That’s pretty unfortunate. I think Pocket was probably one of the best services that Mozilla offered (outside of Pocket). I find it worrisome if Pocket was not a profitable avenue for them.

I used it for a while as my read-it-later but it ended up being too expensive for the usage I made of it.

I’m pretty worried about Mozilla as a whole. I feel that none of the projects I remember in the past 15 years have actually worked out. Pocket, CommonVoice, Servo, Mozilla Location Services… It’s a shame, really.

I hope for them that Relay and VPN still manage to work out though I’ve never really been interested in either unfortunately.

Well, you can disable window controls in gnome and KDE afaik if you want. Then you’ll only have the various app-specific buttons that are necessary for functionality.

If you’re looking for every app to have a vim-like interface or something, well, that seems a bit unrelated to CSDs.

Honestly, I don’t really understand the hate that client-side decorations get. I find that they’re generally pretty useful and good.

I think a lot of it comes from people who want to ‘rice’ and theme their desktops but I personally think that dream has sailed. The kind of theming people want on Linux systems is simply not possible without massive amounts of work and downgrades to accessibility, security and usability.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but for clarification, the fact they’re drawn by the client actually means they can always be the same across different environments. This is in opposition to server-side decorations which are drawn by the desktop environment and should match the environment as a result. That said, server-side decorations are largely much less extensible than client side ones.

Bitcoin is the same speed it’s always been. Blocks happen every 10 minutes. Pay a high fee? Get in on the next block. Want to save on fees? Maybe it takes a few blocks for your transaction to go through.

This is a fancy way to say that it is slower unless you pay higher fees.

Fees are much, much lower than credit card, paypal, or other similar competitors. You could send a billion dollars in a single transaction and pay $1.50 on main chain, or you could send $5 on lightning and pay <1c in fees. Lightning has been around for 5 years now, it works, I use it regularly.

The fees are fluctuating and can be much higher than you claim (https://decrypt.co/234446/bitcoin-fees-skyrocket-okx-exchange-burning-utxo)

While it is true you could pay lower fees if you send larger amounts, if we take your 5$ fee at face value, then any transaction below 147.35$ will have lower fees on a payment service like Stripe (3.4% for international transactions + 0.30$ per transaction).

The supply of Bitcoin, 21 million coins, is known and has always been known. It can’t be diluted beyond that point.

I did not claim otherwise.

Nobody owns 51% of the network. Even such an actor can’t print extra BTC or force money to move without the appropriate private key. The best they can do is temporarily delay transactions while burning north of a trillion dollars in energy and equipment doing so. Which is why nobody has ever done it.

Nobody currently does. However, it is my understanding that theu could fork the network and update it if they had 50%+1 of the network. It is not impossible.

Given that fees have continued to increase with time, this seems like not a problem. It’s not “dangerous”, it’s part of the design. If hashrate drops, it drops, but given that fees and hashrate have continued to grow despite continually minting less coins, it’s not really a problem.

It is a problem because people do not want to pay higher fees.

Anybody can have a cash wallet without disclosing their identity, yet they still pay taxes.

They can pay taxes but they don’t have to. There is no system to know the identity and know the tax rate that should be applied using the raw bitcoin transaction method. This has to be applied using an external centralized service at best.

Bitcoin’s rules prevent the kind of fraud where the value of your money is printed away via supply inflation of central banks or “currency restructuring” on the global scale by the the world bank.

This is not fraud and it is not what I’m talking about.

People pay taxes because they think it’s the right thing to do and/or because the government has guns and makes them. Either way, if you run a company, if you are providing goods and services, you have a place you can send somebody with a gun and enforce those rules. All the companies currently paying taxes would keep paying taxes if they used Bitcoin.

The tax and identity layers have to be added on top. They are not built-in. While it is true a country can force things, it is not true they can force the bitcoin network to apply these rules. This is in fact one of the selling points of Bitcoin according to this video.

This video has seemingly no sources for its claims.

Here are some facts:

• Lyn Alden is part of “Ego Death Capital”, a venture capital company around cryptocurrencies (https://egodeath.capital/team).
• Lyn Alden is the Board Director of Swan Bitcoin - a Bitcoin investment platform (https://www.swanbitcoin.com/alden/)
• Lyn Alden is not an economist (https://www.lynalden.com/about-lyn-alden/)

Here are some weird claims it makes:

• Bitcoin transactions happen at the “speed of light” (~27:00) REALITY CHECK: As Bitcoin has grown, transactions have become slow. It’s in fact why many people do not accept it for purchases anymore.
• Bitcoin cannot be diluted (~27:25) REALITY CHECK: Bitcoin is always being diluted until it reaches its hard limit.
• The value of Bitcoin has only increased over time (~27:50) REALITY CHECK: The log scale is playing tricks. A linear graph would show how volatile Bitcoin has truly been.
• Nobody controls the network (~28:25) REALITY CHECK: If someone were to own 50% or more of the network’s compute power, they could control the network.

