This account is being kept for the posterity, but it won't see further activity past February.
If you want to contact me, I'm at /u/lvxferre@mander.xyz
Even if this is a joke, this is a great example of something that happens all the time: people avoiding responsibility by blaming some chunk of software. The electronic equivalent of "No, sir! I didn't kill that person. The butter knife did it!"
although why you would not want the latest stable version of an app for example is beyond me, like, it's a stable version, you should want the new features
Because most developers don't follow Torvalds' first rule of kernel development: "We don't cause regressions". They're completely fine releasing so-called newer stable versions that are less usable than the earlier ones - removing features, demanding more of the system, letting known bugs to slip through because they assume user case ("it's fine~").
And, contrariwise to the guy in the video plenty, plenty users know this: that the latest "stable" version might cause a regression. But they usually don't have time and/or knowledge to check every single new version of every single piece of software that they might use. So it would be great if there was someone or a group doing this for them, while taking into account that the difference between "this shit is broken!", "this shit is usable but worse" and "this is actually better" is subjective and depends on user case. Right?
Well. That's what a distributor does. This is a critical role of distributions that the video does not address - they sort and trial software versions for the users, based on user case.
because they depend on all the versions of libraries that you would not be able to install on the distro because they would break your system or conflict with a newer version
If library developers did what the kernel devs did, this would not be a problem. So while the video guy is addressing a real problem, he's being unable to pinpoint where the problem lies in; it is not in the distros, but upstream.
duplication, storage, etc.
Is the increased amount of storage necessary a real problem in 2023? I'm not sure given that storage has become dirty cheap even for users, and the cost is usually spread out among the distro maintainers.
Regarding developers releasing multiple versions: usually the ones doing this are the distro maintainers.
I've stopped watching the video at 4:09.
I'm not vegan but my dinner today fits the bill, as long as you use canned chickpeas:
- cut kabocha [pumpkin? squash?] into large chunks
- boil it in water or veg broth, alongside some seasoning
- puree it, send it back to the same pot
- [optional] add tomato paste
- add chickpeas, let them simmer together until the broth thickens due to the chickpeas juice
Amounts are eyeballed (in your case, heart-measured). Seasoning is up to your tastes, but if unsure: I use salt, curry powder, cayenne pepper. It tastes really great with some bread.
And yes, it freezes really well.
This might be related but I've noticed that someone is [likely automatically] following my posts and downvoting them. Kind of funny in a 'verse without karma.
a Haiku bot falls into your “triggered by accident” category (any post that is 17 syllables).
Only if opt-out, as the original Haiku bot in the defunct site. OP however made it opt-in, so in order to trigger it you need two conditions - to actively subscribe to the bot and post a 17-syllables comment. The first one won't happen on accident.
a Haiku bot also does not add any new contextual information (it just duplicates a comment).
Arguably it highlights that the post has 17 syllables in a shape that is suitable to build a haiku with, but in general I agree with you. It is not the kind of bot that I personally would inscribe in my comms, nor that I'd use myself.
Even then, a few people like this sort of gimmick, so there's some subjective value for some people. (Certainly not for both of us.)
so I’m asking OP: “why create a bot to spam lemmy with low-value duplicate content, if you don’t even like that bot yourself?”
OP himself answered it - "I wanted to try something easy to learn bot development on lemmy and a few users were waiting for this and so here I am!"
It's a low-hanging fruit, and a few people wanted it.
EDIT: just to make my position clear, I think that a few restrictions on what a bot can/can't do would be great, specially if they come from the admins. IMHO a good bot should have the following requirements:
- Must be explicitly tagged as a bot, instead of a human being.
- Must perform a specific, well-defined function.
- Must only act once explicitly allowed by either the user or the moderators of a community, through a standard approach.
- Must have a short, succinct output, that doesn't force other users to scroll past a lot of junk.
- Should be non-prescriptive in nature; it shouldn't be telling you what to do.
Again, I wouldn't use this bot, but I think that it already fits all five requirements.
The issue with bots in Reddit was less about their existence, and more about how unsolicited, forced, and pushy they were, since the administration of that site never imposed some limits on what a bot could/couldn't do. But at the end of the day they're just a tool, and need to be treated as such - prevent abuse, don't just kill the tech.
This is easy to prove by looking at the extremes:
- Roboragi - only triggered by request, subreddit-specific, providing contextual information relevant to the discussion
- CommonMisspellingBot - triggered by accident, regardless of subreddit, bossing you around with off-topic prescription
It's clear why one was loved, another hated. And yet both are bots.
And OP is simply testing the viability of the tech here, based on what he says.
The devs have spoken about this. Quoting Nutomic:
Or you could just put a link to your old account into your bio. So this might be a useful feature, but very very low priority. // More useful could be import/export of settings and subscriptions (also much easier to implement).
So there are plans to address this in the future, so you don't lose your data from server migration, but migrating the account itself is low priority. (Even then if someone found a way to do this, and submitted a pull request, they'd probably accept it.)
Because the main instance is a drop in the ocean that the lemmyverse should be, so it makes sense to call it a "millilitre" (ml). [inb4 I'm making shit up.]
I hope that ad blocking features are eventually seen as a killer feature, driving Firefox market shares up at the expense of "you can't even block a fucking ad!" Chrome-based browsers.
If that's gonna happen or not, I have no idea. It depends on how well each side plays its cards. The worst case scenario is Google boiling frogs (i.e. removing capabilities little by little) while Mozilla fails to advertise Firefox in this regard.
This post assumes that a meaningful amount of defed instances are caused by simple lack of agreement. Often, it's an orthogonal matter - it boils down to instance A actually understanding something about the userbase of instance B and saying "I'm not dealing with this shit, it'll make the instance worse for its own users". For example: the typical user of B might be disingenuous, or preach immoral prescriptions, behave like a chimp, or be a bloody stupid piece of trash that should've stayed in Reddit to avoid smearing its stupidity everywhere here.
Are instance admins too eager to pull the trigger for defed? Perhaps, in some cases; specially because it handles groups of users instead of individuals. But those cases are better addressed through actual examples, not through a meme talking on generic grounds.