volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@parismarx I don't think that's quite right as I see so many people who aren't Elon Musk highlighting those sci-fi dreams regardless of the business model of SpaceX.

Basically, WE are promoting that myth, regardless of Musk. We're doing it to ourselves.

SpaceX is a real company with real administrators who aren't Musk. Let's not be distracted by the myth of Musk.

@GossiTheDog the difference is that it's so much easier to monetize a centralized platform. It offers so much more value to investors because of that.

Fediverse is worth less as a revenue generator specifically because it rejected the model that enables that revenue generation.

@BohemianPeasant The Atlantic is wrong. The author here simply doesn't understand the legal procedure or the ruling that came out of the Supreme Court.

Or, perhaps the author does understand it but decided to put out a sensational article instead.

Either way, promoting this sort of misinformation is not healthy for our society.

The Atlantic always seems to be putting out this stuff, and the outlet needs to be called out as untrustworthy.

@petersuber no, it's not that delay is victory. It's that the case against the democratic process wasn't solid.

@m

We're taught that the mixing of water and salt was to replicate seawater with the idea that when international researchers wanted to calibrate their instruments by freezing water, seawater was more available than pure water.

@freemo

@freemo Well, would you agree that 2 inches or even 5 cm is more intuitive than 50 mm? Many of the same reasons, I'd say.

One is a matter of scaling of error. If your perception of any unit is off by a bit, then the more of the unit that you stack up stacks up those errors too.

You might intuitively know about how big a cm is and about how big an inch is, but once you start stacking them, the errors add up.

@freemo you say proper precision and grading, but that's the whole point: in so many real world applications we find that the precision and grading isn't the most convenient for the work in front of us.

Say you're aligning a platform by eye, see that you need to raise it by about the length of your thumb, so you call out to the lift operator to raise it by a quantized amount.

"Two inches" happens to be a pretty convenient call out rather than "five centimeters" or, heaven forbid, "fifty millimeters."

It's simply more intuitive at common human scales.

Or, to put it another way, they're big and bulky, which is perfect for dealing with big and bulky human scale tasks!

@Beachbum yes, that sort of conspiracy theory is sadly often promoted these days, but it doesn't stand considering how the US government is actually designed and functions and has non-optional features in place specifically to make such a thing impossible.

As we saw throughout Trump's first term.

It's simply not an option on the table, despite sensational claims by interests who benefit from promoting such stories.

@peltast the court documents say otherwise, and the agencies themselves say they didn't follow those practices.

Rather they say it doesn't matter that they didn't follow them.

Again, this has nothing to do with whether the drug is actually safe, only that the safety rules were or weren't followed.

No harm no foul only goes so far when it applies to legal compliance.

@freemo as we apply measurements, we disagree :)

We find that, for example, inches are scaled far better for so many projects than cm or mm, in the same way that degrees F are scaled better for human application than degrees C or K.

When it comes down to something ranging in size from around a baseball up to a table leg--roughly human sized things--the royal feet units are simply more practical, so we prefer them.

They make more practical sense.

@asmodai the problem with this sort of claim is that the Supreme Court tends to be applying the rules that were in fact achieved through the elected branches of government.

Well, the legislatures specifically.

@freemo meh, plenty of us are proud to use royal feet over scientific meters because they just make more sense for the particular application.

We proudly use the better tool rather than following the crowd!

@Linux not everything is about getting follows.

Sometimes we share content because it's simply worthwhile in its own right, regardless of where it's coming from.

@BeAware@social.beaware.live exactly, and that's what bothers me so much, a lack of transparency for users to make up their own minds.

There are far too many users on here posting content under the belief that it's much more private and safeguarded than it actually is, that end up surprised to hear how little control they actually have.

I see it almost every day, and it really worries me.

@vetehinen yeah, after your reply I went back and skimimed the docs again, and I think you're right.

It looks like BlueSky emphasizes giving users control over their content and yet admits that they don't think they can really do anything to enforce this.

@BeAware@social.beaware.live right, if you form a splinter Fediverse made up of only instances that are 100% trustworthy, that have all implemented security policies to lock down ways their users might be using their services, then you can block this from happening.

But that seems pretty unrealistic to the way people are imagining Fediverse growing.

A single bad acting instance in the whitelisted network, or a single hacked instance, is all it takes to undermine that firewall.

@erik

@Hyolobrika yeah, there are a few other platforms that didn't have these problems.

IMO, the key is focusing on users instead of instances. ActivityPub chose to put the control in the hand of instances instead of users, but other platforms are user-first.

That makes the difference.