Grumble4681's recent activity
-
Comment on Blocking of unverified apps on Android starts in Brazil and other three countries in ~tech
-
Comment on Sling TV day, weekend and weekly passes are no longer available in ~tv
Grumble4681 Link ParentIt also coincides with Dish exiting bankruptcy. (Sling is owned by Dish) Whether that actually had anything to do with it I don't know, but it was fairly obvious from the start that this day pass...It also coincides with Dish exiting bankruptcy. (Sling is owned by Dish) Whether that actually had anything to do with it I don't know, but it was fairly obvious from the start that this day pass was likely dead once their contracts with networks came up because they were utilizing the fact that there was apparently a loophole in their existing agreements to offer it and the networks obviously didn't like it based on their reaction.
That 'promise' url is interesting because Dish used that earlier this year on their own site when they had a dispute with Gray Media for carrying the local network stations.
-
Comment on An insight into looksmaxxxing/blackpill "ideology" in ~life
Grumble4681 (edited )Link ParentI'm not so sure this is an accurately representative way to frame 'incel' viewpoints. That's now how I've perceived to be the predominant desire of 'incels' anyhow, and surely I could be wrong,...I'm not talking about number of median relationships, distribution of sexual partners or anything like that. I'm talking about the common incel claim which is so often repeated by those communities that it's become axiomatic, that says: it's easier to find love (as in, a long term committed relationship) as a woman, than it is as a man.
It doesn't matter for the sake of this argument though. In the theoretical situation of a serial dating hot guy that women fawn over dating lots of average looking women who are now single, the women are not in a desirable situation. They got dumped (or dumped the guy who had no interest in settling down long term), are now single, and aren't in a committed relationship. That's not the situation that incels are thinking of when they're being envious of how "easy women have it".
I'm not so sure this is an accurately representative way to frame 'incel' viewpoints. That's now how I've perceived to be the predominant desire of 'incels' anyhow, and surely I could be wrong, but the word incel is literally standing for 'involuntary celibate', not 'never finds love' (though that seemingly would be intertwined with someone who is involuntary celibate), so I think reducing what 'incels' want to 'finds long term love' is not accurately portraying that block of people. And before I leave it at that, yes I'm aware when people refer to incels it doesn't literally mean these people necessarily have to be involuntarily celibate always, just as in the same way it used to be in fashion to call people neckbeards without any regard for what beards someone actually had or didn't have, it's common to refer to people as 'incels' based on stereotypes people are imagining of these groups of people not necessarily that they're strictly involuntarily celibate.
I'd say more accurately, the classic 'forever alone' group is the one that is more strongly associated with and concerned with finding love. Now I would presume that has strong overlap with incels, cause if you're forever alone then perhaps more likely you're involuntarily celibate, but one could argue that people can have casual sex while still being 'alone' in the relationship sense.
The stated end goal is to have a loving, committed relationship. I basically never seen incels complain that they're not able to have long strings of failed relationships.
You've never seen an incel complain that they've never had a relationship or never been on a date etc.? Obviously they aren't desiring a long string of failed relationships, but you can't have a chance at finding love if you're not even having the relationships to begin with for them to have a possibility of succeeding or failing. So while no one is desiring a long string of failed relationships, they are desiring the chance at relationships which will in all likelihood lead to a long string of failed relationships. If you look at 'failed' relationships differently, you could also frame it as 'time being in love' or 'experience of love', because many of those relationships will encompass that before their failing point. Someone who has been in 5 'failed' relationships over the course of 20 years, you could frame their experience as 'experienced loving relationships' for 10 years or 'time spent in love' was 10 years, and perhaps another 5 years was 'time spent with growing discontent for person they love' before breaking up and another 5 years was 'time not in a relationship'. Someone who has had no relationships at all will have 0 years compare to the person who had 5 'failed' relationships who may have had 10 years.
Most people have failed relationships, if you want to call it that. Part of even having a chance at finding love are these failed relationships. Do you think incels or the 'forever alone' types are only looking at 70 year olds who have been married for 50 years and feeling like that is what they are missing out on, or do you think that they're looking at the similar aged folks who are dating someone right now, and very likely won't be dating that person in 5 or 10 years, and feeling jealous over that person's relationship? Yes, there are likely desires that aren't realistic or matched to reality, much in the same way people might browse Facebook or Instagram etc. seeing pictures and posts of other people's glamorous vacations and wonderful lives meanwhile what's not in the picture is all the stuff going wrong in their life. I'd guess most people are probably doing this or have done this at some point in their lives over some aspect of life, looking at false depictions of something wishing they had it, or imagining something more fantastical than what is actually depicted.
