Idk, half the apps look like they are just a fork of one app including sync. Why pay for an app that is mostly just a reskin of an open source project.
It just looks like every other lemmy app. They all look the same with a few things changed and their talking points are so similar from app to app. It’s almost completely impossible to decifer the differences without trying them out. If it wasn’t a fork I wouldn’t know because they are so similar on the play store.
If anything, the Lemmy apps would look like Sync, because obviously Sync has existed way longer, even before Lemmy was even a thing. The more likely reason most of them look the same on Android, is because they’re following some (sometimes older) form of Material Design, the design standard for Android.
It would be easier just to imagine a generic social media app than to copy sync. It would look similar too because sync is pretty generic in feature set, like all social media apps are in feature set. Besides I pay developers for making a good app not paying the developers to make it a good app.
The weird part is that I only got the first one because she’s a PITA to take pics of, so I need to take multiple ones. (She usually stands up when she sees me with the phone, and ask for petting. It’s awful photo material but damn cute IRL.)
From the perspective of someone who isn’t currently in the “Bad If Not FOSS” mindset, this image really gets the impression backwards. To the average user who doesn’t appreciate the user-unfriendly klunk and jank that is inherent to FOSS interfaces, it really feels like the image should depict a bunch of FOSS Teletubbies being intruded upon by a competent Power Ranger.
I used to be a FOSS guy. And then I realized I valued my time and sanity way too much to spend more time troubleshooting and nudging my software into just working normally than I did actually using it.
FOSS software as the underpinning of the platform that is then accessed by a closed-source client is, ultimately, the best circumstance we could ask for. Clients are what the user actually interacts with. If that experience is more engaging and approachable, you get many more users on the platform overall, without threatening the sanctity of the freedom of the FOSS platform it all runs on. There is no one authority to make unilateral decisions to derail the platform, while still offering a more welcoming public face. If you can’t understand that, or don’t care to recognize it, that you’re content to let the platform wallow in obscurity.
What about FOSS software is inherently jank? This is a stupid take that’s likely informed by some bad past experiences, of which I’ve had many with proprietary crapware.
It is easier to find crap FOSS software because it is easier to make & maintain a FOSN project when you’re less competent & you don’t have a strategy for long term success. Proprietary software relies on for-profit motives to improve, while FOSS software relies on user feedback & community incentives. This is why, while the average quality of service from FOSS programs is potentially worse, the best QoS is usually from a FOSS program. See Elk for Mastodon for a fantastic example of premium quality.
It comes from a ten year period of distro-hopping a dozen different Linux distros that ultimately all fell short of delivering an experience anywhere near as stable or reliable as Windows or Mac OS. The closest I got to that was Mint, which I ended up using from Mint 9 thru Mint 17. And then the drivers for my nVidia graphics card just…broke. I had my laptop set up as a dual boot, and until that driver mess, rarely ever booted Windows. After the driver busted, I found myself having less and less interest in spending ungodly hours trying to coax some other distro into cooperating (Ubuntu, Pentoo, Kali, Knoppix). Every distro would have some kind of conflict or missing libs or some other issue requiring hours of fixing config files or finding exactly the correct repo to install from so as not to break compatibility with something else. It just got exhausting, like having a second job just to maintain a functioning desktop that wasn’t full of obsolete or deprecated software. Mind you, I gave up back in 2015. I did wonder if I should have given LM 18 a try when it came out about a year later, but by then, I had largely just moved on from PCs as an interest altogether. I just didn’t have the budget to keep up with hardware, and my job as an over the road driver at a time lent itself to portable gaming and consoles. I couldn’t justify spending another 2 grand on another laptop that would be obsolete in two or three years.
So yes, it is my own experience with FOSS software, and lots and lots of it, and all of the headaches that went along with it. I absolutely adored Mint when it worked. It’s just too bad that that only lasted a couple years, at least for me.
Considering this user made an account on lemmy.ml to post this, and the community in world was made by the same user with a world account, maybe they don’t understand the federation aspect correctly. It seems to happen a lot, and it’s frustrating because it leads to one huge instance in lemmy.world.
Personally, I just think the moral middle ground would be to be the person that slaughters and butchers the animals you eat. It would allow the most respect for all parties imo.
I don’t know. That feels a bit off-center to me rather than middle considering one end of the spectrum is “kill nothing ever” and the other end is “How many endangered animals can I make extinct just for funsies.” If everyone killed what they ate themselves, manually, I bet we’d have a bunch more vegetarians hanging around.
I agree that question is morally neutral. And not yet, I don’t, but that is the long term goal. I’ve got the land I would need and am working on fencing. In the interim, I have switched to meat raised and butchered by hand.
Hmmm, I hadn’t considered it in those particular terms, previously. I would definitely say my actions are less moral than they would be if I was doing the raising and butchering myself. Evil feels harsh but if we are using clear cut terms like good, neutral and evil, then I have to put my current actions in the evil column. And since my entire argument is based on a moral middle ground, I would say yes. I am attempting to move into morally neutral territory.
I’ve been searching for hours, but it appears r(u)Torrent doesn’t have any onboard way to see this kind of all time stats 😕 maybe someone knows a trick how to get this data out?
What’s everyone’s opinion on Re:0 season 2? I absolutely loved season 1 but hated the second season, am very sad to feel like I lost one of my favorite animes so soon into its life
At a office meeting, I shared that I bought street snacks in Asia. Some new guy said, “You got Asian street meat?” And i nodded. He proceeds to tell the whole office about how I got Asian street meat to the confused/nervous laughs from everyone. I didn’t know what it meant.
