I really, really doubt that this is going to be a concern. First, while technically Mastodon can interact with Lemmy, in practice how often does it happen? It’s not zero, but it’s not a lot, either, and I doubt that Threads will change that much because while it’s a neat technical feature, link aggregators and micro-blogging platforms are pretty incompatible culturally.

And then we have to remember that we’re talking about Threads normies. Do we really think that a bunch of Swifties and Kardasholes and other influencers are going to look at the absolute zoo of Marxist/Anarchist/Linuxist users on Lemmy and be like “this is the type of content I’ve been waiting for, I need to interact more with that community”? This reminds me a lot of neckbeards saying they wouldn’t date Megan Fox because she has weird thumbs.

And then we have the whole thing with the actual fediverse and the tech behind it. There is still going to be no algorithm artificially inflating the popularity of what are thinly veiled ads. Meta has no mechanism for introducing ads into the Fedi. Lemmy is not suddenly going to be massively interested in the vast majority of content on threads and start upvoting to the moon.

And the dev team behind the fedi I would wager is going to prevent any sort of real technical takeover, so that means that at any point defederating is possible, and with basically no loss to the fedi.

Serious question though - how would you? Meta can’t push content in your feed. The only reason you’re going to see Meta in your feed is if the community here (or people you follow on mastodon) decide they want to show it.

I think it’s even slightly different in that Firefox has some dependence on Google (a scary level, actual, if Google ends that deal Mozilla is pretty much fucked) that the fediverse doesn’t - the people on the fediverse right now are enough to keep Fedi alive and moving, and I’d find it really, really hard to argue that they aren’t there deliberately to avoid being subject to the whims of Meta/Twitter/Reddit, etc. Like, in a lot of ways, it’s a sacrifice to be on these services because the bulk of content still exists in the proprietary silos. Because the actual protocols and main developers are also intrinsically motivated by the this separation, it’s hard to picture how they could even try to extend/extinguish here.

Like, if Threads fully federates, I’d guess that quite a lot of people block their instance just to keep their hands clean. Those that interact with Threads via Fedi probably fall into the boat that I would. I want some particular content or to follow some people, just not shoveled at me however Meta decides it should be, and not in a way that they can profit from showing me ads. If Meta pulls some bullshit, it’s likely the Fedi would more or less just block them entirely then give up and start a Threads account. And I have a hard time seeing a world where they go to Eugen or basically any of the other driving forces in the Fedi and are like “we need you to change Mastodon so we can [do some typical Facebook bullshit” and Eugen are like “yeah cool with me.”

I think its more likely that Threads users are eventually going to see fedi users dropping a long comment or some post that is about how it’s nice to have a clean ad-free feed and move clients if not over to the fedi in general. It won’t be enough to really matter for Meta other than to say “see we don’t have a monopoly!” and hey, if the fedi gets a little bigger it’s all good for the rest of us.

I didn’t know that. Hmm, sounds like it’s decently likely this is a bit overblown then. I mean, I suppose there are a lot of lazy companies out there that will skip this, but that severely limits the functionality in a way that it’s going to force the secure method.

Sort of. If you’re receiving a notification from a remote server on iOS or standard android, they go through Apple or googles servers. That said, some apps rather than sending your device the actual notification (where this vulnerability comes from) will instead send a type of invisible notification that basically tells the app to check for a new message or whatever and then will display a local notification so the actual message stays on device and inside of the hosting services servers (like a self host.)

I mean, Kissinger can have a layover on his way to hell to get his ass beat by Bourdain. This sounds like heaven to me.

I mean, it’s splitting hairs. While the proximity probably didn’t help, I doubt the companies deciding to pull ads weren’t like “sure, we don’t mind hanging out in a nazi bar, just make sure not to seat us next to any nazis.” I mean, some probably were, but there has been increasingly large amounts of pressure on these people and within like 24 hours of each other Elon endorses replacement theory and the MM story drops that Elon is running ads for nazis. There are only so many times you can make a dumb excuse. For lots of us, that was a long time ago. Even the capitalists are realizing now at least that he’s bad for business.

