reddit and Mastodon is the Fediverse version of Twitter, and just like these two giants could live together with each other and also with Instagram without stepping on each other’s toes, so do their Fediverse versions can live with the Fediverse version of Instagram, PixelFed.

Now we’re just missing a Fediverse version of Facebook.

Would you accept a Smalltalk image as Open Source?

I envy your faith in the general public’s long term memory.

As valid and informative as TwitteX’ blue mark.

My code is portable enough to support all versions.

No. You need to run it in a VM that runs TempleOS.

You’ll need my fork of docker, and you’ll need to apply a patch.