I don't know when this meme was originally made, but my boss unironically has this taped to his office door, and it's glorious

I wish people would be more mature about their reaction to this, as well as other people's reactions, regardless of whether they agree or disagree with the choice.

I'm not opposed to piracy, though I understand the risks that come with a platform allowing potentially pirated content. While I respect the decision and see the reasoning behind it, I don't agree with it, and will likely change my home instance to one that allows me to continue communicating with those communities, as I was subscribed to one of them.

I'll still be participating in communities hosted here, and I hope that with this decision, the admins' concern about being potentially sued is substantially alleviated.

I wouldn't call it a matter of need. While I want to see Lemmy grow, I don't think that we should rely on outrage on another platform to drive our own activity in the long term. While the number of users joining has slowed down, it certainly hasn't halted.

All we can do is make Lemmy as solid and enticing of a platform as possible, and leave those on Reddit to choose between supporting a platform they don't like and leaving. We shouldn't be responsible for forcing their hand, but we should be responsible for maintaining a healthy community here.

I think even something like a indie video game developer hosting a forum on Lemmy instead of Reddit would do wonders for making Lemmy "mainstream". Or even a youtuber, streamer, or some other content creator at that. But of course, it's not something I'd go out of my way to do; just something that I think will happen in due time.

Honestly, a pretty valid take, all things considered. I can see why many people would find the headline outrageous, but reading through the article, I think it's a message that a lot of people do need to hear. And I think everyone should read what OP is conveying before jumping to conclusions.

I've seen people on Lemmy with mixed opinions on how Lemmy and the Fediverse should be treated. Some want to expand Lemmy and siphon off as many users from Reddit, while others want to keep the gates tight. Some want Lemmy to remain a small, niche community for enthusiasts, while others want the Fediverse to be a new paradigm for the maintstream internet.

I agree, that Fediverse platforms built up with donations and little to no profit incentive will likely remain dwarfed compared to the tech giants that can afford to give the public the high-end, high-production social media they ultimately prefer. As OP said, that's okay. The fediverse can remain a viable alternative, even if it doesn't become the new #1.

I think this is a message people should hear if they think Lemmy has the potential to outright eclipse Reddit at the moment, or think the Fediverse will take over the entirety of the internet and give the top tech companies a run for their money in doing so.

Videlock is reconsidering being a Reddit mod these days but said Reddit's outreach is an appreciated step in the right direction.

In what fucking world??? How is it a step in the right direction? This "outreach" is no more than damage control. It's a company realizing they fucked up, and wanting to mitigate PR damage without actually fixing their shitty practices.

Buy upvotes?

The sad part is, I can absolutely see this happening. Not as an outright "gib money get updoot" but something more roudabout but effectively the same thing.

"Be heard louder with Reddit Premium! Your comments on posts will be displayed closer to the top for others to see!"

To reiterate, the above is just something I mocked up. May not be upvotes, but still rigging threads by paying Reddit money. I just wouldn't be surprised at this point.

Never really was a fan of the copious amount of awards to begin with. Gold and Silver were fine enough, and they got a point across. If I saw them on a post or comment, I'd have an indicator that someone really liked it, and wanted to praise it beyond giving it an upvote. Silver and Gold were two tiers to this, which coupled with upvotes, was more than sufficient in giving users a metric by which to value posts or comments.

It turned to shit when I start seeing diamond-clad medals, seal heads, unicorns and rainbows, and shooting stars flying across my screen. It took the simple approach and turned it into a clusterfuck of visual noise because the people designing them had no clue about the basics of a user interface.

And then they kill the entire thing because (shocker) it just doesn't work. Typical.

I may be in the minority on this, but I wear pants to work every day, even in the summer, and it doesn't feel uncomfortable. I just like wearing my jeans, and if anything, I've gotten more flak from friends about not wearing shorts enough

21 yo software dev here, so not quite older, but I'd say I fit the tech nerd bill lmao

While a lot of people are conscious about the software they use, I think being involved in tech, either as a hobby or career, ups the chance that a person will care about things like user privacy, how an app is run, algorithms that might manipulate the user, or even how technologically literate the rest of the community is

And that isn't to be condescending towards people who are more apathetic about it. It's like how a doctor might be more behooved to eat healthy; when you've seen and studied what can go wrong, you're more compelled to avoid it

I've noticed my feed can look stagnant if I go by the default, which is Local and Active. I instead set it to Subscribed and New

On Reddit, New wasn't the best since posts were made so quick and a lot of them were low-effort, but at least in the communities I'm subbed to, posts are generally made slower, but are higher quality, making sorting by new valid.

Wouldn't most people just look at the rating average itself for the time being, rather than go through the individual reviews?

Though even if they do the latter, leaving a 1-star review with a well-written and concise explanation about why it scores so low would alleviate the issue of people dismissing it as meaningless drama.

While I hate the shady data harvesting practices of companies like Meta, I do want to play devil's advocate here, as far as the value of data goes, if only for the sake of me understanding the shortcomings of it better. If a company were to dig through your trash can to get an idea of what you want to eat, so to speak, they'd probably find data on a history of foods you have eaten, if you've been interested in burgers, or any other foods you've been interested in. Or if you've been an adventurous eater in general or if you prefer to stick to variants of the same stuff you normally eat.

It may not give you a foolproof way of knowing what your next actions will be, but wouldn't it give a company an educated guess, at the very least? Enough to improve the chances of targeted ads being more effective, as opposed to missing altogether.

If catching the user's interest is a dice roll, then wouldn't the data at least improve the odds of rolling a number you want?