I hadn’t realized how skeptical I was of even genuine attempts from big organizations until I got repeatedly surprised by how they were integrating everyone instead of the usual segregation. Their recommendation for people to not wear strong fragrances shows me that education is a simple accessibly tool that should be deployed more often.

Hello there. I assume you have good intentions with your comment, but I read it as if you were talking to an idea, not a person. A person has feelings that they want to express and be validated. Treat the wound before discussing how to prevent it.

You offered a solution, disengaging, which is nice. I also believe we have a responsibility to ourselves. The problem that I want to point out is you might not have asked yourself the question: "Why don’t they leave the situation? " Can you think of a reason? There must be, we can even ask if necessary. You see, what’s non essential in my life might be very important for someone else.

About space and fairness. This is not a childish dispute. You have the right to your space. In practical terms, they will follow you home and take it from you if you let them. I’m not being hyperbolic. They don’t want you to exist anywhere and will follow you everywhere. Beehaw is a gated space that so many people disapprove, but that serves a very specific purpose, being a safe space, because hiding and isolating yourself from the world is not good to your mental health either.

I was talking about how we always have this type of discussion frequently with my therapist earlier today. It’s always nice to pause and remind ourselves and those outside of our philosophy. One thing that I’d like to add is we might not be(e) nice sometimes because of personal circumstances. We are having a bad day and a comment will trigger a reaction that would be uncommon or we might be aggressive without provocation.

In cases we feel the need to hit back, I’d advise postponing the response by at least one hour. Give yourself time to clear your mind and think things over. And if you are the target of users having a bad day, reminding them that they are not be(e)ing nice is the alternative. Asking questions is the best. “Did I offend you?”, “Did I say something wrong?”, “I don’t understand what the issue is.” Even if they keep the aggression, they will point to the specific issue that needs to be worked on, or prove they don’t want to discuss genuinely.

I decided to give a chance to Super Virus Defense. It was made by the brother in law of my best friend, but it was described as tower defense so it sat ignored for over a year. I play on PC, but it’s very mobile like. I’m addicted. There’s a grind element to buy upgrades, but it’s been so non mindless that it reminded me of how big companies just choose to make you suffer. Specifically, I can grind while completing higher difficulties in previous levels or by playing the endless mode.

Playing it made me want to create a post with all the Brazilian indie games that I really liked over the years.

Does it really work like that? I would say that they are not trying to fool any test, just getting harder to be detected. The goal being looking completely realistic.

Isn’t that a matter of behavior? The crack is doing something expected from a crack and the system warns you because most wouldn’t use it without being aware. If you really trust the file, add it as an exception.

Or do you want a software that can vet good cracks from bad cracks?

People don’t seem to grasp how terrible doxxing can be. It’s easy to distance yourself from the consequences when everything happens online and all is forgotten within a day or two. If you call the police to deal with a problem, you should expect violence. In a similar way, expecting to make people accountable when you sick an angry anonymous mob on them is foolish. Violence is the most likely result.

I hate the term and the fact it became widespread. Unfortunately, mass adoption also means it will mutate and evolution will follow its course.

I don’t think this article goes well with the philosophy of Beehaw. I understand the arguments for violent action, but there’s no context or discussion here, just a manual telling you how to act, which includes doxxing and armed action.

The obvious solution on X’s side is to ID everyone that wants to post anything. And remember that the obvious solution doesn’t have to be the best solution, a good solution or, even, a real solution at all.

Maybe people are not really choosing, just going with the only option they know/ remember. If they have to choose from a menu, the first option is very likely and I imagine randomness would be involved.

“If you have an outcome-based approach and you do not reach the goals, then you have to apply additional measures […] whereas now you say okay, I tried, but unfortunately, it didn’t turn out the way I wanted to,” Paulus explained.

Politicians and producers love good ideas that will attract the public’s attention, but should be tweaked just enough to not be executed as intended.

He was, uh, totally asking for it.

I’ll admit that I got confused. If you visit the site, the article is a response to the research that says women also hit men. I’d argue they simply chose stories of men beating women, flipped the gender and wanted people to be outraged.

I’ve never played any of the games, but I would understand that Link is a silent character that uses sign language.

Telegram is the same. It’s the app people will migrate to because it’s the app people learned to use when WhatsApp can’t operate for some reason. Not many people there. People here are overly attached.