I, for one, will turn to Scalzi on this one:

This is the “So few people find a festering rat’s anus in their can of SpaghettiOs that finding one shouldn’t be considered an actual problem” argument, eliding the fact that the number of rat anuses in ANY SpaghettiOs can should be “zero”

source

Like, really looking forward to court case when Elon or Yacco have to explain “yes your honor, the thing they said is true, but to get it to happen they had to use our platform!!!” If I had to guess, Elon has to know he’s going to lose, but the point isn’t necessarily a win, it’s to tie up Media Matters in a legal battle that Elon can keep going effectively forever. This is one of his favorite tactics – doing whatever the fuck he wants because he knows the only thing you can do is sue, and he can pay lawyers forever so you’re going to have to blink first.

Fair, I also didn’t realize that I was replying in an Aussie specific community, so this part:

but there was literally a law saying all platforms must be responsible for every single comment on their platform and several of them said they would turn off comments.

makes it make more sense to me why you said that in your original comment. Over here (US) there is very little regulation of these platforms. Basically, they can’t knowingly host CSAM, and they have to respond to DMCA requests. The DCMA is basically just “take down copyrighted material when a right’s holder complains.” We have a carve out called section 230 that really lets companies not have much responsibility for the content they host. So in the US’s case when it comes to these things going back to the hot dog analogy, our tech companies only responsibility is along the lines of not explicitly encouraging employees to allow rodents, or even to police for rodents, it’s basically just if the right people report rodents they have to do something about it.

So in the case of YouTube, for example, I and most other people who know how to build websites can make a site that hosts video fairly easily. Because regs here are so lax, all I really need to do is explicitly state that CSAM/copyright materials aren’t allowed, do a shockingly small amount of work to automatically take it down when reported. Laws over here aren’t really the barrier.

This is just the cable model. You want one channel (Youtube in this analogy) so you have to pay for the 200 channel package because that’s the only place it is even though you don’t want the other 199 channels.

If they threw in all of the things you said and still hiked the price, I’d still bail because not only do I not have any desire for those services, I actively want to avoid using many Google products as I can. The reality for me would be the same as including nothing and hiking the price, because I will still see no value from it.

Indeed, and as I posted elsewhere these days I’m far less likely to buy into a product where it’s not clear how money is being made as was the case for Youtube and the last decade. It’s only been free and easily ad-blockable for this long because the Silicon Valley way is to make a product that really can’t exist on it’s own but survives due to the deep pockets of the company or VC until it dominates the market and then turn the screws. Tie this to the fact these are all publicly traded and there is never enough growth, and we get here.

This is why enshittification is suddenly top of mind for everyone. For the last couple of decades, we’ve been enjoying the fruits of this model and we’re now reaching the part where everything has consolidated and the surviving companies start jacking up prices and so forth. Netflix, Uber, Amazon, Reddit, Google/Youtube, Instagram, Twitter, etc have all done this in one way or another.

But this opinion that some folks seem to have that they are for some reason entitled to gratis, ad-free video streaming is so bizarre.

Agreed, and further if a company today presented this as their model, I would be skeptical as hell and unlikely to even try the service.

That said, I’m not losing any tears for Google. I’m in the US so not subject to this price increase, and while I do pay for Premium and find a lot of value in the service, I wouldn’t be able to tolerate a near doubling in price.

I think you’re mostly correct, but I slightly disagree on this part:

Rules, regulations and restrictions, slowly put up more and more stops for simple small people to enter the space

I think the reality is that convenience simply trumped out. As much as we can see now that allowing the internet to coalesce into a handful of silos, or often only 1-2 silos as is the case with Youtube, years ago the major value they provided was that you could simply go there and find the content. Reddit’s demise reminded me of this more than anything else. I was a daily visitor for quite an array of topics for over a decade. When they decided to fully fuck up the site and I left, I found myself having to think about which of those content sources I wanted to replace and what I’d want to replace them with, and as much as it would be cool for that all to just be “lemmy” the reality is that I now am looking at far more RSS feeds, discord servers, mastodon servers, etc.

