This might actually be a very good idea.

My first thought was to abuse something that rhymes with “Mild Topography”. But that would likely lead to legal repercussions for both you and Microsoft. A better solution would be to store hundreds of medical records in your Documents folder. You have a right to store your own medical information. If Microsoft is uploading those to their servers without your consent, and without appropriate HIPAA measures, that smells like an extremely silver-wrapped lawsuit.

Ironically, I was already using OneDrive but that very push is likely to be the thing that gets me to stop using Windows in the next few years.

My idea for it is a social network that heavily relies on webcam-recorded opinions and the occasional hand-written letter.

Yes, that’s super high-friction and inconvenient. I’d argue social media has become so lazy, incorporating effort into it might improve the experience by changing the quality of posts you see.

Just to pose a thought; how practical would it be for a small subject owner to run a FediVerse instance intended to stay localized to their domain?

For example: Indie game owner makes a reasonably popular game, they set up a website that Lemmy users can subscribe/join directly, and use that for forums/tips/discussions related to their game. People don’t need to register as long as they have an account somewhere. Some number of users would be new to Lemmy and use that site’s registration for later discovery. And, someday when X instance (the game, or the next popular one) gets infested by neonazis, everyone just moves to another and/or has other discussions backed up.

I don’t know how practical or convenient that is though. I imagine a lot of groups don’t want to risk lost users.

I’d say a good negative use case really fits in the “reliability” category. So often at work, coders expect everything to always succeed, and have no thought towards what happens if one cog ever falls out of place; but good systems can react well or even help you get to what you generally need.

Interesting that X only pays you that much to include their integratio-

Oh, they want YOU to pay THEM…!?

Not just a weak mind. The weakest mind. I’ve talked to everyone, and they all tell me, they say: I’ve never seen a mind so weak. You won’t find a weaker mind. (etc for 20 minutes)

A story I’m writing has this as a point. The characters fuss over the trolley problem (renamed in the story), with divisive answers about not getting involved, etc.

The protagonist’s answer to the trolley problem is: To fear it, agonize over it, and not prepare an answer for when it comes. Basically, don’t pre-engineer scenarios in your mind that you’re “ready” to make some fatal, definitive solution for - because probably the biggest issue with the trolley problem is working out every last detail to verify with 100.0000% certainty that you are in a trolley problem with no other solutions.

I guess if you want to verify the truth of this statement, look at Unity. They walked back their per-install system, but the indie community still moved away from them because it seemed clear they might try to do that at some point in the future.

This post is about informing people about the nature of that instance; something many people don’t necessarily intend to interface with when they’re just exploring their favorite niche topic community which simply happens to be there. We don’t want people to unintentionally end up in that crowd without knowing about their principles or lack thereof.

The article was revised with a PR release from Microsoft saying they’ll make the feature opt-in.

Let’s of course not forget that things like upgrades to Windows 11, and use of an MS Account instead of local account, were opt-in…until they weren’t. Require them to sign a contractual agreement that this feature will remain opt-in forever.

I had a calm, respectful comment about China’s attempts to censor the Tiananmen Square photo removed for no reason, and without my knowledge. The idea that they’re conducting “normal moderation” is laughable.

The complaint is about lemmy.ml. This post is hosted on lemmy.world.

The issue that caused this topic to arise wasn’t of other people having opinions we didn’t like. It wasn’t even a case of arguing in bad faith, eg deflecting truth, or disguising real intentions by making arguments the owner doesn’t believe for some other purpose (those are also bad, but generally don’t get such a response).

The issue was specific moderator/instance-ownership censorship. People’s posts were being removed without warning when they were making respectful, good-faith arguments - that disagreed with the politics of lemmy.ml. Worse, they were attempting to be stealthy about this removal so that no one victimized by this censorship was aware of it.

For reference, I’m gonna be a Biden voter. If someone posted “Biden is a piece of trash old man” then I’d disagree with them, but they’d have every right to put that opinion up.

It could be that anything you encrypt has to have its encryption key in some place inaccessible to these same hacker tools. If your computer uses Bitlocker, for instance, you need to enter a 6-digit code each time you turn it on.

Best guess, they had such a high expectation of “convenience” for this feature that they couldn’t justify any kind of security key. Which is still a dumb explanation, obviously.

Might be time to pull a “body cam policy” and take the fun out of moderating.

No, just an implication towards the old lemmy.ml version of the community.

What I mean is, moving from a bad situation to an equally bad but improvable situation is still a good move. It might be better to have a small, unmoderated community than one governed by “pretend” moderators.

That said, if the above comment was pointing out a need to fulfill, as opposed to decrying the attempts at community replacement, then you could disregard my snide remark.

Video Games.

I mean, if your qualification for moderator includes “Not abusing powers to defend garbage extremist politics” then we currently have two communities that each have zero moderators.

I am one of the removed comments and just found out about it here. Does the Lemmy standard really not send direct messages to users when one of their messages was removed? If it was an actual Rule 1 violation (which of course, it wasn’t) I’d like to know.