Show newer

I'm gonna keep posting this until one of you fucking boosts it

@allen099 @mollyjongfast Posting a link will not embed the content of the post, so it makes it harder to turn it into a performative narrative.

@Thegreenman @Gargron I think an even more elegant solution is to resist putting other users on blast in any way.

@LouisIngenthron@qoto.org @mollyjongfast @Gargron

Ironically, this would have been a great opportunity to use a "Quote Toot" to show you what Eugen said, but I think the toxicity outweighs the benefit.

Here's a link: mastodon.social/@Gargron/99662

This site shows you how the quote retweet function is actually kind of destructive.

@LouisIngenthron@qoto.org @mollyjongfast

@Gargron posted about it a while back.

To paraphrase: quote tweeting takes a response that should be delivered to an individual, and instead delivers it to your followers in a performative way that can lead to dogpiling. Even if you're trying to do something "good" like ridicule a bad take, you're just giving that bad take a wider audience.

@MickeyMaousse @finlaydag33k The fact that you can input the names of living artists and have the AI emulate their style is a major issue. These GAN art generators are novel and entertaining, but the industry is very inappropriately pushing for this to be some sort of creator tool, and refusing to discuss how it could constitute infringement.

I view it as extremely unethical, outside of personal entertainment purposes.

So it appears Microsoft, GitHub (so M$, twice) and OpenAI are being sued for violating copyright law by reproducing open-source code using AI (GitHub Copilot) without attribution and such.

What do you think about this lawsuit?

Personally, while I do think attribution should be there, they are making too big of a fuzz about it, considering those same people probably got their code from SO or something...

@finlaydag33k

I understand the idea behind AI-assisted coding, and it could be very useful in the long term, but if it is regurgitating existing licensed code verbatim without attribution, it is just a tool for open source license infringement.

Until they can ensure that code is properly attributed, it shouldn't be productized. I firmly expect them to lose these lawsuits.

@A8bit Spam posts like this will earn your instance a place on other instances' blocklists.

If you want to be boosted, post good content.

Best Twitter alternative: Dwitter.

It's like Twitter, but you can only post JavaScript canvas.

dwitter.net

This one is for all the new people on #Mastodon: did you know that the #fediverse has more than just a microblogging replacement? And that they can all interoperate with your Mastodon account?

Check them out!

Facebook replacement: Friendica
Instagram replacement: Pixelfed
YouTube replacement: PeerTube
Spotify replacement: Funkwhale
MeetUp replacement: Mobilizon
Reddit replacement: Lemmy
Podcasting replacement: Castopod
GoodReads replacement: BookWyrm

content warnings meta 

hey new peeps from twitter who're makin a big fuss about content warnings

y'know how the saying goes

"when in rome, disregard local customs and force the romans to do as you do"

...right?

Show thread

Thank you to my 800+ new followers. The fact that my viral Tweet gained me more followers here than there speaks volumes!

I plan to follow a lot of you back, but I have a lot of profiles to review through before I do that.

@JulienD @mariusz @Gargron you can always start your own instance that doesn't defederate. Complaining doesn't make sense, nobody has ultimate authority here.

Lotta talk about replacing Twitter.

The better dialogue is how to get people to re-evaluate how they engage with the internet.

Personally, I'm convinced of two things:

- You can't 1:1 replace Twitter unless it's a similar top-down walled garden.

- Most people probably shouldn't want a Twitter replacement, since Twitter is bad for us.

Instead of finding/molding/creating a replacement, we should encourage people (and ourselves!) to focus on what they like most about internet interaction.

I've made a deliberate choice against a quoting feature because it inevitably adds toxicity to people's behaviours. You are tempted to quote when you should be replying, and so you speak at your audience instead of with the person you are talking to. It becomes performative. Even when doing it for "good" like ridiculing awful comments, you are giving awful comments more eyeballs that way. No quote toots. Thank's

Show older
Mastodon (Vran.as)

This is the Vranas instance.