I also think that there is a phenomenon that is a bit more insidious at play, and that’s that most of these services are funded by VC or these massive companies and don’t make money for years or even a decade or more until they’ve consolidated the market to basically just them and they can charge whatever they feel like. Youtube follows this pattern. Even after Google’s acquisition, it was quite a while before YouTube became even break-even as they gobbled up the market for this type of thing. VC/Google can sink billions into infrastructure without turning a profit until the market is basically just Youtube, and then all of a sudden we get Adblock crackdowns and near doubling of Premium rates. The only place that might compete with Youtube at this point is probably Apple or Amazon mostly because they’re the only companies that can say “we’re going to lose hundreds of millions or billions for at least a decade.”

Ultimately, I think this is going to be the major lesson from about 2000-2020. As consumers, we should be extremely mistrusting of businesses where we can’t understand how they make money, because usually that just means that the way they make money is to basically monopolize the market and then really fuck us.

Obviously, to ruin the world and complete his turn into a Bond villain, he needed to tank the 5th most popular social media site, which has been proven over and over to have less influence than anyone thinks.

There are a few things I’d consider:

• How many users are going to be on the MC server? MC is pretty notorious for eating RAM, and since most of my home server adventures often includes multiple VMs, I would look for something with at least 32 gb of ram.
• for plex (I’m guessing similar is going to be the case for Jellyfin) how many users do you expect to support concurrently, and how good are you at downloading in formats that the clients support direct play for? Most remote plex users are going to require transcoding because of bandwidth limits, but if you have direct play for most of your local clients or have a good upload and don’t have to transcode 3+ streams at a time, you’re probably fine with just about anything from the last 10 years in terms of CPU.
• also re: plex, do you have any idea in terms of storage requirements? Again, if you’re just getting started < 10 tb of storage in mind, you can get by with most computers.

Anyway, to give you an idea, I run both of these and quite a few other things besides on a Dell R710 I bought like 4 years ago and never really have any issue.

My suggestion would be grab basically any old computer laying around or hit up eBay for some ~$100-$200 used server (be careful about 1u’s or rack mounts in general if noise is a concern, you can get normal tower-case servers as well) and start by running your services on that. That’s probably just about what all of us have done at some point. Honestly, your needs are pretty slim unless you’re talking about hosting those services for hundreds of people, but if you’re just hosting for you and a few friends or immediate family, pretty much any any computer will do.

I wanted to keep things very budget conscious, so I have the r710 paired with a rackable 3016 jbod bay. The r710 and the rackable were both about $200, and then I had to buy an HBA card to connect them, so another $90 there. The r710 has 64 gb of ram and I think dual Xeons plus 8 2.5" slots. The rackable is 16 3.5" slots, so what this means is I basically don’t have to decommission drives until they die. I run unRAID on the server, which also means that I can easily get a decent level of protection for drive failure, and I don’t have to worry about matching up drives and all that. I put a couple of cheap SSDs in the 710 for cache drives and to run things I wanted to be a little more performant (MC server, though tbh I never really had an issue running it on spinning disks) and this setup has been more or less rock solid for about 5 years now hosting these services for about 10 people.

They wouldn’t have nearly as many problems as they did if they waited another 6 months for the initial release. I have a pc with a 1060 card, and I bought it relatively soon after launch, and it was extremely buggy, and I could barely play even at low settings. I made it maybe a 1/3 into the game before I just gave up and decided to wait until it was improved. I just installed again last week and started another play through, and even pre-2.0 it was markedly better and I could get a consistent 30+ fps on medium.

That’s I think the issue. 2.0 obviously contains many more bug fixes, but that’s not really what that release is about and it’s been past just playable for a long time. I actually really like the idea of 2.0, which is not really a bug fix but rethink of some gameplay mechanics that make a lot of sense. Like, it was always infuriating that the best armored clothes in the game often looked absolutely stupid, so I like them making clothing pretty much just cosmetic, and then moving armor to the ripperdoc upgrades. Sure, they could have probably figured that out for 1.0, but once things get into player hands you are always going to learn something. Conversely, Skryim has shipped on every platform with a screen practically and ships every time with the same garbage ass inventory system from 2011.

So yeah, they (the whole industry) should be releasing games that are fully baked, but I really don’t mind the idea that they’re going to take a game and iterate on it more like a platform. I could see Cyberpunk being something I’m still playing in 10 years as long as they keep adding content and iterating, in much the same way that people are still playing the shit out of GTAV.