What I'm saying here is that while people may not be fantasizing or dreaming about having lots of 'failed relationships', that's part of being in the 'game' of finding love. Certainly people who go through these redpill, blackpill or other feedback loops that warp their minds to thoughts that become ever more extreme or ever more unrealistic end up saying something else after they've been simmering in that pan for awhile, but if you go back to where they started, what first led them into that feedback loop, what they wanted was what they perceived everyone else to have. If they were 'in the game' so to speak, they would have quickly learned the reality that everyone else learns, which is that even if they can get dates and get into relationships, finding that 'loving, committed relationship' isn't necessarily what they think it is.
I think a lot of them actually do desire to have lots of casual sex. I'm not addressing that desire, because I think a lot of them know that's an unreasonable public complaint to make, so the posts they make are things like "I just want a looksmatched girl who loves me and I can start a family with, is that so much to ask???". That's the demand I'm addressing, and the arguments around it that I'm attacking.
So you're addressing what you believe to be a coded desire for sex, that what they are saying is not what they really mean but it's a cover for wanting sex but not feeling like they can express it. If you don't believe what they said was genuine, then seems strange to me to begin by making arguments against it as though it's genuine, and then later say that it's not genuine and it's code for 'give me sex' and that is what your arguments are tailored around. I don't really know how to respond to that as it feels like the goalposts are moving. Telling people who are coding their desire for sex into a phrase of something like "I just want a looksmatched girl who loves me and I can start a family with" that it's 1:1 and women are equally impacted in terms of chances of a 'loving, committed relationship' doesn't make sense to me.
-
Comment on An insight into looksmaxxxing/blackpill "ideology" in ~life
Grumble4681 (edited )Link ParentYou just need to think about it logically for 10 seconds is so incredibly condescending that I want to do it back to you even harsher, because your comment sounds just as stupid as you think...I don't get how this theory is so widely accepted in this community when you don't even need any research or experience to disprove it, you just need to think about it logically for 10 seconds.
You just need to think about it logically for 10 seconds is so incredibly condescending that I want to do it back to you even harsher, because your comment sounds just as stupid as you think others remarks do, but I'll stop at that and hope that I didn't go too far considering that's not the proper way to respond. But I want you to know that's the kind of feeling your condescending remark inspires in others, or at least in me.
To address your 'logical' 1:1 claim, let's say you take a pool of 20 people, 10 women and 10 men, let's ignore age gaps or anything like that and just say they're all adults who theoretically are within the dating pool of the opposite sex. Now chart this over the course of a few years. For simplification, let's just label each person as W1-10 and M1-10. Let's say W1-5 and M1-5 are dating their respective opposite sex number, and each one of these were 6 month relationships. Within those 6 months, let's also just say W6-10 and M6-10 weren't dating anyone. All is equal, just like you said. Now the next 6 months, W6-10 begin dating M3-7. So within a year, all 10 women have dated, and 3 men have not. Hmm I really wonder about this 1:1 thing you said now, maybe it's not so solid. Now at the 1 year mark, they all break up, and W1-5 all now enter 1 year relationships with M1,2,6,7,8. Then fast forward another year, they all break up, and W4-10 are dating M1-6. So to sum it up, the average time the overall group of women were in a relationship is equal to the average time the overall group of men were in a relationship, except the difference being W1-10 all were in a relationship at some point while M9,10 were never in one.
We could keep this going for awhile, but I hope I've made the picture clear by now. I vastly oversimplified the timing of relationships and what not because writing out anything more realistic would greatly expand the amount of words to convey it. Even outside of 'casual sex' scenarios, more women can have been in a relationship within whatever time frame you want to examine, and for similar logistical reasons that you acknowledged were possible with 'casual sex', just on a longer timescale. It also doesn't need to be as drastic as you stated, as one man having sex with hundreds of women in a year's time span. Even a lesser imbalance over a large population set will still have a significant result.
