Would be interesting to combine this with a web-of-trust.
None of my one-hop trusted people are part of the cancelmob. If I found that somebody two hops away from me did something absurd it's quite easy to do something about it -- apply negative trust to whatever path endorsed that nonsense.
Unfortunately people these days seem allergic to running anything that isn't a web browser or served by an app store, and the entities that control those two channels are extremely unexcited about decentralization.
... and how they steer the discussion from "social media" to "screen time".
Wikipedia helpfully selected a picture of somebody using an ebook reader as their illustration of what "screen time" means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_time
I'm just flabbergasted with the level of smokescreen that goes on in this discussion. Pretty sure reading books on ebook readers is not what is driving teenage mental health problems.
It's okay, the Cargo Lords promise me that because they require a git-hub account and agreeing to the git-hub terms of service before contributing, everything will be okay.
where a repo is forked but the new maintainers don't change the repo's did
A DID is a public key. If you don't know the corresponding private key you won't be able to make any updates. All you'll be able to do is mirror it.
instead just get more nodes to follow them than the original
This is like saying "but I can fork Verisign's Root CA certificate and get more nodes to follow me than Verisign!". No, you don't have the private key that goes with that root certificate. So everybody will ignore you.
Thanks for the reply. I see that "repository delegates" is a git-versioned list of public keys corresponding to approved maintainers. So it looks like a fork taking over an abandoned repository would have to use a slightly modified URL to access [0] (until the original maintainer comes back and adds the new maintainer to the delegates list, then the new maintainer can merge the repositories). My confusion (your so-called "popularity contest") came because I read how the "canonical branch" is determined based on consensus of signatures, and I didn't realize that only the pre-approved keys could contribute those signatures.
So, anyone can make commits and seeds will accept the commits from anyone, but the "canonical branch" will only update (on a given seed) if it's signed by repository delegates. The "next strictest" level of control is private repositories, which simply means that Radicle will only send its commits to a peer in the repository's allow list.
My next big moderation-related question is what redaction looks like. Obviously an unwilling peer would diverge from the signature chain at this point, but does Radicle provide any tools for, say, permanently redacting an issue comment? It's obviously possible (but painful!) to do this in regular git for commits.
Suburbs, for better or for worse, have been around for a long time. They cannot explain the massive decline in Generation Z's mental health compared to its predecessors.
PS, next time try to link to housing costs -- that one gets better karma yield. Bonus points if you can somehow denigrate cryptocurrencies while you're at it.
No they haven't! Suburbs as we know them developed as a result of land made available cheaply post-WWII and the automobile enabling the sprawl. Sure there's a bit of a spectrum of how badly developed a particular suburb can be, but without car dependency they could not exist and don't make any sense.
I think they're saying post WW2 was just a turning point that coincided with auto culture. Eisenhower saw the highways in Europe and worked to bring similar infrastructure in the US. This facilitated more people living outside the city one worked in. Hence the sprawl and unwalkable suburbs.
They said "No they haven't!" in response to "Suburbs, for better or for worse, have been around for a long time." But if they haven't been around for a long time, then you have to accept that WWII was a recent event. On the geological scale, okay sure, but on the human scale it happened a long, long time ago. We've raised several generations in the meantime. It does not begin to explain why this is apparently only affecting a group of people born within a narrow set of comparatively recent years.
> This facilitated more people living outside the city
Most people lived rurally prior to WWII. And of those who lived in urban areas, most were in urban areas of the small town sort. If we accept the lack of excitement suggestion, what was so exciting about said rural and small town areas? Why can't people today engage in the same excitement?
Yeah, I wanted to follow this account (always interesting to keep track of feedback, even overwhelmingly negative) and had to tell Safari to “disable content blockers” to log in temporarily to do that.
None of my one-hop trusted people are part of the cancelmob. If I found that somebody two hops away from me did something absurd it's quite easy to do something about it -- apply negative trust to whatever path endorsed that nonsense.
Unfortunately people these days seem allergic to running anything that isn't a web browser or served by an app store, and the entities that control those two channels are extremely unexcited about decentralization.