Mastodon Feed: Posts

jscalzi@threads.net ("John Scalzi") wrote:

That whole boygenius album was fantastic

RE: https://www.threads.com/@broreenjonathans/post/DW9i8nDCOKH

jscalzi@threads.net ("John Scalzi") wrote:

Not sure where in the scriptures it says Jesus was a grifting adulterous pederast

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-sparks-fury-with-image-of-himself-as-jesus-antichrist-spirit-11818578

Boosted by jwz:
Paul_Taylor@mathstodon.xyz ("Paul Taylor") wrote:

I have been using email for 40 years. It used to work.

As an (independent) academic researcher, I need to contact new people, primarily in universities, to ask questions.

I refuse to use Google, Microsoft or the other American IT giants.

But they are increasingly preventing refuseniks from sending email at all.

I know what RFC, DNS, MX, SPF and DMARC mean. My email goes through small British companies with intelligent, friendly and helpful staff.

mxtoolbox.com says that I must have DMARC to send email to M$. So I set it up. I now get a dozen copies of the same report from G or M$ for each email that I send out.

They show that my email gets to G and M$ sites, but then it is marked as spam.

The stupid senior management of numerous universities has surrendered their staff email to M$.

Web searches and AIs preach about spam. I don't send spam - I want to contact my colleagues.

Rumour has it that previously unknown senders are treated with suspicion and their emails are sent to spam. In other words, it is impossible to **initiate** communication with someone.

Let's be blunt about this. They are a mafia that is enforcing an **oligopoly**. It's got nothing to do with reducing spam --- I have no doubt that they let through emails from "trusted partners", ie companies that bribe them enough to send their spam.

The result of this is that it will only be possible to send emails by paying M$ to do it, and then it will only be allowed to express "approved" opinions.

What can we do about this?

At the very least, those of you with senior positions in universities can tell your management to revert to competent standards-based email systems hosted on Linux systems.

Boosted by ChrisWere@toot.wales ("Chris Were ⁂🐧🌱☕"):
_elena ("Elena Rossini ⁂") wrote:

@reiver if I may be blunt, I think many creative people (and journalists and politicians) are too attached to vanity metrics even if their engagement on Big Tech platforms is very low. They may be afraid to start over on yet another new network where they'd have 0 followers.

This year I'm all in trying to help cultural institutions get on the Fediverse... I think once some big players are here (museums, galleries, media organizations) others will follow

Boosted by GuillaumeL@hachyderm.io ("BigSaur G"):
RickiTarr@beige.party ("Ricki Yasha Tarr") wrote:

Who could have possibly anticipated this? Oh everyone, that's right.

Also, ONLY 4%!

Boosted by glyph ("Glyph"):
iris_meredith ("Iris") wrote:

A new article: this one's an extension of last year's article on the subject of wank, and it discusses why wank is discursively effective despite being annoying as hell. Many thanks to @dahukanna and @whitequark for productive conversations on here that led to me developing some of these ideas:

https://deadsimpletech.com/blog/why-redacted-wins

db@social.lol ("David Bushell 🪿") wrote:

totally serious notes on Skill Issues:
https://dbushell.com/notes/2026-04-13T05:35Z/

anyway, happy Monday!

soatok@furry.engineer ("Soatok Dreamseeker") wrote:

https://github.com/fedi-e2ee/public-key-directory-specification/issues/118

Boosted by glyph ("Glyph"):
chriswarcraft.bsky.social@bsky.brid.gy ("Chris Kluwe") wrote:

OZYMANDIUS IS WEAK ON HISTORICAL RECORDS

Boosted by glyph ("Glyph"):
jacob@jacobian.org wrote:

I think it’s worth remembering that nonviolence is a tactic, not some sort of universal moral imperative. There are certain situations where nonviolent activism was effective. And others where violence prevented far worse outcomes.

glyph ("Glyph") wrote:

Ultimately every good regulatory regime needs to be designed by people who know that they are themselves supposed to be protected by the same rules. Our leaders are not "our betters", a special class of people endowed with better judgement who should have different rules, just a group of people we have entrusted to represent our interests. Political representatives need to think of their constituents, even their constituents who are minors, this way. They are stewards, not lords.

glyph ("Glyph") wrote:

But, even that framing is still "othering" the problem (assuming that your representative is not a 22-year-old woman). The best way to think about this from a regulator's perspective is to ask the potential regulator: how do you want the regulation to impact YOUR behavior, rather than kids'? If the choice is "stop allowing Instagram to trick kids" vs. "stop allowing kids to access instagram" this feels like a nuanced debate; making it "stop allowing instagram to trick ME" the discourse sharpens.

glyph ("Glyph") wrote:

Anyone interested in solving the problem of e.g. Instagram-driven anorexia would be much better off banning Instagram's machine-learning algorithms whose entire job is to get vulnerable young women trapped in cyclical problem behaviors, not getting involved in draconian liability regimes where it's OK to do this to a young woman who is 22 but illegal to do to one who is 17 even if the technique is equally effective on both

glyph ("Glyph") wrote:

Engagement-maximizing has a whole bunch of problems. It creates a nonconsensual, exploitative feedback loop. It's bad for kids; it's also bad for adults. It does not appear to be meaningfully *differently* bad for kids vs. adults.