Now to clarify, I'm not claiming that the data above is reflected in reality, but I believe it to be possible and if so it would tear a hole into the 1:1 claim. However a quick search, which I don't expect anyone to do the work to dispute it nor do I expect anyone to put much stock into this, as I do not, does produce some results that may suggest such a thing does happen.
https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/blog/2024/12/10/new-relationships-after-a-break-up/
Our results confirmed that heterosexual men are more likely to re-partner than heterosexual women. The gap starts to emerge two years after the first relationship breaks up, and remains throughout the ten-year period we looked at. Within those 10 years, 73% of the heterosexual men in the sample re-partnered compared to 61% of heterosexual women.
If you were to take the simplified example that I gave above, it would necessarily produce results like this, where men will have less time 'out of relationship' between relationships. I really just wanted to use that to illustrate what data might look like if the above simplification I created did play out in reality, not that it is actually true. I cannot find more comprehensive data on that, and to be clear, I'm mostly disputing this flawed 1:1 claim and I'm not attempting to put forward a claim that some men are definitely dating less or none at all more than a similar portion of women.
The 1:1 idea assumes you're taking a snapshot in time, that at any given time, given vast majority of people are monogamous, it's roughly 1:1, which would be true from a single snapshot in time or from a static pairing over time, but being static over time is not true of a large majority of relationships. When you factor in time, you can have imbalances in dating/relationships/love just like you can in 'casual sex' that break the 1:1 if the consideration is history of dating rather than just current status.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
Grumble4681 (edited )Link ParentI don't think that even if people are giving credit to the idea that all of these dire warnings from AI execs are greed-induced faux hype for their AI products that it means people are...I find it rather off putting that there is large group of people who seem rather quick to conclude that the people closest to this technology don't know it the best or can't be trusted to give observations.
I don't think that even if people are giving credit to the idea that all of these dire warnings from AI execs are greed-induced faux hype for their AI products that it means people are discrediting the actual threat of AI. I think both things can be true, that they're not to be taken at face value for what they're saying but that what they say could also be true. They are untrustworthy in the sense that they have very conflicting incentives.
There are dire safety concerns with AI, but the 'solution' being offered is sort of creating this narrow focus of it being the only way to handle it. Whether it's 'slow it down' or some similar angle, all of this is an inevitable product of relatively unrestrained capitalism. Instead of the solution being to rein AI in, maybe it's to rein capitalism in. Unrestrained capitalism is a race to the 'end', so is it any surprise that we're now getting all these signals from people in high positions proclaiming something resembling an 'end'? The reality is that the people with the resources making these signals don't want to risk or give up any of their resources to attempt to resolve the problem. They want to continue to hoard their resources and hoard their power while claiming to be the prophets foreseeing a problem that they're perpetuating while pretending to offer some kind of solution that doesn't involve acknowledging that they themselves are part of the problem.
Also, the 'slow it down' suggestion isn't even a solution. Slowing it down doesn't prevent anything, and I have absolutely no faith in the current US government, influential people/leaders, the general populace or the direction things have been going for the past couple decades that even if we gave them more time to react to the coming disaster that they would appropriately respond to it in a meaningful way that helps people.
Instead what they are proposing is a 'controlled fall', because it is what best helps them maintain the system and control over that system. If you fall in an uncontrolled manner, you might fall hard and fast and with significant collateral damage, of course they don't want this because the blowback could come on them. Instead in a controlled fall, they can attempt to ensure the system that best lets them hold their resources and power has the least amount of collateral damage to impact them. Why exactly should there be a fall at all? How did we get to a point where a 'controlled fall' is the solution? Because the people proposing it and the cloth they are cut from led us to this situation.
-
Comment on The American religion of self-storage facilities in ~life
Grumble4681 Link ParentI wasn't really 'keeping' anything in a storage unit with the intention of it being there long-term, but I had basically moved all my belongings at least 6 times in as many years, kinda lost count...I wasn't really 'keeping' anything in a storage unit with the intention of it being there long-term, but I had basically moved all my belongings at least 6 times in as many years, kinda lost count at this point. By the end it was due to not really having a place I wanted to live at anymore, so that's when I finally moved my stuff into a storage unit and I was living out of my car, a small sedan which has no room to store anything hardly. I ended up having to move my stuff twice from one storage unit to a different one for a few issues. None of it is stored there any longer which before I even put it there I knew it wasn't worth keeping it in there for long, as over a long enough period of time the cost to store would easily exceed the resale value of what was in it, but then there's the additional cost to re-acquire what is in there which is generally still a bit higher than the resale value of the items and even that wouldn't take that long to eventually exceed the value.
