Man, please, learn to read. My whole point is that you should not care about what people upvote.
So once again: if you are okay with the original comment/post - which means you are fine with keeping Nazis on and what they have to say on your platform - then you should be okay with people who “react” on that content.
Or maybe you aren’t fine with it, so you should delete the offending post or comment, and then you won’t be bothered by the reactions either.
I think that if you allow that question in the first place, voting on it should not have any consequences either.
Besides, despite what most people instinctively think it’s better to see what you disagree with so that you can keep your eyes on it rather than forcing it into hiding and knowing nothing (again, in moderation - you probably don’t want to run an actual Nazi instance, so if it does bother you you should moderate that post/comment).
And mistakes still happen; it’s easy to accidentally upvote/downvote something by mistake, to misunderstand someone, etc. So yes, I do think banning people based on what they up/downvote is a bad idea.
perfect example is when a nazi says “based” in response to an article about someone being racist and it gets like 20 upvotes. I don’t think anyone reasonable would be against a banwave on something like that.
I would absolutely be against that. Voting should not be bannable outside of vote manipulation itself. If the content is offending, remove that (and possibly ban the user), but not people who vote on it. That’s just stupid “guilty by association” nonsense. And besides, voicing stupid opinions (in moderation) is still better than suppressing free speech.
Lemmy just chooses to hide them to prevent the “chilling effect” where people feel afraid to vote honesty for fear of repercussions.
I find that kinda stupid as well. It leads people to think that their votes are private when literally anyone can view them with a bit of work. Sure the chilling effect sucks but it’s better than misleading people. At the very least they should be warned when they sign up.
It’s fairly common to give a (sense of) a good deal to new people while raising a bit more money roght now than you would with a traditional subscription.
Then later when you start getting more users quicker you cancel that offer and nee users have to use a subscription (which will make you more money over time).
Protonmail did something similar originally, giving out Visionary for life for a (large) one-time fee. It’s a decent strategy to raise money from people who believe in your product.
The difference with Linux kernel is that it’s way more complicated to persuade someone who just likes the idea of it to install it, so there’s really no protection needed - if you’re installing a custom kernel (or more likely, a whole OS using that kernel) you probably know enough not to end up downloading malware.
That’s not so true about just providing “random” APKs.
When someone builds a skyscraper and then you take one small unit in it and paint the walls a color you like and change the light fixtures, would you say that you built the skyscraper?
Because that’s what Brave (and everyone else who builds on top of Chrome codebase) does.
When the builders then decide to remake the wiring in the whole building so it doesn’t work with your new light fixtures you bend over and take it because you don’t have a choice - you have nowhere near close enough resources to remake the whole wiring for yourself.
That’s Google’s power over the forks.
Ehh there is only so much a single person can care about. If you have a life and aren’t effectively an activist/lobbyis by profession you can’t care about politics both local and global, preserving nature and ecolody, world hunger & disease, and a million other things like which software company is less evil all at once and follow through 100%, supporting all of the causes meaningfully.
Not to mention we have to make compromises, too.
There’s one and literally only one browser that actually stands for all the things the most vocal people around here claim to care about.
Hard disagree. Firefox had its fair share of controversies, it’s still technically funded by Google (while not accepting donations), and Mozilla Foundation as a nonprofit is pretty questionable too.
The leadership of Mozilla Corporation is shit too like any other corp; they lay off engineers and give themselves huge bonuses.
It takes them years to even acknowledge simple bugs, let alone actually getting to fix them.
A huge part of why Firefox lost the “browser wars” is also that they failed to make it easy to build into other apps so it could work more like Electron, while also pissing off users with surface changes that break their workflow.
Overall it’s better than Chrome especially if you care about privacy, but it’s not a huge win.
I think its almost good its forced on normies
Sure, but ideally there should be an option to opt out for most things. Sometimes you get forced into it for the dumbest stuff.
And, like, don’t forget that everyone’s use case is different. For most people, Google account is really important. But I might use it as a burner account and not care about its security almost at all. Then MFA is only annoying.
is it really that much to have a separate password-locked 2fa totp app
I use PC for most of what I do (both work and leisure). There’s a major difference between having TOTP autofilled and having to find my phone, pick it up, unlock it, find the authenticator app, click/find the correct authenticator, then typing in the code.
Again, depends on the account, but for the vast majority of my accounts it’s complete overkill.
Doesn’t help that many providers don’t properly remember devices/logins. If I had to sign into a given account once a year I wouldn’t care much. But when it’s monthly or more (for many, many accounts), and half of them don’t even remember the device and ask for OTP every time, it truly is a pain.
if your main computer gets compromised or keylogged, then accessing one 6-digit code is worthless unless used in the next 30s, unlike the totp secrets
Realistically if my main computer gets compromised I’m royally fucked either way. I try to be safe in general, know what I’m doing for the most part (definitely more than your average user, though that’s probably true about literally everyone on Lemmy) and in like 20 years since I had access to a computer I never had an issue, so I’m probably doing something right (and I used to do way, way dumber stuff on much less secure systems than one has today).
But yeah, you’re right I probably shouldn’t have OTP in my password manager at least for my primary email. I’m sure I’ll get to fix that someday…
You are only at a 1FA level if someone hacked your PW-Manager but in that instance you’re most likely fucked anyway
As long as you at least have actual, separate 2FA for access to your recovery email(s) you should be more or less fine.
Unless you mean that if your password manager is compromised it probably means that your device is compromised, which also means that you’re probably also a victim to a session hijack for the recovery email(s), in which case you are truly fucked.
You can also have a multi-level approach where for “higher value” accounts you have a separate password database so the more valuable accounts aren’t exposed as much as everything else… There are definitely options.
The “value metric” that pisses me off the most is per user pricing when the service doesn’t incur costs per user.
Even in cases where there is a cost per user (or there is at least a correlation in cost increase with number of users) the price is usually many orders of magnitude larger than the cost increase.
Life isn’t a zero sum game where you have to optimize material wealth. Some people do things for others just because they like doing it, because they have the means to do so, or because they simply want to help others.
Sure, there are costs involved, but that’s true for literally everything if you account for opportunity cost. The vast majority of people choose to waste time completely unproductively, with no objective benefits to their lives (often with objective disadvantages), so is it hard to imagine that some people aren’t like that and instead choose to help/provide for others whole perhaps having some other non-material benefits like learning something or just becoming liked within a community?