Manager then called me in asking why did I share that, and I explained. Then he explained what Asian Street Meat was (to my absolute horror), called in the other guy, and went off on him. New guy quit after six months.
Honestly I had no idea what it actually was until the responses to this thread. I just thoughtit was funny. Now my comment is pretty funny without any context.
The younger voters need to band together, take political power then strip all rights and entitlements from the elderly. They've plundered for far too long with no consequence. This is our last chance before they burry themselves with their ill gotten gains and leave us with nothing but active fires.
Millenials outnumber Boomers. But Boomers actually go to vote once every 4 years, which is basically all they need to do to have the outsized effect on politics.
Yes, PETA does some crazy shit, but as with many things there are two sides to the story which is difficult to see when you get bombarded by anti-PETA stuff as is common on e.g. Reddit.
They are the driving power behind all the misinformation and PETA-hate that is spread around. PETA is actually doing a lot for animal rights, that’s why they are such a big target for smear campaigns:
PETA kills animals because unfortunately there are no better places for them. Blame the puppy mills and irresponsible short term owners that give up their pets a few days or weeks after getting them because they had no idea what they got themselves into. Those people create more pets than there are places for them, so instead of having them become strays and further add to the problem, PETA put down those they can’t adopt out. Because PETA accepts all animals, even those that other shelters turn away in order to not sully their adoption numbers, PETA shelters end up with many more “hopeless” animals. See more here.
The case of the mistaken dog (and how PETA doesn’t steal and murder pets):
A farmer asked PETA to euthanise a pack of stray dogs that were aggressive and violent towards the farmer’s cows. Upon arrival, PETA found the pack of stray dogs, took them to the shelter and put them down, as a free service. Unfortunately it turned out, that one of the presumed stray dogs was a pet-chihuaha called Maya, that was not sitting on the porch, as often claimed, but running freely with the stray pack, without leash or collar or supervision. PETA fucked up, because they didn’t wait the 5 day grace period to give the owners time to look for and collect their pet. That’s why they had to pay a fine and apologized for it. www.whypetaeuthanizes.com/maya.html
The monkey selfie:
The monkey took the picture himself btw, the photographer just left the camera lying around. I am not saying the monkey should be copyright holder and it’s an open-shut case, but it does raise the question about the photographer having ownership over something that was voluntarily and independently created by an animal. What if a painter would leave his brushes lying around and an animal would create a painting? The artist actually sees it the same way and settled for a compromise with PETA followed by a joint statement. This was a landmark case in copyright law.
PETA equating milk to racism:
White supremacists actually use milk to demonstrate their superiority over “inferior” (their words, obviously) lactose intolerant ethnicities. That’s the reason behind their campaign on the issue.
Final thoughts (I promise):
PETA does a good job at raising issues and are one of the most successfull organisations to fight for animal rights. The granting of rights is the only real way to protect animals from unneccessary cruelty. Animal welfare will always be arbitrary, both in what species are worthy of protection, and the extent of protection they are worthy of. You cannot consider yourself an animal lover without recognizing the importance of that.
Sometimes PETA (intentionally?) overshoot, that happens when you try to move the border of current perceptions (i.e. animals are objects to be used for food, clothes, entertainment). I am not here to defend their tone or (lack of) tact, and there are a number of (sometimes downright stupid) PETA-campaigns I disagree with. I’m not trying to convice you to become their friend, but at least judge them for what they are doing, not for what they are said to do.
Most of the criticism of PETA you read on Reddit comes straight from the mouths of the Center for Organizational Research and Education (CORE), formerly known as the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). It’s basically a corporate propaganda organization with donors like Tyson Foods, Wendy’s, and Coca-Cola. They also run campaigns claiming obesity isn’t that major of a problem and that you can eat 10 times as much mercury from fish as experts recommend. The vast majority of the animals PETA euthanizes are suffering and are brought to PETA’s shelter by their owners specifically to be put out of their misery, but the CCF distorts that into “PETA is stealing people’s pets off the streets” and Reddit gobbles it up.
The media also knows that PETA is an easy target. Years ago I read an article in one of the British tabloids (the Sun or the Mirror) with a headline something like, “PETA blasts child’s bunny wedding!” But if you actually read the article, what happened is a kid dressed up some bunnies in wedding outfits, the “journalist” reached out to PETA and asked them to comment, and PETA said something like, “we don’t support dressing rabbits in costumes because it may be stressful for them.” And that was the end of the story, but that wouldn’t get clicks so they distorted the headline to make it sound like PETA was protesting or attacking the kid on their own accord.
For the record, I think there are perfectly legitimate criticisms of PETA, like the sexist imagery they use in some of their ad campaigns and their welfarist (as opposed to abolitionist) approach to advocacy. It just gets to me that so many redditors claim to be rational and free-thinking but then read literal corporate propaganda about PETA and swallow it whole without a second thought.
It’s their own materials and marketing, it just gets on my nerves. I hadn’t heard any of those claims about them, so the smear campaign didn’t reach me. I’m a vegetarian anyway, but yeah, I don’t like PETA.
No, I find the way they conduct themselves as an organisation irritating. Because they are brash, rude, and often come across as stupid as in the above post describing the chicken family unit.
lemmy.ml
Active