The thing is that even though I moved so many times and it was possibly an opportunity to get rid of things, I generally didn't get rid of that much between all those moves and it's probably been reinforced a little each time because when I did move, I'd often lose track of where I was storing something and would get frustrated not being able to find something that I wanted/needed and knew I had at one point but didn't know if I still had it or if I lost it or got rid of it.
-
Comment on Fairphone Gen 6+ now available in the US in ~tech
Grumble4681 LinkI don't understand why they made a phone that doesn't support Band 13 from Verizon's network. I assume something related to costs, but at the price point they are offering at, it's already not...I don't understand why they made a phone that doesn't support Band 13 from Verizon's network. I assume something related to costs, but at the price point they are offering at, it's already not even a cheap phone anyhow. Seems like a lot of other phones support all major carriers in the US. I guess maybe even though they're selling Fairphone in the US, they probably designed it for other markets where maybe that band isn't relevant and it would hurt their market position for no gain elsewhere to increase costs to appease a small portion of the US market?
-
Comment on ‘Barbie 2’ in crisis: sequel could be shelved amid pay battle and crumbling deal talks in ~movies
Grumble4681 Link ParentPerhaps I'm reading your comment wrong, but it seems you made an immediate jump to saying someone's post has more to do with misogyny just because they called it a cash grab?Perhaps I'm reading your comment wrong, but it seems you made an immediate jump to saying someone's post has more to do with misogyny just because they called it a cash grab?
-
Comment on Any significant changes to Tildes are extremely unlikely in ~tildes.official
Grumble4681 Link ParentNot gonna lie, this post hits harder to me than Deimos' post does, only because I had already known that Deimos wasn't working on the site anymore and I think many people did as well, so none of...Not gonna lie, this post hits harder to me than Deimos' post does, only because I had already known that Deimos wasn't working on the site anymore and I think many people did as well, so none of that was news to me. Even the declaration of lack of changes didn't necessarily shake me because I remembered in talklittle's post that he said that Deimos was still the one deciding on what made it live to the site.
So to rectify that conflict of what Deimos said I had hoped maybe you guys were still continuing in the original vein of the 'community fork' sense that it would potentially allow for the creation of new tildes sites to pop up, but I certainly can't fault anyone for feeling dispirited about the situation either.
Not for me personally as I'm not a coder, but I assume others might ask, do you know if either you or talklitle would still be open to accepting contributions if there is someone significantly motivated enough that would intend on starting their own tildes site? Is that even within your scope to be able to do that as maintainers on the official repo, or would such a person just be better off making their own fork?
-
Comment on Any significant changes to Tildes are extremely unlikely in ~tildes.official
Grumble4681 Link ParentThis is where you're dead wrong. You're in one right now and you just don't see it. OK, just kidding. People who engage get banned. There's a few familiar names that had been around awhile that...I have seen some spirited arguments here but it’s been rare for me to be in the middle of one.
This is where you're dead wrong. You're in one right now and you just don't see it.
OK, just kidding.
I agree it’s pleasant but also I feel like I’m in a bubble here where I get only tiny pushback on things that might be controversial. So either we’re pretty aligned politically or there just is almost no engagement when people disagree.
People who engage get banned. There's a few familiar names that had been around awhile that are no longer around anymore and when I go to their profiles, it says they are banned. It's also true for less familiar names.
Because there is only 1 moderator on the site, and as his post laid out here he doesn't have much time devoted to the site anymore, the way I'd put it is that there's very low tolerance for friction, because more friction requires more moderator attention, and moderator attention is an extremely limited resource here.
-
Comment on Any significant changes to Tildes are extremely unlikely in ~tildes.official
Grumble4681 Link ParentIt's worth noting that there were posts from talklittle awhile back about work on Tildes codebase. @talklittle and @Bauke were added as maintainers. Specifically in the post I linked, it said this...It's worth noting that there were posts from talklittle awhile back about work on Tildes codebase. @talklittle and @Bauke were added as maintainers.
