Spzi
reddit refugee
here to stay
I know that is bs because I haven’t been there in days and I probably added 100 visits a day to their stats. So they’re at least a couple hundred shy.
The article mentions 55.31 million daily visits (average). You decreased their stats by 0.00018%. Even if all new active lemmy users had your level of activity, the other site would still return to normal. There are just so many other users.
I know that I am not back. And I won’t be back, and I think a lot of people are staying away as well. That the traffic is now normal seems a bit sketchy.
I’m afraid that’s just bubble bias. Most people just don’t care or haven’t found a viable alternative yet. These +43k active users on Lemmy are huge for Lemmy, but not even a scratch for the other site.
After the initial exodus at the start of this month, you could see more and more comments demanding returning to business as usual.
there’s a bug where voting causes all of them to become uncollapsed at once.
The title made me think it could not fly. It can fly!
The biggest issue from my point of view: They can only transport one (1) passenger at a time.
Even with 100% renewable energy, that is a wasteful and ineficcient way to move people.
Utopia (from Ουτοπία) is an impossible Vision of the future, while Evtopia (from Ευτοπία) is the best possible Vision.
Interesting. I never heard of Evtopia, and I also did not understand Utopia as necessarily impossible. Could be possible or impossible, depends on context.
- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/utopia
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia#Etymology_and_history
I also don’t think being unreachable is necessarily a bad thing. Consider an ‘Ideal’. Although some ideals may never be fully actualized, they are seen as something good and worth pursuing nevertheless.
But mostly, I don’t think the opinions of proponents or opponents of this idea are swayed by wether we call it Utopia or Evtopia. If anything, using the more common term makes it more relatable.
You’d think if it was all basic biology we would just have a unique gender for every one wouldn’t you?
Nothing in biology is exactly identical between individuums. A common eye color is brown, although there are as many shades of brown as there are people.
It is just practical and how language, or even perception works, that we tend to categorize similarities, and strongly favor common occurrances over outliers.
the doctor is describing your phenotypic sex based on observable characteristics.
Your doctor is assigning you a gender.
Maybe you two aren’t even disagreeing?
I’d say the doctor tries to assign the new born into male or female according to biological sex, and gender is inferred from that.
He calls you either a boy or a girl based on your genital configuration
Yes, that’s what I mean. A two-step process. First, biological expression is assessed. Next, based on #1, social gender is inferred.
Sorry for being unclear. What I meant is:
These actors play nice until they are too big to ignore [as a presence in the fediverse].
When they run the most and the biggest popular communities on their instances, do most of the development, offer the best tools and services in the fediverse, they have become too big to ignore.
If they then start playing dirty, it is too late to defederate them. They will play dirty. Let’s not make ourselves dependent.
