I think you mean monitor their usage.
And to be fair, this is fairly technical. Many parents aren’t very technical. They’re unaware of parental controls they have access to, and I think that’s by design (as it would be unprofitable for social media).
Yep! Good luck.
Also: I’m not sure if I was clear about this, but you shouldn’t look at this through the lens of conversion.
She’s your sister; you should respect her and meet her in the middle. Any atheist should appreciate morality and family. Buts it’s not going to work if she feels like you’re trying to force her into a ritual that makes her uncomfortable, or coerce her somehow.
Compromise.
Ask her to keep the morale core of Islam in-heart. Charity. Love. Peace. Judging the heart, not actions. Things like that, whatever they may be.
Request, gently and with no pressure, if she would participate in prayer with you when you are together, as a family activity. Because it’s important to you. And acknowledge you would respect her beliefs in the same breath, even if you don’t share them.
My experience is that faith, at its core, is a template for how to live as a good human being. Atheists (IMO) should have no problem with this aspect. Believers in God shouldn’t either.
But you can’t force aspects she doesn’t believe in onto her. And even if you could, you shouldn’t.
Can we not quote a Polymarket tweet? WTF.
not stereotypical religious people at all
Tons of religious folks are compassionate and generous. They live by their religion’s themes instead of obsessing over passages and worshipping demagogues.
It’s not hard to justify. “Love thy neighbor” is the heart of Christianity.
It’s the hateful fundamentalists, “traditionalists” and such that give them a bad name. The reputation is deserved, but it’s not fair to everyone else TBH.
Presumably because one needs a phone app or physical hardware (like a Yubikey) to use them.
I dunno. Shrug
Maybe occasionally when they visit their Mom, sometimes? But it’s not like they live together, no.
It’s not that unusual. I have 30-40 year old cousins that might share a bed with their mom, in gatherings where we’re short on beds. It’s a little odd, but… shrug.
I wouldn’t worry unless you feel like you have to do it.
The Internet Archive is a treasure.
It’s going to hurt when they annoy the wrong person and get sued out of existance.
Yeah. I prefer the idea of a bunch of 9-meters unless they can really perfect a cheap folding mirror to mass produce.
A small upper stage, an ion drive or something could get them to deep space. It’s not worth flying a whole Starship out there and burning more fuel to get it back; the return trip only makes sense for LEO.
I wonder how big you could get the mirror if you did it James Webb style in starship.
Presumably 7x ~8m hexagons folded up?
That is a good point though. And if one were to design a “budget” 9m space telescope, they could amortize the R&D dramatically by launching the same design many times, perhaps with different sensors for different purposes? Amortization is why the Falcon Heavy and such are so cheap, and why the Space Shuttle and JWST are obscenely expensive.
Okay, you’ve sold me. I hope this does happen.
Theoretically, even if we assume SpaceX is overshooting, that’s an interesting thought:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-cost-of-space-flight/
In practice? I’m more concerned about interest in funding astronomy in the first place.
That, and big fat telescopes are fundamentally expensive. And (at least for the optical variety) “swarming” them with a bunch of cheaper units isn’t as effective as building a big one.
I’d love to be wrong though. There are some interesting papers on swarms of optical telescopes for a larger effective aperture, but I’m not qualified to assess them.
Point being the ragebait crowded out all the interesting niche subs.
It wasn’t like that at Lemmy when I first joined, but with every passing day it feels more and more like a Voat, even if the political leaning is the polar opposite. And no one seems to want to do anything about it.
I mean, .world is an echo chamber too. It fits that exact definition.
It feels like all of Lemmy is going the way of Voat to me, and other long-dead Reddit clones. Drowned in ragebait once all the “hero” niche community posters leave from lack of engagement.
They’re selectively asking for verification to do it. That’s mixed, because:
They’ll only ask to verify “suspicious” accounts. So all the bots that “behave” are going to stay, which is what the bots will now optimize for.
Verification will become another form of selective enforcement. Say the wrong then, and you get either verify or get banned.
As for the methods, see for yourself:
When confirming that there is a human behind an account, we prefer third-party tools that keep a distance between verification and Reddit itself. Any system we use will not expose your real-world identity to Reddit nor your Reddit username or activity to any third party. There are a handful of ways to do this, and I’m sure there will be more. Each have their tradeoffs:
- Passkeys (which are well supported by Apple, Google, YubiKey, and various password managers) - These are lightweight, require a human to do something, and don’t require your ID. The tradeoff is that there is no proof of individuality or anything other than “a human probably did something.” Nevertheless, it’s a great starting point.
- Third-party biometric services - For example, World ID (yes, the Orb company, though they have non-Orb solutions as well). This technology unlocks proof-of-individual without requiring your name, government ID, or a centralized database. I think the internet needs verification solutions like this, where your account information, usage data, and identity never mix.
- Third-party government ID services - In some countries, such as the UK and Australia, governments require us to use these. These are the least secure, least private, and least preferred. When we are forced to do this, we design the integrations so that we never actually see your ID information, so your Reddit data cannot be tied to you.
Draw your own conclusion.
But my take? It’s the worst of everything: Only the most primitive, obvious bots get banned. “Transparent,” sycophantic bots will all stay on Reddit, and get even stealthier. Rebellious human users will get hit with verification, at the whim of whatever opaque algorithm determines they’re “bot-like,” which is a fantastic recipe for censorship without the appearance of doing so.
And this is all if you take Spez at his word. There’s a lot of history suggesting you should not.
That’s the neat part. The Fediverse doesn’t eat itself; more activity on Piefed is more activity on Lemmy.
I’m quite satisfied with LanguageTool.
It doesn’t have every esoteric variant of words, but adding a few to its dictionary over time brought it up to whatever vocabulary I know.
Yeah; 100%.
Go go China !
Bops the tankie.
Like, I have a Chinese LLM loaded right this second and follow them closely, but holy moly. Curb your enthusiasm.
Anyway, OpenAI has plenty of compute to train a Sora 2 if they want, but apparently they don’t. My guess is some combination of:
They couldn’t figure out a more efficient architecture, like you speculated. I buy that. OpenAI’s development is way more conservative than you’d think, and video generation is inherently intense, especially if Sora 1 is the baseline.
…Maybe they looked at metrics, saw Sora is mostly used for spam, scams, or worse, and pulled the plug for liability reasons?
They’re focusing on short-term profitability, as other commenters mentioned.
HDR version for browsers that support it: