robryk @robryk@qoto.org

@moonbolt
By "locked" you mean "followers-only"?

@logan @alilly

That would mean that even such simple things as saw or a file are poorly designed (even if you understand the concept of sawing already: should you press down when you pull, push, or in both directions?). Rotary telephones too: it's easy to find recordings of people who are too young to have used them being presented with the problem of using one as a puzzle and finding it very unobvious.

I claim that most cases of devices that you know how to operated ahead of time are cases of devices that are so ubiquitous (or similar ones are) that everyone has been exposed to the required concepts by osmosis.

@moonbolt

Disclaimer: I'm coming at it from a POV of thinking about parallels I can understand better, so I might be just wrong in some pretty stereotypical ways.

tl;dr that's very little information about someone's approach and it seems unreliable when understood perfectly literally

If I cared about communicating with such a person at all, I'd try to understand what is the discomfort trigger, e.g. by weird thought experiments. Would they be uncomfortable around an alien? An alien going out of its way to adopt human culture? Would they be uncomfortable speaking via text with a person of unspecified gender (assuming their native language allows for doing that without contortions)? Speaking with an actor "in role" or one that they more strongly associate with the role who's not "in role" at that time? (If this is about plural people in particular: how does this compare with speaking with identical twins that they can't distinguish?)

I'd also have lots of skepticism about the "will never understand" statement. I'm pretty sure ~no one means such statements literally (as very strong predictions of the future) when they say them. They usually either mean "I don't understand it now and so can't imagine myself understanding it, because imagining that requires understanding the thing in the first place" or "I do not wish to understand, so will actively avoid doing things that would lead to it".

If it's the former, then it might all be an issue of too little information that might slowly change over time and the whole figuring out of how-do-we-communicate-so-that-we-both-find-it-fine-enough would hopefully be looking for temporary arrangements. If it's latter that figuring out would probably be looking for permanent arrangements.

(If that's useful or interesting: the most vivid parallel I was thinking of was relations with people who find it natural and obvious that everyone should be curious of random things in their environment at all times and expect others to be like that.)

I might have completely misunderstood the point of your question. If so, I'd appreciate if you told me so, but don't feel obliged to do so.

@potzerus Do you think that crazy good speeds within an ISP are unrealistic or are you simply imagining something more community-oriented?

@grzgrz W przypadku pisuarów dość powszechne IIRC jest coś typu spłukiwanie gdy wykryjemy obecność przed nim a następnie jej brak. Czy nie możnaby robić tego samego w toaletach?

@yuki2501

Are you saying that this might be used for selective enforcement, or that the total volume of people suggesting illegal things is lowish anyway, or both (depending on the exact case)?

@feditips

It might be useful to note that followers/mentioned/... also prevents a random fedi user from seeing your posts (just like it says on the tin).

@naln1 This is usually true for many people (incl. anyone vaguely similar to me). However, I know people who dislike the actual experience of seeing a particular word in its full form (replacement of curses with some similar words is roughly in that vein, though not entirely). My model of that approach is roughly the same as my model for aversion to seeing nudity.

@porsupah @millenomi

How do you find libraries with good librarians?

@moonbolt

Is the truncation part of the point?