I'll give you one reason where Firefox blows chrome out of the water: multi account containers:

Firefox Multi-Account Containers lets you keep parts of your online life separated into color-coded tabs. Cookies are separated by container, allowing you to use the web with multiple accounts

That way you can seamlessly have multiple accounts for a specific site open side by side (for example, your work and your personal mail with the same mail provider). Especially amazing if you're an IT contractor who works for multiple clients.

Oh up yours, with your clickbait title. A DDOS is not a hack.

It does reinforce Madison's claim that they want to keep everything verbal, rather than put things on record with HR.

Aye. I remember it being big news worldwide that she tore up a picture of the pope. It was only decades later that I found out it was to protest molestations.

Stupid clickbait title. Here, saved you a click:

O'Connor told them they should call her accountant before they call 911.

"See, when the artists are dead, they're much more valuable than when they're alive. Tupac has released way more albums since he died than he ever did alive, so it's kind of gross what record companies do," she told PEOPLE at the time.

O'Connor continued, "That's why I've always instructed my children since they were very small, 'If your mother drops dead tomorrow, before you called 911, call my accountant and make sure the record companies don't start releasing my records and not telling you where the money is.'"

Why would these people blocking each other have any influence on whether you stay on or leave twitter?

Is this /c/technology or /c/circlejerk?

This is going to get buried, but I think it's important to note that block on twitter (unlike on most platforms) works both ways. You can still mute an account, and you won't see any of their content or mentions.

By removing block, it means you can no longer block a person from following you, but you can still prevent seeing their stuff. After all - all that person has to do see your public tweets is open an incognito browser window, and view your profile. If you have a private profile, none of this applies to begin with. So in that sense, I agree with Elon - block in its current form on twitter makes no sense.

Edit: Responding directly onto your posts - good point, I hadn't considered that. It's partially circumvented by changing the setting so can comment on your posts, but I agree that's more effort. For all the other things though - if you block someone now they can just take a screenshot of your tweet and comment on that.

On my motorola: quick shake side to side to enable flashlight. So easy to use, it's become second nature. I'll have to find a way to replicate that on the next phone I get.

Did they though? It might be my filter bubble, but whenever I saw web3 being pushed I saw a small refraction of responses of people who also thought it was a great idea (typical salesbros - so a good idea for others to do, just not for themselves). But the vast majority of people reject it for being a scam.

So how many people fell for it, really?

You definitely could, but it's not really sustainable.

Worst case scenario: if everybody does this, and there's 50.000 subscribers on a certain community, then that community will have to update 50.000 other servers whenever one user leaves a single message or vote.

Sure, your own server wouldn't have a hard time, but it every popular server (with lots of subscribers) would. It would either take a long time for you to receive their updates, or you wouldn't get them at all.

The best thing you can do, is join a medium size server: it won't be as overloaded as a big server, and wouldn't cause as much strain on the fediverse as a personal server.

I heard that rumor before, is there any source to this? Like, which antivirus companies?

No censorship / unable to delete content? What happens when somebody decides to post illegal content like CP? I know that's an easy target, but either it has a way to deal with that, or it's going to attract a very scary crowd, at least as a subset.

Hi. Lemmit developer/owner here.

You are not the asshole. As you are quite aware by now, the whole point of the bot/Lemmy server is to copy content from Reddit. I know the bot can be quite spammy, and I have no idea why people Request subreddits like these, let alone subscribe to them - since it doesn't copy any comments, even when it EXPLICITLY states so in every post.

When I created the bot, I did so specifically for subs where interaction with OP and other community members is of little value, like !itookapicture@lemmit.online , !steamdeals@lemmit.online and, errr, "grown up subreddits".

That so many people subscribe to "cliffhanger subs" (just the questions without the answers) is beyond me, but it's a side-effect of the model / open market, I suppose. I do intend to keep improving the bot though. Short term plans are for adding some thresholds of minimum karma levels before archiving a post, and putting a sticky on each community that suggests actual, organic communities rather than this.

My end goal for Lemmit is for it to be unnecessary - that all the content people love is created here. But I do know it's hard to let go of some of the content treasures people leave behind.

Last but not least: I sincerely encourage everybody who dislikes the bot to block it, or to ask their server owners to defederate from lemmit.online if they dislike it. That's the beauty of the fediverse, in my opinion.

I'm not sure when or if other servers will stop pushing, but did you unsubscribe from all communities before doing so?

Would be interesting to see if that would stop incoming traffic.

Thanks for putting an actual summary in there. Much appreciated.

No, the whole point is that an isp should not be forced to do anything, unless ordered to do so by a court.

As the title mentions, this an endless chase if you approach it like this. Vigilante mobs aren't going to solve this, it's going to take specialist agencies with mandates to request data civilians can't. Crimes are being committed there (not murders, but a good way to get the scare votes, I suppose), and there are laws in place to deal with that.

As mentioned several times in this thread, shifting the responsibility for what is allowed to be said on the Internet from governments to corporate entities is a terrible precedent.

Edit: Nevermind. I see you're also responsible for this wonderful gem:

The position is intellectually dishonest unless you’re actually pro-killing-transgender people.

There's no point in arguing with you.

On the other hand: nothing looks as cheap as a shattered glass back, or having to use a cover because the default surface is too slippery for 1hand use.

saying that if I don't create an account then they will do it for me

I would report the hell out of them, both to Facebook and HR. That's literally the definition of identity theft.

Although the point is kind of moot - because of all the people who know you, that do willingly share their everything (including their phone contacts, photos etc), Facebook already has a You-shaped hole, even if you don't have an account.

So when I got pressured into creating a Facebook account (not as badly as you were though), I was so creeped out by the amount of data they already had on me, I immediately deleted my account. It felt like being invited into someone's home for the first time and seeing a stalker shrine dedicated to yourself.

"it's okay, I do this with everyone."

No, it really is not.

I'm starting to wonder if complete anonymity on a computer is actually worth it

Everything is so much easier when you put it in absolutes - because it's no longer reasonable.

Are there any practical (non-theoretical) uses for NFTs that couldn't be done otherwise easier/better without them though?

Edited to make it easier for NFTs to show their worth.