Specifically in the post I linked, it said this
Deimos still has the final say on what makes it to the website. Bauke and I can't deploy changes directly.
But there have been no updates since then, so I'm not sure the details of what is happening with that, if anything anymore. I'm not sure between those 3 people who is able to provide insight on what is the status of all of this and what it means to people who want to contribute. In talklittle's post there was a link to documentation for those who wanted to contribute, but again, none of that necessarily means anything if everyone involved has moved past that.
-
Comment on Any significant changes to Tildes are extremely unlikely in ~tildes.official
Grumble4681 Link ParentI think removing the vote button for comments is the right way to go. I like what Tildes has done different than reddit like allowing comments to 'bump' older posts and such, like old forum style,...More importantly, comments won't have vote buttons and they're sorted by new. I think everyone is entitled to an opinion, and voting encourages echo chambers. I don't really want to create a "safe space", but more so a place to encounter an infinite number of opinions. I have a ton of other ideas that I will eventually map out in some form of documentation.
I think removing the vote button for comments is the right way to go. I like what Tildes has done different than reddit like allowing comments to 'bump' older posts and such, like old forum style, but having votes I think is a mistake. Of course sorting just by new has its own set of problems too, I've seen other people mention various ideas over the years that sounded compelling but of course I can't remember them now.
The rest of your description is open-ended enough that anyone can put their own assumptions about what that might look like in there and to my eye, the 'infinite number of opinions' description doesn't seem appealing. Not that I don't like varied opinions, just that I don't find an 'infinite number of opinions' to be a worthwhile goal on its own. There's got to be something more compelling than that, otherwise it's just a waste of time trying to filter through an 'infinite number of opinions' to find something that's relatively unique or higher thought/effort.
Personally, the one thing that I've found as I've gotten older is that I find a lot of opinions seem familiar through my history, in that I can recognize that I thought a certain way when I was X age, and a different way at Y age, and another way at Z age, and I sort of have grown to dislike some aspects of the intermingled commentary of people in anonymous/pseudonymous platforms because sometimes I'll see something someone has written/argued and think 'you'll see the other side of this in some amount of years' and there's no words or response more effective than time experienced that will affect that person's perspective. I'm not saying there's anything actionable in this viewpoint but it is what came to mind when I thought of 'infinite opinions' and imagining finding anything worthwhile to me currently in something like that.
-
Comment on New label suggestion: a removable "One-sided" label that gradually reduces the comment's visibility in ~tildes
Grumble4681 (edited )Link ParentI agree that Tildes lacks transparency in moderation, I think in some ways it's intended but even if it isn't, it's also just a matter of how it is because there's no ongoing development. Even if...I agree that Tildes lacks transparency in moderation, I think in some ways it's intended but even if it isn't, it's also just a matter of how it is because there's no ongoing development. Even if everyone agreed it was the best idea ever, even if Deimos himself agreed, it still wouldn't exist because it requires someone to spend time, skill and energy to develop those features.
I think over the past year or so there has been some glimmer of hope that may be changing because talklittle and Bauke have/had gotten involved in some aspects of the codebase of the open-source part of what is the basis of this site, but it's also not like it's their primary job and then there's an additional element of those things that they may work on being incorporated into the codebase that actually makes it into the live Tildes site. Since I believe Deimos owns the entity that owns tildes.net, it's always been solely up to him how this particular site is or is not updated, is or is not moderated etc. I have not kept up with the details of this process of talklittle and Bauke helping with development, if it is still ongoing or not, but it was originally stated to be a very slow moving process even if it were to still be in progress so I wouldn't have any expectations for radical changes anytime soon.
Also some of the foundational rules of the site are somewhat predicated on Deimos being the sole moderator, not saying that they can't work otherwise but it would necessitate some kind of changes most likely. There has been numerous conversations about the 'rules' on this site and one of the ones I've seen numerous times is that a lot of people seem to favor rules that aren't super specific and clear cut, and the 'Don't be a jerk' type of motto is a better rule because there are certain types of bad actors who will play to a certain type of audience with actions that they know antagonizes people but aren't ones that explicitly cross the boundary of the very specific rules laid out. So having less specific rules and 'Don't be a jerk' type of attitude is a method for reducing that type of antagonism, and I think it works well when you have a single moderator who has no accountability to anyone but themselves. Their perspective of who is being a jerk is likely to be consistent, and they don't have to care what anyone thinks about it. This is why a lot of people refer to moderation on Tildes as more like a 'benevolent dictatorship'.
