An interesting alternative that I’ve found (for when making English breakfast or something similar) is to steep the teabag in the milk first before adding the hot water. I find that it cuts down on the bitterness and makes a much smoother tea.

Transphobic main dev […]

Do you have a source?

Basically, every search engine has incorporated LLMs and are shoving them down your throat. If we are talking about tools that I would find useful I’d rather have a reverse image search. […]

So, for clarity, are you saying that a reverse image search tool is more useful to you than AI integration, yet search engines are pushing for AI integration rather than reverse image search tools, and they may not have reverse image search tools at all?

Edit: damn, that down vote hurt. Must be an llm developer, I guess.

If you are accusing me, I would like to clarify that, as of writing this, I have not downvoted your comment ^[1].

Could you elaborate? I don’t understand what you mean.

the streaming in an SS uniform […]

Do you have a source?

I agree, through the lens of unfetted capitalism, but, with adequate regulation, I don’t think this is a necessary outcome. Although, perhaps “unfetted capitalism” isn’t capitalism?

[…] it doesn’t remove admins from the equation and users still have to choose an instance to be associated with […]

I think that’s a fair point! At any rate, I do agree with you in that I think that users should be completely portable for a truly sustainable federated service.

It could be done without having to clone all data though. Reddit is hosted by AWS and their data is distributed on multiple servers, so replace AWS by a bunch of people like you and me providing disk space for the data and tada, you can decentralized the database and just give people access to interacting with it directly (through code) or via various front-ends that people would create. […]

If I understand you correctly, there is an open issue for Lemmy for an, I think, similar idea of co-hosting communities.

[…] they’re always using the same credentials no matter the website they use and no matter the website they can interact with everything that ever happened on the servers, no one has the power to prevent users from seeing some of the transactions that happened (no admins) because the website they use are just a front used to simplify interaction with the servers. […]

Hm, IIUC, this is one of Bluesky’s issues that the linked blog post was pointing out — if joining the network requires one to mirror all existing data, it makes it prohibitively expensive for anyone to spin up a server to join the network if the size of the network is enormous.

If things were decentralized in similar way to crypto it would be way better for user adoption.

IIUC, are you perhaps referring to something like Nostr?

🐻 “it’s not. it’s not. it’s not. …”

🐻 “it’s not. it’s not. it’s not. …”

🐻 “it’s not. it’s not. it’s not. …”

/j

What about a conditioner?

Yeah, potentially. I honestly just haven’t taken a moment to research an appropriate product, yet. So, if you have any recommendations, I would appreciate them 😊

Oh damn, that’s a lot of cross-posts. I didn’t know this had already been posted so many times before.

Personally, I don’t use shampoo. I find that scrubbing my head and hair using my hands while in the shower is more than sufficient to clean it. Personally, though, I do still want some hair product just for its perfume, though I haven’t found a satisfactory product yet.

If I understand you correctly, you seem to be outlining the paradox of tolerance.

Imo, this is just an argument of definitions. For example, Merriam-Webster’s definition doesn’t require one to be paid in order for them to be called a journalist ^[1[2]]. Whether a one must be paid in order to call themself a chef, however, seems to depend on the definition of “proffesional” ^[3] and perhaps “profession” ^[4], neither of which explicitly require one to be paid ^[4][5].

I just don’t follow what your point is. Could you elaborate?

The process we’re discussing isn’t about verifying the final article, it’s about verifying the source itself.

Okay, sure, but one can’t verify a source if the source wasn’t cited in the first place.

“A young man stole a car” “Man, 28 (link), steals car” “Man, 28 (link), of latino descent (link) commits crime in our town (link)”

Which of these is complying with your guidelines closest and which one is creating a more biased narrative?

That’s a fair point.