Please, don’t take this to a private conversation if it’s not a private matter. The topic you were discussing would benefit others and being open offers the chance for someone to jump in with a unique perspective.

Now, about the way you expressed your opinion on the assault received. I don’t have a degree in psychology, but I believe you shouldn’t so nonchalantly analyse someone’s behavior after just one interaction and you definitely shouldn’t treat it with levity (“to die on”). Also, personally, I think you should only advise people to seek help when it’s for their on benefit, not because you don’t approve their behavior. You might have had the best intentions, but the language you use is important.

You didn’t ask the same thing.

Reading this comment made me realize that the competition will just copy the system because customers having options is not good for business.

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

Civil and high quality are two hammers educated people enjoy using to bash people without dieting their hands. The article address the fact they couldn’t verify the content of the discussions, but decided the format shows they are better than the ones in which cursing is prevalent.

From my personal experience, I’d agree that trolls don’t invest in their online personas, usually. Getting online in the 90’s meant finding who I was, instead of transplanting my real identity to the internet. Without so much centralization, each one of us were a lot of different people expressing all our different sides in different places. Using the same user name everywhere would end up in nice surprises when friends from one place showed up in another, something that would put us in danger of persecution nowadays.

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.

Sorry to ruin your comment, even though I mean it, but they are only talking about the birds in the nests, not most birds that go with the flow like sheep.

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.

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.

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.

Adapting is a survival mechanism most times. You do it because you have no choice. Conforming would be accepting the status quo, that you’ll always have to adapt because it can’t be changed.

Personally, I believe we should aspire to shrink standards and embrace more variety. It’s more work for a lot of people, but it would benefit everyone in the long run.

Adapt if it doesn’t hurt you. Create space for the other if the only argument against is it’s going to be inconvenient.

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.