![](https://lemmy.villa-straylight.social/pictrs/image/9bbfbf6a-daa8-4e48-a881-4bbddb7f3051.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
It was a metaphor for personal hygiene.
I’m just here to have a good time 🤗
It was a metaphor for personal hygiene.
I sometimes think to grok CSS you have to have a printing degree.
For a second or two I thought that you didn’t even get any actual ink. I had seen a post about multi-function printers refusing to scan if you’re out of ink, and I thought perhaps you could buy a card with an unlock code for such situations (hence “instant ink”). That’s not too unbelievable these days though, is it?
Orthography is hygiene for written thoughts.
I would say since faking most Lemmy interactions isn’t profitable, there’s no point in using chatbots to generate content for it apart from, perhaps, some sort of a social experiment, but your exposure to such experiments would likely be minimal.
Of course, you should always beware of astroturfing when, for example, looking at product recommendations, but I don’t think we’re there yet in terms of numbers to be a target.
Ironically I haven’t yet read any of the books in the trilogy, but I plan to do it soonish.
At least they don’t use this crap in the medical field. Oh wait…
The coolest name.
British Cycling is sponsored by oil company Shell.
— Reuters
British Cycling is the Host partner of the championship, according to the official website of the championship (linked to at the UCI website, “Organizer website” section), and its partner is Shell UK (announcement and the list of the partners).
Someone pointed it out in the comments before, but it’s neatly summarized now 😝
Thank you for your reply!
I wonder how much experience you had with those technologies beforehand.
Edit: found the answers about Rust here and here. Impressive! Would it be reasonable to assume that y’all didn’t have much prior experience with Inferno as well as you appear to be very quick and eager learners?
Why did you choose Rust for the backend and Inferno for the frontend?
P.S. Thank you for your work!
I think the example isn’t correct anymore. See this comment.
Accuracy is guaranteed though, it’s from this post.
I’ll take a look. I haven’t really examined the bottom comments before. Also I just learned about the Barbara pit massacre.
I meant the debate is not productive in the sense that we only have our opinions and opposing anecdotes to back up our arguments. I may change my mind after I make the observations you suggested.
And after all, Nutomic said they’d never remove the slur filter, and yet here we are, they caved in after all and effectively fully removed it by making it fully customizable.
I admit, it’s probably idealistic of me to expect all people to follow the guideline of “downvote is not a disagree button”. But I assume most users are already acting in good faith and those who disrupt the intended use (promote quality content, discourage uninteresting content) are a minority.
There is no data that the algorithm is not doing its job on Lemmy. My personal experience show that it does an okay job at least, so I inclined to believe that voting is still more of a good thing than a bad thing. If the problems you mention become significant, then they should be addressed, but only if and when. It’s unlikely that voting on Lemmy is going anywhere, so arguing about it is not productive.
Dessalines puts it pretty well here.
You present very fair points.
A good demonstration of how the voting system is counterproductive is the Steam reviews that are ruined to the point that they’re barely usable as it’s nearly impossible to find a coherent actual review of a game and not a poor attempt at humor, or worse, a copy-pasted award farming sob story.
But Steam reviews are functional and have a narrow task of helping you make a buying decision, so it doesn’t compare directly to a general purpose social network like Lemmy.
I understand how upvotes may promote groupthink and how downvotes may encourage unhealthy self-censorship but I don’t agree that the problem is on the scale of being existential. The general consensus is that voting helps promote quality content and my personal experience with Lemmy so far makes me agree with it.
One of the maintainers has a similar argument against removing voting, but maybe they’re right about the benefits of hiding the counts.
Also I think it would be good if there were fine-grained control for casting and displaying votes.
In my opinion, the problems you mentioned are not caused by the voting system.
Groupthink is caused by a lack of discipline. Obvious hot takes or otherwise poorly formulated comments should be downvoted. Well presented contrarian opinions should be upvoted. Perhaps educating users on using the system in its intended way – promoting healthy debate or interesting insight – is better than removing the system completely.
Manipulation is caused by poor bot control, so while removing voting might help somewhat, this would be a band-aid at most. Unless you mean some sort of psyop manipulation that doesn’t involve automation, which voting can, in theory at least, help against by refuting attempts at manipulation.
Duplicated content I have only seen in connection to the nature of the fediverse so far (i.e., same topic communities spread across multiple large instances). I guess some people would try to farm internet points by posting low quality content, but if people like that content and vote for it, what’s there to be done apart from blocking the community you don’t like?
Also Lemmy’s popularity would suffer if it was missing one of the key features of Reddit (“Full vote scores (+/-) like old Reddit.” is listed as one of the main features on the official website).
Are you sure the issues you mentioned are caused by voting? I’m not certain, so I cannot answer your question.
It’s so that the machine elves have some time to hide!
On a serious note, I found this explanation here: