Imo that’s as much a problem of the sorting algorithm as it is with a single community blasting out too many posts at once without any consideration for how current frontends are unable to usefully integrate that into people’s feeds. A couple of years ago nanoUFO was being a bit (subjectively) overenthusiastic about posting - I counted and !games@sh.itjust.works had 40 posts at once from them and it made the first couple pages of my feed basically unusable for a while.

Scaled is also probably better suited for your subscribed feed rather than /All.

Thank you for leaning into the account name roleplay now and then :P

Honestly once they made it clear that holo-Thatcher was giving consent I thought they’d be redeemed in other’s eyes.

What are your blocking habits?

I made it through nearly two years and eventually caved after I made the mistake of arguing in favor of the truth, supported by video evidence and a fact check from an internationally recognized fact-checking organization only to be told to “fuck off”, a second user said that they enjoyed pissing on my shoe(s) in their personal fight against truth, and some other catastrophically braindead takes. I generally don’t like the blocking approach for opinions I don’t agree with because everyone has differing views and also people have bad days and that’s just life. However, being actively hostile to the truth and being extremely confrontational about it was a bridge too far for me and it was either blocking a few mouldy potatoes in an attempt to keep things tolerable or getting off the threadi/fediverse so I decided to give the former a whirl.

If you do block a lot of people, has that affected your experience?

Thankfully haven’t felt the need to block many, so the only thing I’ve really noticed is that occasionally one of the blocked users comments in the thread for something I’ve submitted (which I don’t get a notification for and can’t see) - but then someone unrelated replies to them and then I get a notification for a comment chain which I can’t actually load. It took me a while to even figure out why I was getting these “ghost” notifications.

Science has gone too far

It’s not the intended effect, but this just made me sad:

That really matters. Not because the internet is the most important issue facing us today. Far from it. Compared with the climate emergency, genocide, inequality, corruption, democratic backsliding, authoritarianism and sustained racist, homophobic, misogynist and transphobic attacks, the internet is just a sideshow. But the internet is the terrain upon which these fights will be waged. It is the communications medium we will use to organise to save our species and planet from their imminent eradication. We can’t win these fights without a free, fair and open internet.

It’s become increasingly difficult to imagine the sort of wide-scale change needed to achieve that vision actually happening.

Before posting I read the recent annual reports which she advertises having a hand in as part a push for greater transparency, but was still left very unsatisfied personally (half the budget – over $90 mil – just hand-waved away as “infrastructure” spending? Really?). So despite being an improvement, I didn’t feel that the CEO change has had much effect on the scales of “donate vs not”. Perhaps for others it might, but my comment still reflects my best judgement.

I simultaneously believe that Wikipedia is valuable and that it’s not clear that WMF needed $185 million dollars.

As far as I can tell the situation has not significantly changed since “the last time(s)” this was discussed. Wikipedia remains a valuable resource, and WMF continues to aggressively increase both spending and fundraising revenue. Whether you think that means you should donate or not is probably the same answer as it was several years ago for most individuals based on personal preferences.

edit: typo

It’s fine, it’s mostly just a federated software problem. For people on lemmy they can see the image itself in the UI.

For those who don’t see the image embedded, it’s this cursed URL: https://s2.qwant.com/thumbr/474x184/4/1/6e8510687c330d38e894f4a419f5068153b7312148590f6fca6b18001404db/OIP.JY7AimVCBQ6lSbPAKajQCQHaC4.jpg?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse.mm.bing.net%2Fth%2Fid%2FOIP.JY7AimVCBQ6lSbPAKajQCQHaC4%3Fpid%3DApi&q=0&b=1&p=0&a=0

doesn’t allow filtering by number of users or amount of content

It does though?

https://instances.joinpeertube.org/instances?sort=-totalUsers https://instances.joinpeertube.org/instances?sort=-totalLocalVideos

Look, I don’t know what you’ve been smoking but you should probably compliment your dealer

the kbin.social domain expires in a few days, on 10 September

Looks like someone might’ve bought the domain?

I used to believe in this (and to a degree still do), but the idea of increasing the attack surface of unreasonable people (who seem to have become increasingly common in the last 10 years) who will do insane things like SWAT you, or doxx your personal details (like home address), or even just follow you around online to harass you has made me have second thoughts about the tradeoffs involved in this approach 🫠

I’m not judging whether it’s good or bad, I’m saying that despite their weird attitude, the root level comment is right that the design is not “open source” because the design is not freely accessible despite being royalty free for paying members to implement and use.

The same argument you’re presenting could be used for commercial open source enterprise though, and that’s not completely impossible to do via support fees and such.

It’s not quite fully open though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort

VESA, the creators of the DisplayPort standard, state that the standard is royalty-free to implement. […]

While VESA does not charge any per-device royalty fees, VESA requires membership for access to said standards.[70] The minimum cost is presently $5,000 (or $10,000 depending on Annual Corporate Sales Revenue) annually.[71]

That doesn’t change how it’s, hm, questionable to prefer HDMI on the basis of “open source or nothing” compared to DisplayPort, but still.

The short paragraphs thing predates smartphones and the collapse of print newspapers (here’s a paper from 1996 that does it), so fwiw I don’t think it’s that. I assume it’s some sort of stylistic / presentation thing that’s just normalized in news reporting. Maybe it’s an outdated holdover from print media somehow (where presumably more spacing = more expensive, so it presumably wasn’t a financial motivation) but I think orgs would’ve moved on by now if it was purely done for unnecessary legacy reasons.

Nonetheless, it’s pretty common for news sources.

E.g.:

• Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/minot-city-north-dakota-ground-squirrels-dde22d2fa10140191a168687a5aa4daa
• Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/technology/intels-new-ceo-plots-overhaul-manufacturing-ai-operations-2025-03-17/
• ABC (Australia) you already saw
• BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpwqewyrw57o
• CBC: https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/carney-first-nations-summit-c5-1.7586758
• Al Jazeera: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/17/europe-assumes-financial-burden-of-ukraine-war-alarming-russia

All use this style of paragraphs. It’s not universal but I’m surprised that it’s surprising anybody!

That’s… pretty common for news sources?

FYI your first link isn’t actually inside of your spoiler tag