My memory is a bit hazy on this. After listening to Snowden’s “Permanent Record” audiobook , my interest in encryption and online privacy grew. I became much more aware about how unhealthy it is to have a society that relies on large centralized platforms to broker people’s social interactions.
At some point along the process of looking into solutions to the centralization problem I remember running into Dessalines’ essay on “Favorite apps and services”. I think I found it via a google search for decentralized social media alternatives or de-googling, or on a post on Reddit alternatives, I don’t remember the details. In this list lemmy is listed as a reddit alternative, and I was shopping for one 😄
I am glad I found lemmy as it encouraged me to learn about self-hosting, and that has snowballed in a positive way.
Car crashes are one of the main sources of traumatic brain injuries. I think that it is likely that someone who is wearing a helmet during a car crash would be protected to a degree from TBIs, so I looked a bit for a source on this and found this relevant blog post:
Op-Ed: Yes, Gov. Cuomo, Car Helmets Could Save Lives
Fortunately here in the Netherlands we don’t have to bike with a helmet on. Would I be supposed to leave it hanging from my bike, exposed to the rain and theft? Or carry it with me into the shops and bars and keep an eye on it? Sounds like a nuisance.
By getting immediate feedback on your writing.
A student can provide it an idea that they are stuck on and being given several pathways through which you can get unstuck.
By generating personalized content immediately that you can then analyze.
Specific example: A student explains the thought process while using an AI to create a poem. The student would provide a prompt to the AI, the AI provides a poem, then the student analyzes that poem and provides another prompt to improve the poem. The student will justify the reasons why they decided to convey the new prompt, explaining in which ways the AI’s poem erred from the expected format for that particular type of poetry. There should be at leas 10 prompts. If the student considers the poem to be a good poem before the 10 prompts, the student should defend why it is a good poem and try to transform it to convey some different emotion.
I think that this type of AI-supervised learning is very different from what we are used to, and it can create a very engaging and dynamic process. This is just one random example - I am sure that good teachers will come up with excellent techniques.
And I do want to point out that we learn basic arithmetic without using calculators. Teachers can ask students not to use an AI for some particular work. Students can cheat, and most schools around the world do not have anti-plagiarism tools. Common tools can’t even detect translated plagiarism, so if someone speaks two languages they can plagiarize all they want with little worry (actually, when I worked as a teacher I did translate work that I was suspicious about and caught a few, but most teachers won’t bother). I doubt that AI will increase the percentage of students that want to cheat, and it is easy to cheat.
Thanks. I thought so too. Sometimes I think I may be over-critical, so I wanted to check ;)
If you emailed me from this address i would consider you a dork, and as a bit of one myself i might start calling you Fratnickle.
Fratnickle! Haha, I did not even think about how sounds if you read the @ as ‘at’.
- •
- 11d
- •
They have to replace the whole system because of a software problem? Maybe we can also place some of the blame on proprietary software developing practices that obfuscate and lock software on purpose. If this system would have been built using open source practices, I suspect they would have been able to find someone skilled enough to fix it.
I think that using the first line up to maybe ~10 words followed by “…” as a default is a good idea. It would still be nice to have a preferred format to indicate the title, such as:
---
@asklemmy@lemmy.ml | Should Mastodon users be able to create threads on Lemmy?
Post content
----
Another possibility would be to reject a post if it is lacking the title and have the ‘community’ send a direct message or reply to the user letting them know the correct format. A correctly formatted posted using the first sentence could be generated and included in the direct message as an example. It could say something like this:
Are you trying to create a post in a lemmy instance? If so, please create the toot again including a title. Here is an example using the first sentence of your post as a title:
@community.lemmy.ml | First sentence
Post content
Approach one is good because it does not require one to be familiar with the format at all, but it can lead to some awkward titles. Approach two would require a slightly higher amount of effort from the poster, but one failed post should be enough for them to become familiar with the syntax.
I say this because in the article they quoted the paragraph in Netflix’s terms of use section 4.2:
4.2. The Netflix service and any content accessed through the service are for your personal and non-commercial use only and may not be shared with individuals beyond your household. During your Netflix membership we grant you a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access the Netflix service and Netflix content. Except for the foregoing, no right, title or interest shall be transferred to you. You agree not to use the service for public performances.
They way this is written is open to interpretation with regards to what ‘personal use’ means and what is considered ‘members of the household’. If you invite someone else over for Netflix and chill - would that be a violation of this section? It might be “obvious” that it would not be a violation of the terms, but 4.2 was used in the argument, and from that perspective I would say that Netflix and chill falls within the same gray area as password sharing.
The original article has been updated though, it now states that the Intellectual Property Office has modified its advice and removed the password sharing mention.
could it be covered by fair use, as long as it’s part of (or offering to have) a discussion about the topic?
It is an interesting point. Commentary is generally considered fair use when - for example - someone makes a video in which text is shown and the text is commented on. I think that directly copying the comments and not commenting on them would not be transformative enough to fall into fair use. But you are right that putting it up in the context of generating a new discussion could be transformative enough - but that could open loopholes (for example, displaying a full movie without permission at a public venue for the audience to critique could be considered fair sue).
But adding an explanatory comment of why that particular comment was chosen could be transformative enough to be “fair use” by most people. Looking into it, it is messy and complicated. It seems that in the end the reality is that to find out whether something is fair use or not, the commenter or platform would have to sue you and then a judge would need to decide.
But people share all sorts of screenshots on social media without it getting purged, maybe there’s some different rules?
My guess is that either the platform or the person that made the comment would need to actively sue for something to be done about that, and not many people see this as something they would want to do. I am sure most people post comments online without worrying about the copyright of their comment work.
If Reddit has not gotten rid of Removeddit, I don’t think that they particularly care about their comments being copied.
- •
- 2M
- •
- •
- 2M
- •
- •
- 10M
- •
Place the ^^ inside the square brackets.
So: Text1
Text[^1^](https://lemmy.ml)This will show up nicely in the browser. However, it will not show up correctly in Jerboa.
In Jerboa, this will show up correctly:
Text<sup>1</sup>
Text<sup>[1](https://lemmy.ml)</sup>But not in the browser.
Not sure of a way that works for both.