It is justifiable to age-restrict things that kids are A) especially vulnerable to (cars) or B) developmentally affected by (alcohol & drugs).

Neither seems to be true for "social media". (Source, vaguely: If Books Could Kill's episode on The Anxious Generation)

glyph ("Glyph") wrote:

RE: https://mastodon.social/@glyph/116240274811219588

One can generalize my thoughts about "junior engineers" to "adolescents" in many cases. Children *are* different from adults, but far less different than popular discourse would have you believe. *Most* of the idea that they are a special class of person whose agency should be tightly controlled by their betters, is a self-soothing fantasy *by* those "betters" about their own deficiencies, not about risks to children.

To wit: "age gating" anything on the Internet is solving the wrong problem.

Boosted by glyph ("Glyph"):
Asbestos@pnw.zone wrote:

PEOPLE "What is Mastadon who's on it??"
ME "Think of the biggest geek you've ever met"
PEOPLE "So it's for nerds?"
ME "Let me finish, Imagine the geekiest person you've ever met, has a friend that they think is a huge geek, and imagine that friend goes to convention where they are the least nerdy person there, and there are breakout sessions where the topics are considered obscure and geekish by most of the people at the convention."
PEOPLE, "um, OK"
ME "Mastadon is that convention "

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
nepi@nepi.gay wrote:

that's right, it goes in the downloads folder

Boosted by glyph ("Glyph"):
mttaggart@infosec.exchange ("Taggart :ifin:") wrote:

And yes of course, none of this legislation is about kids. We've already established these ghouls don't give a shit about kids. But these laws actually will hurt kids, which I guess is right on track.

Boosted by glyph ("Glyph"):
jalefkowit@vmst.io ("Jason Lefkowitz") wrote:

“This has turned into a party now - people are dancing in the streets as the celebrations go late into the night in Budapest.

The smell of smoke from flares is mixed in with the smell of champagne and beer hanging in the air.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c2d8zw2d3rkt?post=asset%3Abb518223-8cc8-4364-9345-1cb8d44a2d5a#post

Boosted by cstanhope@social.coop ("Your weary 'net denizen"):
Unixbigot@aus.social ("Kit Bashir") wrote:

“No Gran, I’ve changed that recipe, it works better with twice as much. No I’m not disrespecting you — I’m just adjusting to modern palates”

“Hi hon, are you on the phone? I thought you didn’t have any living grandparents?”

“I don’t. My g’gran haunts our family cookbook.”

“Oooh-kay…”

“Normally it’s fine; means I can also cook those secret recipes that are never to be written down. But she’s unreasonable about garlic. YES GRAN I SAID IT.”

#Tootfic #MicroFiction #PowerOnStoryToot

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

Found the crucifix glitch #monsterdon

Boosted by cstanhope@social.coop ("Your weary 'net denizen"):
ThompsonArt@mastodon.art ("Aled Thompson") wrote:

Bluejay

Prints available here - https://www.inprnt.com/gallery/thompson%5Fart/bluejay-2025/

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

Movie definitely made by someone who hasn't been to Hungary and Romania. #monsterdon

slightlyoff@toot.cafe ("Alex Russell") wrote:

I don't believe in omens. Apropos of nothing, just saw this out the cab window at SFO:

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

Funny thing about this film is that parts of Transsylvania being in Hungary is an artifact of like 4 years, this movie came out during one of 'em. #monsterdon

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

"I'd never put her in an asylum."
“But you have to protect her from herself."

In context of a real estate plot this sure is a thing

#monsterdon

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

"Well it may not be ethical…" is peak old white dude #monsterdon

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

Oh yes the family judge. Very Southern. #monsterdon

slightlyoff@toot.cafe ("Alex Russell") wrote:

Landed in SF to the amazing news the Orban's corrupt, anti-democratic regime has been ousted after viciously suppressing a free press, rigging the courts, and gerrymandering the electorate. Added to Poland, shows change is possible.

Congrats to Hungary, Europe, and everyone that's against the oligarch-illiberal axis that Putin and Trump prop up. A great day for us all.

kornel ("Kornel") wrote:

Maybe High-Fructose Corn Syrup would be a good analogy for #LLM code? It's a crap nobody would want, except that abundance of subsidized corn creates an incentive to stuff it into everything.