Here are some things it omits:

• Bitcoin transaction fees (~28:15): Transaction fees that empower miners have also made it much less usable as a currency. The transactions fees for Bitcoin are so high that credit card fees are actually more reasonable.
• Bitcoin’s hard limit is likely very dangerous for the network (~29:00): Once the hard limit is reached, it is unclear if people will keep pumping computing power at it. If the creation of new Bitcoin is no longer allowed, it is possible that transaction fees will need to be raised to compensate miners.
• Bitcoin’s lack of rules allow for massive amounts of fraud and prevents effective taxation (~29:25): While the video paints a cute picture of financial freedom, the reality is that Bitcoin allows for fraud on a world scale and does not allow for sales tax because of the way that anyone can have a cryptocurrency wallet without disclosing their identity.

Genuinely, this is Bitcoin propaganda.

Taiwan is not recognized by most countries.

Because of the Chinese Civil War (which technically never ended), both the government of Taiwan (under the name “Republic of China”) and Beijing (under the name “People’s Republic of China” claim to be the ‘real China’. At some point in time, most people recognized the Republic of China as the legitimate government of China, however, as the situation stagnated and the relevance of China became more important, most countries now recognize the People’s Republic of China as the legitimate government of China.

As for the NATO question - no, no such rule exists and nobody would want such a rule because it is a defence pact.

Yeah, either that or [any]. I don’t know why people would be offended.

Also, did you mean enby? I just realised you said nimby (not in my back yard) which is not quite the same thing lol

I know there are MSCs to make sure more data is e2ee like reactions.

As for anyone putting that in their platform pitch, it seems the closest was the representative of Gematik, the German Health service though most platform pitches are rather vague in details. You can read all of the candidates (do note that not all candidates were elected so do double check) https://matrix.org/governing-board/elections/2024/

I’ve seen a lot of people specify (any) or a combination in those cases but it is theoretically true, yes. (I don’t think that’s true here though)

Do you care to elaborate?

I can’t tell what you’re trying to say honestly.

It sounds like you are more concerned with the matrix.org homeserver than matrix itself.

No. The foundation also has massive influence in how the clients and protocol develop. These tools that I’m talking about are not built-in for matrix, they’re largely exclusive to instance admins through mjolnir or require the usage of bots. This is not a good state of affairs.

Matrix.org homeserver will eventually go away for personal use, this is the plan for the future.

I don’t believe this is true. I’ve never read such a thing.

The bullet points you listed are all currently able to be realized on any self-hosted homeserver.

Not every room or space will be hosted by someone self-hosting their server. I find it kind of appalling that this would be the solution. It’s certainly not what I’ve heard from people working on projects around moderation.

well the statistic you show does make it clear that little people expressed interest in moderation and/or trust & safety.

As for how I relate cisnormativity and the demographics of the board, I feel that people who may have no experience with harassment may not prioritize the construction of moderation tools.

On the technical side, I’ve expanded here in another comment here.

I’ve personally heard that Mjolnir works not great when it comes to admin things but the biggest problem that I’m aware is that Mjolnir does not really solve the problem for individuals with their rooms and spaces to moderate. I believe Draupnir (https://github.com/the-draupnir-project/Draupnir) is trying to help with this particular flaw with Mjolnir.

One of the other things in terms of T&S is that it is my understanding that the team is too small and the tooling to handle the reports of abuse on matrix.org are not good enough.

As for mod tools more concretely, I think that people who are admins of rooms or spaces should have the following abilities:

• Clearer moderation roles
• More interaction between permissions in rooms and spaces
• Filters for slurs
• Blocking homeservers (in case of abuse)
• Reports that actually go to them

It should be noted that I’m not very familiar with the tools on matrix as I largely have little trust in my ability to moderate there.

The DMA (Digital Markets Act) has clauses that force big companies that are considered “gatekeepers” to allow interoperability with other services.

Images aren’t federated through ActivityPub so I don’t really see how deleting media is supposed to work.

Yes, they are. Every instance downloads everyone’s images for a “cached” version that is currently never used. This is what makes this problem especially insidious and straight up dangerous in cases like CSAM.

It’s a basic curl command, that shouldn’t be “arcane” if you’re setting up a server.

This is the equivalent of saying that any instance admin needs to know how to use curl while most people have never used a commandline. Not only that but you need machine access to know the api key which I would wager instance admins do not necessarily have.

I think this is the result of not prioritising work that makes moderation possible by non-technically inclined people and it is genuinely a failure of the system.

The priorities of development on Lemmy are decided by developers and the people who are not are simply pushed away. Most community leaders and moderators are not developers. The mental gymnastics to justify this lack of tooling is tiring.

They can, if they read the manual. Mods can’t, but instance admins can.

Yes. If you use arcane commands using the docs that are in a pull request that is not yet merged. This is not accessible to many instance admins and it is only “technically supported” which is the worst kind of support from my point of view.