copygirl

joined 1 year ago
[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Is this not what the "active" sorting does?

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The idea is that "roguelike" = a game like Rogue, which according to some people, requires checking most if not all of the boxes including ASCII, proc-gen, perma-death, turn-based, ... while the term "rougelite" is less strict. But I think we're past the point of that distinction being adopted into mainstream.

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

The lenses don't have to both be at the same distance to be fair.

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago

Taming animals so you can ride them, or let them pull carriages? Building roads for vehicles? Train tracks with functional trains? Cool airships? All made obsolete with this one-kills-all glider feature! Don't let good game design get in the way of convenience! /s

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 month ago

The real question is not what the algorithm pushes to you, but whether their moderation actually bans bigots and removes their posts. Any other instance would lose their "right" to federate with a queer-friendly instance if they didn't do that, so why would Threads get an exception?

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Isn't "queer friendly" and "federates with Threads" an oxymoron?

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Indeed, it's a neat way to visualize gravity, but that's it. It lacks any sort of explanation of why masses appear to be pulled towards one another. (I will point to the other person in this thread saying it "explains gravity with gravity".) This is why I think the metaphor you mentioned detracts from the original video.

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I think that explains the "how" more than the "why".

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I don't think that's how it works and it would likely not be legal. By explicitly blocking Threads, you make a big statement about not wanting your instance's posts to show up there. Also from a technical standpoint, I don't think a "middle-man" instance will push posts from another instance to a third one. You'd have to explicitly scrape data that's not available via the API. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Could you please provide some sources for that? I'd like to know more.

First of all though, there is no such thing as a "hostile fork". Being able to fork a project, for any reason, is the entire point of open source. And to be fair, not wanting to continue working for a for-profit company for free is a very good reason.

And yeah, when you suddenly turn a FOSS project that's been developed with the help of a bunch of contributors, into a for-profit company, without making a big fuss about it beforehand and allow the contributors and community to weigh in, then yeah, that's a hostile takeover of sorts, at least in my opinion. Developers gotta make money, but they could've done that by creating a new brand instead of taking over that of a previously completely FOSS project. Forgejo is preventing that exact thing from happening by joining Codeberg (a non-profit).

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 133 points 2 months ago (4 children)

There's been a hostile takeover at Gitea and it's now run / owned by a for-profit company. The developers forked the project under the name Forgejo and are continuing the work under a non-profit. See also: Their introduction post and a page comparing the two projects. Feel free to look up more, since I haven't familiarized myself with the incident all that much myself. Either way though, maybe consider using Forgejo instead of Gitea.

view more: next ›