The moment you start changing those dynamics, like more moderators, each person has their own idea of what being a jerk looks like. Now what was already somewhat of a vague boundary set upon an intentionally vague rule is even more vague and inconsistent. Again, I'm sure there are ways to deal with that that are a compromise between setting very specific rules and relying on a benevolent dictator, so I'm not saying there's no other alternative, I'm just saying that personally I believe that probably plays a role in why Deimos hasn't opted to hand over the site to the community or anything like that. It's not like there's some simple straightforward process where it's obviously better and it will require lots of development work on the site and design changes etc. to allow for any changes to happen beyond how the site functions now. I'm pretty sure Deimos has mentioned in the past that there are not clean moderation roles or permission structures etc. and that giving out the moderator permissions that he has would require giving people more access and authority than he would be comfortable with in the current capabilities of the site.
-
Comment on Is it time to include pronouns? in ~tildes
Grumble4681 (edited )Link ParentJust to mention an alternative perspective, I don't necessarily mind being @-ed, but I'm also not a big fan of it in principle if it's just being used to point to someone's elses post in a...Just to mention an alternative perspective, I don't necessarily mind being @-ed, but I'm also not a big fan of it in principle if it's just being used to point to someone's elses post in a conversation that doesn't currently involve that person.
If Person C makes a comment, and Person A and B are in a chain of replies where Person A wants to refer to what Person C said to Person B, they're not asking for Person C to be involved in the chain of replies they're just merely trying to save time or space by referring Person B to more information already discussed in Person C's comment. Not that it happens much, but I don't personally care to be tagged in such a scenario. Usually I associate notifications with something that directly is a reply to me or is someone invoking my name with a tag to engage me on conversation.
So typically that's how I in turn use someone's name when I post. I wouldn't tag someone if I'm just trying to point someone else in the direction of a post they made, I'd just use their name without a tag to give enough specificity that the other person knows what post I'm talking about.
Edit: Also I get that other people have different perspectives, so I don't really care that much if someone does @ me in such a way, but that's my reasoning behind why I don't do it to others rather than something nefarious.
I just made a comment where I mentioned talklittle and Bauke, but didn't @ them, just like now. Maybe they would prefer to know every time anyone mentions them, I have no idea, but it's not like I said anything about their character or such, I just mentioned what I believed was pertinent information about their contributions to Tildes to another user. I don't feel like my comment is all that useful to them in particular to warrant getting their attention, so I just didn't @ them.
-
Comment on New label suggestion: a removable "One-sided" label that gradually reduces the comment's visibility in ~tildes
Grumble4681 Link ParentI am sure there are a myriad of reasons, but thinking about your initial remark about using the mod voice and how that might apply to a site designed like Tildes made me wonder if it's not just...But that does take pretty active moderation. You generally have to dive in as soon as stuff starts to go off the rails. Also the culture of online forums seems to have shifted to where people react to mutes or temp-bans as if you’ve committed a GRAVE offense to their honor as a poster and you can pretty much count on them bearing a grudge for the next half decade, so you’re all but guaranteed to have to ban them eventually once you go down that road. I don’t know why people are like this now, temporary mutes used to be extremely normal things to dish out to encourage people to cool off. I’m pretty sure Deimos has muted me at least once in the past.
I am sure there are a myriad of reasons, but thinking about your initial remark about using the mod voice and how that might apply to a site designed like Tildes made me wonder if it's not just the people, but the site designs that may lean into people reacting differently.
For example, if Deimos came into this thread and responded to a chain of comments telling a certain chain of comments to calm it down, the site design necessitates that it be a response directly to one comment. In old school forum threads, which may not be the same across all the different forum types, most of them were only designated as replies to specific comments when you quoted someone else's post. Otherwise the post in the thread is just a continuation of the thread, not a direct reply to anyone in particular. I could see someone taking more offense to that if they just happen to be the last comment in the chain and it was directed at them. Again, this is just an example to illustrate how people's behaviors might change over the years as a response to different site designs and I haven't ever seen Deimos reply that way, I think more likely I've just seen a top-level comment that maybe he can just pin to the top. I can't remember if that's a feature on this site or not since even if it is, it is rarely used.
