Also find me at @[email protected] and @[email protected]
Thank you very much! I wasn’t aware of these guidelines so it’s interesting to read
I think the notability is a little hard to define, so I could see some discussion happening, especially about more minute details like individual items in games. But it seems like, based on the existence of a Krillin page, that there is at least some precedent for somewhat broader topics
I see what you’re saying, but also I don’t think those analogies are necessarily fair. I don’t think putting Yoshi’s birthday on Wikipedia instead of Yoshipedia is quite as critical as a central bank failure
We’re on Lemmy, which is an aggregation source just like Wikipedia. Some knowledge is only stored here, while other knowledge is an external link. It’s not a bad thing to be a central point of information as long as it is a community-driven process with high levels of transparency, like Wikipedia.
Lemmy, however, works differently from Wikipedia or Reddit in that multiple services work together to be that aggregation source, which is great, and Wikipedia doesn’t have that, which is not great. So that of course could be better in an ideal world, and I would bet there is a federated Wiki service already out there
But, I’m not talking about life changing information here, I’m talking about what happened to Krillin in episode 700 of Dragon Ball Super, I think it’s okay if that information lives in one central location - especially since you can always just watch the episode again to verify
Do you happen to know where in the rules it would list the “level of relevance”. I did a cursory read through of the content guidelines but I didn’t see anything that would necessarily exclude descriptions of specific video game content, levels, or assets, but I’m no master at Wikipedia - I can’t say I’ve contributed much beyond donations.
Also I did mention those unique features some wikis have. For example, the Old School RuneScape Wiki has some really great calculators, maps, and data collectors, so I’m very happy with those. But for less popular ones where nobody is putting in the work to make the wiki exemplary feels like we may as well save time and not give Fandom money by using Wikipedia
And look and feel I would say is good unless it’s a fandom, and then all the look and feel in the world doesn’t justify those ads
One thing that recently had me pondering was why do we need separate wikis, why not just add the information to Wikipedia? Unless your wiki has some feature Wikipedia doesn’t support, it just seems to provide a background image and ads.
For example, I was looking up some Dragonball information, and their wiki was really sparse and didn’t answer my question. So I randomly tried Wikipedia and it had all my answers
My only guess is some Wikipedia usage rules that say not to but I find that unlikely
A couple options here: https://github.com/offa/android-foss?tab=readme-ov-file#-call-blocker--spam-filter
None of them are very big but they may be worth a try
The first two reasons, to me, feel like excuses to hide the true reason(s) they cheat. I’d wager it varies per person but that many just want to be seen as cool or skilled by having everything or beating everyone. It seems equivalent to people who modify cars to be extremely loud; despite many saying the contrary, they’ve convinced themselves that people love to hear their loud cars go by.
It could also be the anonymous effect of online games. They don’t quite perceive themselves as cheating, really, because they don’t know the players and will never know them. It likely feels like NPCs in a video game, for the most part. If there were actually social pressure, like would be in a schoolyard game of football, then far fewer would be willing to risk the social ostracization. But because they are anonymous online, they feel safe and empowered to cheat.
Yeah the news of this non-recusal came too soon after the other recusal. Very confusing timeline if you didn’t know there were two cases
The mathematical proof is that Elon owns several hundred million Tesla shares and his holding or selling of those shares will impact the share price of the judge’s shares. Up or down, the price will be impacted, that’s just how markets work. If he is forced to sell those shares to fund X, the judge will be impacted.
Also, you shouldn’t really need an exact proof for the judge’s recusal. There is a chance he is impacted by the result of the case in a significant monetary way, so why not pass the case to a judge who doesn’t have these connections. This isn’t the last judge in Texas (just one of the most partisan) so there is far greater upsides to recusal than downsides.
Why risk the optics of impropriety when you don’t have to?
For anyone confused by this headline, there are two trials this judge is considering for X
[O’Conner] was overseeing two lawsuits filed by X and recused himself from only one of the cases.
This isn’t the new case about the “illegal boycott” O’Conner has recused himself from that trial (likely) because he also owns stock in Unilever, one of the defending companies
In my opinion, it comes down to the wording of the U.S. judges’ code of conduct
A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned
While the link between Musk’s two companies might be debatable, it definitely raises “reasonable questions” about whether or not the judge can be impartial. It is much easier to recuse oneself then to try to deal with a mistrial, so the judge not recusing themselves is extremely suspicious.
Also, as to evidence to whether Musk’s involvement with X has impacted Tesla stock, that has been a matter of debate for a while. X is in a dire financial situation because of the loans taken out during the buyout. If they cannot get advertisers back on the platform, then either X goes bankrupt or Elon has to chip in his own money. Musk’s money is mostly locked in to Tesla stock, and if he sells a large number, the stock will inevitably go down. Therefore, if Elon loses this case, it is very possible that the judge will lose money.
I just wish people were less aggressive when arguing on the internet. It just gets so vitriolic and about winning rather than finding the truth
I also hate when people think “downvote = disagree” when that’s really not what we should be using it for. I never down vote in a debate (unless they get rude or offensive) and I always feel bad when someone comes along and down votes the person I’m arguing with! Now they’re going to think it’s me doing it and get angry!
I mean, I’m not much of a tinfoil hat, but this article feels extremely conveniently timed for Intel, who is currently going through a massive ordeal with their chips. Especially considering that the vulnerability is so extremely difficult to exploit that there’s borderline no story here for 99% of people but the headline will still drive clicks and drama.
Also how is this being exclusively associated with the US?
I mean I get it, we like guns and this is the US version of Amazon, but it’s not like we have these toys in every household. And it’s not like other countries don’t have guns present in their culture (video games, movies, etc.).
They are most likely produced in China and are definitely going to be uncommon.
It’s like making a post “the US has 80-gallon drums of lube no joke”. It just feels like rage bait with an anti-US agenda
Edit: Got home and did the most rudimentary search on the U.K., France, and Swedish version of Amazon. An identical or closely similar product is available on all of them.
To be fair, moving to the top allows for much more space for the list of predictions, so there’s at least some benefit to ir
While data privacy is a concern, in my opinion the real fear motivating the government is the massive control China has, indirectly, through TikTok, over citizens’ beliefs and culture.
As another comment pointed out, Facebook (and Cambridge Analytica) had an enormous role in Donald Trump getting elected. That is the kind of influence and power that shouldn’t be in the hands of a foreign power (ironically, it’s the kind of power the US has wielded for generations over many countries). And the US especially doesn’t want China or Russia to have that power.
If China felt inclined, they very likely could push to have the algorithm modified to fit a particular agenda - say perhaps promoting a pro-China candidate - and most users would barely notice and slowly be drip fed posts that nudge them in a particular direction. People in power could start to lose that power at the behest of TikTok.
As many will likely point out, there’s a good arm’s distance between China and TikTok right now, as far as we know, but it’s possible they are more involved than they let on (much like the NSA and Facebook) and could become more involved over time. It’s a risk the government is unwilling to take.
A good example of what kinds of things can happen is when TikTok published a post to every US user with their congressperson’s number, urging them to call them to protest the ban. I’m certain that scared the shit out of the US government and probably did more to force the ban down mid than anything else.
Didn’t he cheat on his wife and get caught as well?
How does that make sense? How does putting a “Download PDF” button on their site with no restrictions make this a “me” problem?
They definitely weren’t monitoring the one at a time rule… I downloaded the file and now have it forever
Just added this to my browser this morning, coincidentally! Not sure what thread it was, but I thought it was this one. Thanks for the link though, it’ll be a big help