I’ve seen that on one windows machine with a weird network sharing issue.

Just use Usenet.

By your definition every single news comment section is social media, which is clearly a ridiculous suggestion. Webchat, irc, literally anywhere there’s a comment section. That’s just clearly incorrect and so broad as to be a completely useless definition.

Lemmy has the ability to lock down forum creation, like on programming.dev which is the 8th largest lemmy site.

Social media has always been defined as being about people, not topics. People just don’t even try to use the right words though so you get ridiculous things like people calling something coincidental or unfortunate “ironic”.

A forum?? Which have existed for literal decades before social media was a thing? If you define literally anything social as social media then you’re defining the entire internet as social media which is just a useless definition.

https://programming.dev/comment/12069336

Social engagement has nothing to do with social media. If you define anything with social engagement as social media then you literally are calling the entire internet social media.

It’s absolutely not. It has none of the hallmarks of social media (personal relationship, feed of user activity, likes and shares). It’s a forum. Forums existed for decades before social media. If you define forums as social media then you are defining every comment section on every site, including news sites, help sites, things like stack overflow even, as social media which is clearly ridiculous and so broad as to be a useless definition.

I don’t really understand how that’s YouTube’s fault. They created a good product so people used it and there were no alternatives when it got shit. There’s no lock in. They don’t force you off the platform if you post elsewhere (like twitch did). You can literally post the same video to as many platforms as you want. Sites like Instagram and GitHub have more lock in than YouTube does.

If you block ads everywhere else then it doesn’t really matter. Pi.hole, AdGuard, proton vpn, Firefox will all block ads for you on pretty much every other site on the planet.

I think the price won’t come down until they get more subscribers. I agree that 300 isn’t enough for any sort of software dev, but it’s fine if you’re careful about your searches. I went the first trial month keeping it under 300. When I started paying for 1000 then it was easy to keep it under that. Then they switched it to unlimited which is nice, but I still hardly ever go over 1k. If there was a 1k option I would definitely go with that since you only pay fractions of a cent per search after that so I would save money.

Claiming that everyone who disagrees with you is a hater is inherently dishonest.

I did not claim that. I said that anyone who provided an alternative opinion got downvoted by haters who are so fervent they do not care about facts. Disagreements are not downvotes.

I’m not trying to defend every single person who might have downvoted you, only providing you a counter example to hopefully get you to challenge your assumption.

I’m not even talking about myself. That was one of the first comments I made in the thread. I was talking about others who got downvoted for literally saying they like the bot. It had nothing to do with disagreement.

I can give you an example of what I would consider misinformation from MBFC itself in their bias rating of the BBC. It’s misinformation in my view because this particular example exposed the arbitrary and contentious nature of their bias ratings which they present as though they have some kind of rigour behind it. That is simply not the case. For what it’s worth I provided a discussion on this particular topic which I won’t repeat here but hopefully you can see why I would say it spreads misinformation.

Can you go more into what you think is arbitrary and contentious in that rating? As it is, what I see is that they have provided very detailed reasons for their ratings, backed up with sources and statistics, and then provided a multi-faceted rating to cover each part of that.

Again, not trying to defend every single person who’s been in this discussion, but your dismissal of criticism because everyone is just a hater is not justified, because there are plenty of people raising well thought out and genuine concerns.

you’re the first I’ve seen that actually has commented anything even slightly reasonable.

This user is literally lying about what the thread contains! holy shit the level of gaslighting and misinformation is insane! How can you function!?!?!

There’s literally not a single link in that thread with any evidence, maybe you should go read it yourself.

Not a single person in this thread has provided a single shred of proof for the “misinformation” claim, so forgive me if I don’t believe your very first sentence. It’s just a bunch of people spouting nonsense and not backing it up with anything. If you provide even a single link (first hand source, not a lemmy comment) supporting your argument that it’s misinformation then I will gladly have a conversation with you about how bias ratings can be accurately created.

I said everyone is a hater because I did try to converse honestly earlier in the thread and people refused to provide any sort of proof of misinformation, literally going so far as to say I should just “google it”. Sorry it’s not on me to provide proof for others claims.

No it means that the only people participating in the thread are people who passionately hate it. The same way you only hear negative reviews for things, even if something is great, because most people don’t care enough to put the effort in for positive reviews.

I’m not mistaken. Even Patreon doesn’t claim the apple change will cost 60%. https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/11111747095181-Creator-fees-overview

And 60% of 160 is almost 40%, nice rounding down there to make your numbers sound better. And what the fuck does that have to do with anything anyways??? 30% of 100 is 30%. I’m saying that the creators shouldn’t have to do anything.

Why does Patreon even have a fucking app!? There’s no need for it at all. This ridiculous rise of companies creating useless apps just so they can harvest your info in addition to the info they’re already harvesting from you just signing up.

The law literally is so broad it applies to every website on the planet with a comment section. This will be struck down immediately.

Lemmy isn’t social media. Ignoring that though, the law actually says:

According to the Texas Office of the Attorney General, this new law will primarily “apply to digital services that provide an online platform for social interaction between users that: (1) allow users to create a public or semi-public profile to use the service, and (2) allow users to create or post content that can be viewed by other users of the service. This includes digital services such as message boards, chat rooms, video channels, or a main feed that presents users content created and posted by other users.”

Which literally applies to every single site on the entire planet that has a comment section. This law is incredibly unenforceable.

Apple is not charging 60% more. That is patreon. How this drivel spreads is beyond me. Apple charges 30%. This has been pretty fucking consistent for a decade. Patreon is telling creators to raise their prices because they (patreon) aren’t going to take the loss, they’re going to force it on their userbase. Patreon could easily just eat the 30% or even 15%, but that would cost them profits so they don’t. And then they claim Apple is costing users a 60% price increase. Fucking ridiculous.

Firefox supports custom search on iOS mobile.