I also think vote counts and other stuff may contribute to that as well, but I do remember some forums I used back in the day had reputation points so maybe that's not all that different. My initial thought was maybe just that people put more stock into some online reputation and votes are one aspect to that, but getting muted/banned etc. are another.
-
Comment on Is it time to include pronouns? in ~tildes
Grumble4681 Link ParentFor some reason I never thought of the parent to the parent comment as grand parent, nor have I seen anyone mention it before this comment, but it's so logical I can't believe I hadn't seen it...For some reason I never thought of the parent to the parent comment as grand parent, nor have I seen anyone mention it before this comment, but it's so logical I can't believe I hadn't seen it used before. Maybe I'm just the oddity here in that experience.
-
Comment on New label suggestion: a removable "One-sided" label that gradually reduces the comment's visibility in ~tildes
Grumble4681 Link ParentI don't know of any specific thread that person is talking about, and I'm not trying to supplant their response if they plan on responding, but my perspective on this is that I think some people...I don't know of any specific thread that person is talking about, and I'm not trying to supplant their response if they plan on responding, but my perspective on this is that I think some people that are aware that it's moderated by one person are more reluctant to utilize methods that call to his attention. There's this threshold of how bad it needs to be. In other communities, calling attention to something to an outside party isn't necessarily that big of an ask, hell in old school forums it was quite common that the moderators were active users/browsers of the forums and you didn't even have to call attention to anything they would just come across potential problems when browsing. I think there a flip-side to that alternative where you get over-moderation, so I'm not even arguing one outcome is superior to another.
I don't think the only response for moderation is that threads "should be removed", there's other responses that could happen, but not if you have only 1 moderator with limited time. So you can actually go back and look at any number of threads that were locked over the years and probably find at least a few examples of ones where they could have been resolved with a different moderation strategy if there were different moderation resources available to the site. I actually don't even know if you can find all the locked threads as I think their visibility is removed without the direct link, so it wasn't a specific call to action there, just more of an example.
-
Comment on Browser fingerprinting demonstration in ~comp
Grumble4681 Link ParentIt said that for me as well, I tried it multiple times and every time it said I typed uneven and every time I was over 105wpm.It said that for me as well, I tried it multiple times and every time it said I typed uneven and every time I was over 105wpm.
-
Comment on Browser fingerprinting demonstration in ~comp
Grumble4681 Link ParentI'm curious if anyone has used Mullvad browser on it yet, besides me? It seems like it's not the case because it said I was the first and second visit, and basically all the data Mullvad gives it...I'm curious if anyone has used Mullvad browser on it yet, besides me? It seems like it's not the case because it said I was the first and second visit, and basically all the data Mullvad gives it is spoofed. I thought all Mullvad browsers were supposed to present the same spoofed details though to make it hard to track off unique fingerprints. As far as I know it's the only browser that intentionally is set up to make it more difficult to have unique fingerprints.
Even with my normal Firefox browser, not Mullvad, it didn't have all details so at least some of it was obscured, but almost surely it would have a unique fingerprint that in theory could track me across sites that share the information. To me that's the key element, even if Firefox obscures some of the info, if there's some browser fingerprint database that companies sell this data to, then they can still create a profile of sites I visit, interests etc.
-
Comment on UBlock Origin got turned off with my most recent Brave browser update. Any alternatives? in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentI haven't used Brave but I have used Vivaldi and their built-in adblock sucks compared to uBlock Origin. I don't know if that is just a flaw of Vivaldi or Chrome limitations.I haven't used Brave but I have used Vivaldi and their built-in adblock sucks compared to uBlock Origin. I don't know if that is just a flaw of Vivaldi or Chrome limitations.
The very Wikipedia page you linked provides an image that uses the phrase, and it doesn't say the image is a fake or anything like that but is supposedly an official image. So 4chan didn't even coin the phrase, and they certainly don't have ownership over the rights to lambast it. The fact that they attached it to their own ridiculous ethnic/racist conspiracies shouldn't prevent anyone else from being able to use it anymore than you shouldn't be able to use a keyboard because people on 4chan also use keyboards.