• 167 Posts
  • 139 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 6th, 2025

help-circle

  • AbnormalHumanBeing@lemmy.abnormalbeings.spacetopics@lemmy.worldBBC
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah, they aren’t unbiased, they are more hesitant perhaps than other outlets on the other end of the bias spectrum - but not covering? Covering up? The biggest headline result when I just visited bbc.co.uk was about the starvation campaign.

    Their bias can actually be somewhat helpful - it lends legitimacy to what they are reporting on, and makes it harder to claim that it’s “just biased pro-palestine pseudo-journalism” or some crap like that.














  • You actually make a great point. Really, for me it was mostly a quick idea because I had been musing about PeerTube’s streaming capabilities in a different comment thread, and about how it leverages the P2P mechanism, so it was fresh on my mind that I wanted to stress-test my own server somehow (and I wanted to learn how to set-up OBS with chat and stuff for PeerTube). Then, while “working” on the canvas, I had the sudden: “Hey, I’d love to set my pixels while zoomed in, while also watching the whole field zoomed out”-thought … but of course that would just as easily be possible by just having two browser windows open 🤷

    If nothing else, I got some promising data showing my server can handle several people tuning in to live streams at the same time - and I am also using this to test how my server handles someone wanting to encode a 24h+ VOD from a stream, so that will be there, too - probably for another time-lapse in addition to the official ones.




  • That would indeed be interesting to see. Who knows, it might crash everything after all. From what I have seen, it might play out favourably.

    I had noticed this channel when browsing the “most watched of all time” list, I have no idea about them and their content, as I don’t speak their language, but I assume they probably chose PeerTube as an (additional?) hosting option for content they already had an audience for (seemingly from YT?), probably embedding their videos on an external website with a following?

    Any way, back then (the numbers are misleading, btw, because the x years ago lists from the originally-published date, not the date-uploaded), they seem to have garnered thousands of views, so probably easily hundreds of viewers simultaneously. The interesting part: The server they uploaded on has the technical info listed, and that reads very much “laptop at someone’s private home”.

    Unless the numbers have been fudged - which I will grant, is always a possibility - that bodes well for any hosting that’s done even just a bit more professionally. It should be able to relatively easily scale up even to thousands concurrently, again, if those numbers aren’t doctored. And it makes sense, at least to me - downloading torrents has worked like that for a long time now, too - even for torrents that aren’t “professionally” seeded with dedicated servers.


  • It’s pretty amazing how well that scales, really. What surprised me the most was, that it also works well for live streams - I witnessed that in action when heise (that huge German tech publisher which recently created their own instance and you may have seen a lot in the trending videos) streamed their live show for the first time. Even on a live stream, towards the middle when I checked, I had more downloaded from peers than from the central server, and more uploaded than downloaded.

    I also have my instance set up to mirror a lot of videos from trustworthy, popular instances - and even so, traffic statistics show no issues whatsoever so far, if something really does attract lots of concurrent viewers, the p2p feature handles that quite efficiently.

    Now, if only storage was trivial in cost, too, costs for running PeerTube would basically be the same as for text/image-focused Fediverse stuff.




  • You are right, and thank you.

    Still, I have to add one small thing, quickly, because I did indeed not communicate what I meant well for that point: My point there was about Himmler having (superstitiously) thought of some “pure” Roma people potentially being essentially a worthy “Aryan precursor race” - that belief also being connected to his expeditions to Tibet/India. That was the point I maintain would have been completely unthinkable for Nazis to even entertain for Jewish people, whom they deemed as fundamentally, irredeemably evil and without worth. And while, yes, things like the Madagascar plan (essentially a less direct form of genocide) were discussed, I maintain, that the implementation of finding, registering and exterminating of Jewish people after it was decided upon as a “solution” was more “urgent” to the Nazi state.


  • NOTE: I only after already writing all this noticed you weren’t OP poking me with a second comment, which sort of sent me into a bit of an emotionally laden wall-of-text, because truth be told, I am not all that well at the moment. I will still leave the text as-is, but of course, some of the points or the overall tone is not fair as being directed towards you. I do agree, more broadly, that the Porajmos is underappreciated. I do still maintain, that antisemitism was much more central to Nazi ideology, and their attempts to eliminate Jews were much more driven and fanatical, however.

    I really do not want to get into this much further, I have an easier day today, but I am definitely not stress resistant enough at the moment to go into large and long-lasting internet arguments about a topic like this - but I think you are missing why people were disagreeing with you. I can cherry-pick facts from articles too. From the same you posted, which I reviewed before posting my original comment:

    For the Jews it was total and everyone knew this—from bankers to pawnbrokers. For the Roma it was selective and not comprehensive. The Roma were only exterminated in a few parts of Europe such as Poland, the Netherlands, Germany and France. In Romania and much of the Balkans, only nomadic Roma and social outcast Roma were deported. This matters and influences the Roma mentality.

