I even dont think its Russian bots, just plain old capitalism and a general decline in journalistic integrity. Any article that hypes up XYZ, I assume is written by a marketing firm representing XYZ. :(

Definitely valid points, and I might be wrong. It definitely isnt a super glowing article, but “flocking to” part of the headline struck me as a bit hyperbolic, which is probably the root of my skepticism.

My conspiracy, if you want to call it that, is that I dont think article is the product of actual journalism. I think Xiaohongshu has paid for that article to be written, to give the impression that the influencers are moving to it, and its the next tiktok. One of the listed authors has never published anything else, and the site isnt exactly a mainstream news site.

I dont mean that your tone is bot like or anything, just that they would want authentic voices.

I do find it hard to beleive, because look at the reddit and twitter transitions. They either took years (bluesky is only barely starting to gain notability, and I’m not convinced that isn’t also doing astroturfing) or never happened (Lemmy userbase is a rounding error). Getting people to switch social media is very difficult. And tiktok isnt even banned yet.

Also, just because there are no ads, doesn’t mean that no one is propping up the business. Someone is paying to keep the servers running and lights on, and an astro turfing campaign isnt that expensive. Social media companies either grow or die.

So if your liking this new site, power to you, but I suggest you enjoy it while it lasts, because its going to have to become profitable somehow, and that is never good for the users.

With all due respect, this comment is exactly what a faked “Grass roots marketing campaign” would write. But your account has an extensive post history, so thats a lot more effort than a typical astro turf account.

Also, inflating subscriber numbers and view counts wouldn’t be out of the question either, remember Facebook video…

Yeah, this honestly sounds like a press release with made up “users”. Definitely part of a marketing campaign.

Still sounds like it could get quite messy if Google adds a feature, Qualcomm adds a fix to that feature and then you need to add a fix on top of that. Does it work better in practice and just needs to been seen to be understood?

Competence, Time and Direction are often quite hard to find in any professional team, let alone an open source team :D

Are you at liberty to describe those strategies further? Or point to some other resource? Its never been a situation that affects me, so I’m curious to learn more.

Requirements gathering is really really difficult, and its why I am currently not worried about an LLM taking my job.

For my work, I had a project where the requirements were gathered for us, which stated that A was completely forbidden, but X, Y and Z were required. We developed to that spec, released it, and it turned out that the users actually needed A all along. We added A, and now A is the only feature they use… Shame, because X, Y and Z were cool features, and I was really proud of them, but a complete waste of time developing them.

Yup, so convincing upstream to take the changes is really the only option, which gets you back to point 1.

As a developer (not affiliated with either of those projects), you have to understand a couple of points:

1. Adding features means increased maintenance burden. Any feature that is added must be tested and maintained, and once released, often cannot be changed without significant user push back.

2. Users often have no idea what they actually want. If a project just implements what every user asks for, it’ll end up being a disjointed mess of a project. Developers have to draw a line somewhere.

3. Unless someone is paying for the work, developers have zero incentive to make changes. A democratic committee can make all the requests they like, but unless the developers are on board, nothing will happen. (Also, tying into 2, but good luck getting a committee of users to agree on anything)

The only real answer is to fork the software, make the changes and hope that either everyone switches to your fork, or the upstream accepts the changes. That is the Open Source way of doing things.

Facebook Fact Check©: I’m not paid enough to check this, probably true

For a similar tool for windows, there is: https://www.grc.com/wizmo/wizmo.htm

Given Greenland’s population, and related military size, this might be the one time they are happy to be protected by the Danes.

without sacrificing your privacy

Pls explain:

We also receive the following information from third parties when you use the Service:

Inputs and Outputs. When you use the Service to summarize or query web content, we automatically receive a payload back from the relevant [Third-Party Models] containing the contents of your query; information about the model queried (such as the name and version number); information about technical problems with processing the query, if any; the number of tokens required to process the query; and the model Outputs in response to the query. We do not store this data beyond temporarily caching it to process your query and return the Outputs to you.

And make your chisel blunt and chipped? You monster

Remove the HDMI port with pliers :D

Season one JD isnt everyone’s cup of tea either, my partner doesn’t like him. He grew on her though, which season 9 never got a chance to do.

I dont think it was given enough chance to find itself. If it was properly treated as a spin off, it could have grown into something good.

I’m cautiously interested in the reboot, there is room for a light hearted medical TV show.

I seem to be in a minority that liked season 9. It obviously wasn’t the same scrubs, and season 8 was a perfect ending, but it wasn’t terrible either.