FaceDeer

Choice is a good thing. Small communites are good. Decentralized is good because then big bullies can't come in and take your community away. Small size and fragmentation are features, not bugs.

Would be nice if the Fediverse had more of that.

There are three or four different "Technology" communities. But there might as well just be one, it's the same bubble in each of them.

Here on social media we get to ensure that we only associate with other "normal" people. By our definition of "normal."

And then we get shocked when we discover that large numbers of people out there are not, in fact, "normal." Often when an election happens.

So, a ton more developers for the GrapheneOS ecosystem.

DRM is suddenly popular and people think it will work this time.

Here's an unboxing video, this timestamp skips straight to Moxie coming online. Moxie is a real product. And the video is from three years ago, before convincing video generation AI was a thing, in case that was a concern.

Moxie does pose as well, its various joints are motorized. The arms exist entirely to point and gesticulate, they don't have grippers.

We don't have people walking around trying to put human faces on cats and dogs, but we can understand them well enough all the same.

They do have faces, though. Dogs literally developed additional facial muscles compared to wolves apparently as a means of improving their communication with human companions. Moxie's face isn't a human face, it's highly stylized.

Yup. IIRC they paid the movie's producers for the product placement, and then the company went under before the movie's release date. So it ended up advertising a defunct product. But at least it fit perfectly into the movie's plot.

Right before the AI boom really started to take off there was a robot "companion" named Moxie that I thought struck exactly the right balance - it was nowhere near the uncanny valley, staying firmly on the cute robot side, and it used a projected cartoon face that was simple but expressive. Unfortunately the company's timing was rather poor, they went out of business right before the AI back end would have been able to make full use of an avatar like this. I'd love to see another version of this approach.

Sure, if they subscribed to literally everything and had started doing so right from the beginning.

Not holistically, as an archive. When new content is posted on an instance it gets pushed out to any other instances that are subscribed to it. That's the only time the content is sent out. So if you start up a new instance but don't subscribe to anything nothing will be sent to you, and you won't get any historical content sent to you from beforehand. The Fediverse isn't a "flood fill" mesh.

You can download archives of Reddit comment and submissions from Academic Torrents.

I'm not aware of any similar public archives of Fediverse content.

Even completely disregarding the cryptocurrency angle, "content that harms the reputation of Codeberg" is wide open to all sorts of future arbitrary interpretation. It basically means "if a lot of people dislike your project we nuke it." Who knows when a lot of people are going to end up disliking your project? Who decides which people's opinion matter to Codeberg's reputation? And it's something that can change at any time.

Maybe some open-source Fediverse server's code is being hosted on Codeberg, and then one day some big news story breaks about how it was being used as the server for some big child porn distribution ring or something like that. The server's name is showing up in news articles about this. Does it now "harm Codeberg's reputation" for it to continue being hosted there? Boom, gone. Through no action or intent by the server's authors, through nothing they could control or anticipate.

What "new take?" I'm saying the same thing.

Ah well. You'll declare me a troll regardless of what I say, the goal determines the interpretation. This is pointless.

Pretty sure they're not users of Codeberg, and likely weren't the ones who voted for this TOS change.

Well, maybe Microsoft did, given it makes Github look more appealing by comparison.

And these "rich and powerful" are using Codeberg projects for that? Not, say, LGBTQ+ people living in sanctioned countries who use cryptocurrency to buy HRT?

Cryptocurrencies are generally open protocols, usable by anyone. Both the rich and powerful and the poor and powerless. Much like open source in general. I'm sure Donald Trump and family make use of other open source projects in their various endeavours, should those be banned too?

Yeah, only "cryptobros" could be upset about an open source hosting site deciding to officially ban "anything they think makes them look bad", and using an entire field of software development as an example apparently based on the popular misconception that it's a scam. This certainly isn't a sign that any other projects could abruptly find themselves on the wrong side of someone's opinion of whether they're "bad" someday.

You pruned off the last part of the sentence in what you quoted: "which makes it seem like cryptocurrency is inherently scammy." Adds a bit of important context.

The interpretation that cryptocurrency projects are "harmful" is based on a popular position that misunderstands the nature of cryptocurrency and its full range of uses.

Your obsession with stalking me keeps leading you to pouncing on comments with an "aha! Got him!" That leads you to misinterpret them in the worst possible light. Which is quite ironic given the situation this thread is actually about.

That's not correct, and you should know better than to claim this.

This is my first exposure to Codeberg's terms of service, why would you think I know more than what I'm seeing here and in the linked pages? I haven't used them before (and almost certainly won't now).

The text you quoted from my earlier comment has nothing to do with any of this, either. I'm not sure why you think it means anything in this context.

AI is wildly popular.

Wow. I'd ask whether you've ever been in any threads on this community about LLMs, but of course I've come to recognize your particular username fairly well at this point.

Sounds like they're willing to ban anything "unpopular." Not a good sign for serious development.

It's still rather poorly worded, though. The ban is: "Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg, such as cryptocurrency related projects" which makes it seem like cryptocurrency is inherently scammy.

Edit: Looks like clarification is being asked for.

It'll also be a great way to take down projects you don't like. Just accuse them of witchcraft.