    Or:

    Initially, there was disagreement within the Nazi circles about how to solve the “Gypsy Question”. In late 1939 and early 1940, Hans Frank, the General Governor of occupied Poland, refused to accept the 30,000 German and Austrian Roma which were to be deported to his territory. Heinrich Himmler “lobbied to save a handful of pure-blooded Roma”, whom he believed to be an ancient Aryan people for his “ethnic reservation”, but was opposed by Martin Bormann, who favored deportation for all Roma.

    Such a discussion and disagreement all the way up to Himmler would have been completely unthinkable to Nazi ideology to have with Jewish people in the same way. Just imagine Himmler saying, some select Jews should be preserved for their worth as a race. Antisemitism dripped from every facet of Nazi ideology, it was absolutely central, and their efforts to exterminate Jews were going above and beyond all rationality. Them just being in the same category (as I said, both “rootless” and “parasitic”, thusly seen as incompatible with nation states) does not mean they were viewed in the exact same way in practice.

    You are also missing the point on where you are crossing lines. This is not about antiziganism not being a more pressing issue in many European countries concerning their present politics, it absolutely is, especially but not only in many Easter European states - and it has definitely been addressed in a worse way, the pitiful and late reparations given are a good indication for that.

    This is not about that issue not being a fact, it is about you using that to downplay antisemitism and antisemitic structures, which are also still very much alive, and downplaying their absolutely essential and central role in Nazi ideology historically. That is the issue. Even if you did not intend to do it, you reproduced antisemitic dog-whistling and whataboutism.

    And even though in some countries it is less than antiziganism for sure (even though - sidenote, a very numbing part of reality is, that antisemitism has been reduced more thoroughly from parts of Europe, because Jews where wiped out and displaced more thoroughly by the Nazis, so there were none left to reproduce the old stereotypes against in everyday live afterwards), and some organisations have wrongly utilised the term “antisemitism” to try and silence opposition - writing out “anti-semitism” in quotes, essentially doing a “but #alllivesmatter” thing about races. That is classic downplaying behaviour.

    Antisemitic crimes are well and alive, I know only the statistics for Germany, and not off the top of my head, and I don’t have the strength to look those up now, too - but even just casual shit like swastikas spray painted on historical Jewish graveyards (is a regular occurrence around where I live) or videos going viral of some dude off the street saying “I am against Nazis, but I think Hitler did some stuff right concerning some people, you know which ones I mean.” - things like that still happen. Hell, Jewish spaces here in Germany are often ridiculously in need of security and high walls, and that is not all just their paranoia - there have been terrorist attacks on them, e.g. in Halle not too long ago for one attack that made bigger news. There have been people wearing the Kippa attacked in the street. That all happens.

    Also: Analysing how fascist elements are active in Israel, and some structures have fascist characteristics is completely okay. Resolutely claiming them to be “Nazis” is at best blind towards history and Nazism, and how it actually played out and what its ideological foundations were/are - and at worst, an actual antisemitic dogwhistle you have, I hope accidentally, reproduced.

    And again: This is part of a century old history, reproduced from generation to generation, and cause of one of the most horrid crimes committed against humanity - which is why the things you said are indistuingishable from dog whistles and concern trolling and, yes, antisemitism. I truly believe you did not want to communicate it like this, but you did reproduce the same arguments. And it is possible to try and bring across those points without crossing those lines.

    I really can’t invest much more energy into this, but it seems you are still emotionally invested in your comments getting removed, hence me getting poked with a stick after your first answer. Which is why I did not want to write anything at first, but I hope, even though I must admit, I was getting a bit dismissively emotional there, I could still bring across better what the actual problem was. I don’t think I will have another answer in me, especially since probably no one but us two will be reading it anyway days after the fact.





  • That has been my impression of present dynamics and historical data, too - boom-bust-cycles of either some other platform fucking up or there being curiosity from some synergetic effect, then the initial wave breaking over time - but usually also leaving behind at least more (genuinely active) users than before the wave. For Lemmy, one can definitely see some reduction in activity, I think - not dramatically, but I do think it’s noticeable if you spend a lot of time here. E.g. unlike during the last Exodus, I see more of “the same users” than before. There’s still enough content, it does not feel dead by a long shot, and who knows when the next wave may hit.

    That wave-like character makes it hard to estimate organic growth too, at times. The mass influx of users dying off over weeks will give shrinking numbers there, even if some users from organic growth who are more likely to stay and be active than “mass exodus users” may still join there. Also, users moving in between MBin/PieFed/Lemmy will fudge numbers, but they are essentially in the same ecosystem.