Your comment, which I quoted in my reply, is itself a speculative and anecdotal piece of data. My “vitriolic” anecdote is literally just an anecdote, which is in no way vitriolic. My “inflammatory” comments? Can we not say fuck on the internet anymore?

I also work in IT supporting various tablets. Have to go back a little bit before USB C was gaining traction, but We mostly use iPads (like 4-5x more iPads) but used Fire tablets with micro USB. The iPads get used like iPads, the Fire tablets were mostly stationary. Since like 2015 when we adopted iPads, I’ve never had to replace due to a failed port. We stopped buying Fire tablets because I had to replace about 1/3 of them due to failure of the port in around 2 years of service vs 8 years on the iPads with no failures.

Granted, this sample size here is only like 50 devices in total so I’m sure it’s just more “vitriolic” anecdata.

your perspective focusing more on negative experiences than positive, etc.

Good point. On the positive side, I’ve never seen a Lightning port fail in my family, my extended family, or from any of my friends, or in my job. Another positive is micro USB is almost dead and replaced by much less trash connectors. Golly gee don’t tell micro USB all the micro USB stans (which I guess have shown up exclusively for this thread) I said that, would hate to offend. Of all of the things I’ve ever said on the internet, boy did I not expect calling micro-usb garbage to be controversial.

I’m skeptical that this happens anywhere remotely near frequently enough to condemn the entire technology. Never seen it, and never heard about it until just now.

I have three kids. I have had to buy parts off of eBay and replace the ports on both of my PS4 controllers. They see way, way less use than any of the kids iPhones, or mine or my wife’s. I have a Kindle that has to be propped “just-so” to charge.

I really don’t give much a shit if everyone in this thread hates apple, but micro-usb is a fucking garbage connector that frankly, USB-C shares too much in common with. If you stepped on a lightning cable that was in a device, you probably need a new cable. If stepped on a micro-usb, you probably need a new device and new cable. USB-C, you need a new cable and you might need a new device (see also, me figuring out how to fix the kids oculus this week.)

that article sources nothing.

They paid for the whole disk, they’re going to use the whole disk.

That would barely scratch the surface, I’m afraid. For quite a lot of America, not owning a car is simply not feasible. I don’t have a large friend/family group, but in 4 cases now, we’ve had to relocate our families a town over because wages aren’t keeping up with cost of living. So we all have long commutes now. There are no buses, trains, etc. We were priced out of housing market. When my landlord sold the property and forced my move 5-6 years ago, I could rent and pay 30% more for a smaller place, I could buy for what I was paying if I wanted to move my family of 5 into a two bed with no yard, etc, or I could move a town or two over pay a bit more, and get a decent size house for my family. Today if I had to buy a house, I couldn’t even come close to affording the place I live in now, especially not at 7-9% interest compared to the 3.5% I got.

Now I guess you could still say fuck me I should have given up my dogs, moved my family into a shoe box and just walked to save the planet, but even then that’s not really feasible. In a town of 60k I moved from, there is only bussing, and even then they don’t run often enough to a wide enough range of places that you’re not building in additional hours of the day to get where you’re going. And they often don’t run past 7pm or before 7am. And that’s most of America. Even in large cities, public transportation is severely lacking compared to the rest of the civilized world.

Biking in the US should also help be a stopgap, but our whole society is so fucking car centric even that’s even not really feasible. Aside from the fact that most of infrastructure rarely has bike lanes or even places to store bikes, its still lacking severely from “I’m just going a few blocks over to the bodega” every few days and is more like “just 5-10 miles to the grocery store.” And this is just looking at my tiny little town where I live that is nowhere near as bad as somewhere like Houston, which is far more populous and also even less dense and less traversable by anything that’s not a car.

In 2023, saying people shouldn’t own cars is either ignorant of the issues around it or just classist. The Rivian CEO saying shit like this, with a starting price of $73k, is just more classist CEO bullshit. We don’t even have the charging infrastructure at the moment to support everyone buying electric, not to mention I’d be willing to bet that 50% or more of this country can’t even afford the starting price on whatever the cheapest electric is.