For the people who suggest users just change apps. Imagine I just ban all your current forms of text communication (you can still have e-mail), but only you, your family and friends will keep their ecosystems. Do you care you won’t talk to them anymore? Can you convince them to use a new app? Does it affect your life beyond social interactions? Is it worth making your life harder?

The article didn’t go in the direction I expected. Theoretically, open source software can be fixed by experts outside of the main company, but it would be very niche. The expert would need to be familiar with the specific hardware at least, have varying degrees of medical knowledge and have access to the individual in need in some cases.

Forced updates and treating medical software as no more special than a game is the problem when dealing with apps. Tag medicals apps and make it so that system updates have to be manual or go through warnings before being deployed. Offer the option to go back to a version that previously worked. Create regulations to make companies liable for malfunctions.

Daily quests, login rewards, any other mechanic that wants to dictate when I should play, all that ruined my relation with a lot of games. I actively try to ignore them nowadays. If my line of reasoning is I should play a little more because the reward is around the corner and will be gone tomorrow, I’ll let the most precious opportunity go to waste to protect my mental health.

The problem that I see is that power comes in great part from the responsibility to educate yourself. In a community, you don’t have to know everything to contribute to its workings, but someone has, enough people do you escape the clutches of external players. Everything is quite individualist right now though. Things must just work without the help of anyone.

They can block access to the site if they don’t comply. Then people use VPN.

I don’t think it’s the same concern. It’s not that people will become pedophiles or act on it more because of the normalization and exposure. It’s people will see less of a problem with the sexualization of children. The parallel being the amount of violence we are OK being depicted. The difference being we can only emulate in a personal level the sexual side.

Maybe there’s the argument that violence is escapist, sexual desire is ever present and porn is addictive.

That’s really curious. LLM were usually on the other side of this note and not considered the traditional AI people referred to.

I think submitting the whole article will put the instance in danger of copyright strikes.

I understand the sentiment. By saying we, I meant myself and the other users. We should take more responsibility for what we share. Maybe we can try to make that part of the culture. The title should be the information we personally want to spread or call to attention.

We really should moderate the titles more. I just realized that every article I ignored I basically accepted as truth. Or, at least, my brain accepted as truth in the background. I’ll see the same lie twice a day everyday and start processing as fact.

I think that’s exactly the point. The current situation is already bad, tools that reinforce the bad part of the system shouldn’t be accepted.

I think there’s something missing in this article. It sounded familiar and I remembered the old news when they mentioned Google and Australia. The issue with Google was that the news would show in the search results, which meant there’s no need to visit the source.

We really do need more romance in games not being presented as a mean to get a prize. Maybe some randomness could be applied and the same actions would not always result in the desired outcomes.

It was curious when I realized, not many years ago, that people found strange to play a character with a different gender. Imagining a different sexuality is probably the same. In both cases, games don’t go deep in making you feel like the other, which is kinda sad.

This might be relevant: https://tildes.net/~tech/16on/reddit_is_silently_restoring_deleted_edited_comments#comment-8o2b

The reason behind the rules might help with that. Don’t be a dick and be nice are more about being respectful and understanding than following etiquette. From my point of view at least. The specific way you act is not a problem until it’s related to another person.

What I mean is that the way people perceive you is the important part. If someone accuses you of being a dick and you disagree, don’t defend your words, explain your attitude. At the same time, don’t go around accusing people of beings dicks and try to see if it’s not just miscommunication.

The letter of the law entitle people to not care for any harm they cause if it’s in their rights. Then there are the people that realize pain is what the law tries to avoid and act to correct themselves without the need of being guilty.

Twenty years ago, before I questioned anything about myself, I fell in a pattern of looking for queer friendly spaces when looking for nice clans inside games I played. It’s a shorthand for receptive spaces that I use even today.

It’s really good and comprehensive. The tragedy is that so many people simply won’t read it.

The article is mostly clickbait. It sensationalize a reality we are already used to: fake advertisement. I’m from Brazil by the way.

I just want to talk about a specific point in the article. When they refer to the digital literacy as lacking compared to the wide adoption of technology. Android is the most common system here, more so if you don’t have any money. The one that people find surprisingly complex or difficult. Which means nothing because it’s social engineering using people with smartphone cameras.

I think of money as one form of contribution. People should contribute more instead of simply asking from a place of entitlement.

People seem to overreact to the loss of some convenience or extrapolate problems that are not real.

A local store being closed for a day doesn’t mean the concept is dead. One branch of a megastore having trouble doesn’t mean the whole chain sinking. Downtime is just a fact of life. Sometimes I don’t even notice that they happened.