CoderKat

You shouldn't do that. That's not gonna help screen readers and in fact will just waste their time trying to read off a URL because it thinks it's describing the image. The alt text is intended to be human readable.

The text isn't supposed to show up. It's alternative text for viewers that can't see the image (or otherwise need it described).

In web browsers, you often can long press the see alt or title text, though. As an aside, title text is kinda similar to alt text, but shows up on hover in desktop (on mobile, it's also long press). It's not meant for accessibility and not usually friendly for it. It's usually for supplementary information and not to describe the image. Eg, an acronym might have title text that defines what the acronym stands for.

No, not Bitcoin or crypto. Those are currencies but don’t provide financial services.

They're not even currencies. Most people buy them solely to hold onto them, not to spend.

In theory, you could have open source bank software. Security by obscurity isn't security, after all. If the only thing keeping you safe is the code being closed source, you're not actually safe. Attackers will find exploits even in closed source code (just look at how many Windows exploits there have been) and attackers may get access to source code anyway. However, I think you might have a tough time convincing the average person of this, based on how I've seen folks react to open source in the past.

Above all, the kinds of people who love FOSS and the kinds of people who want to run a bank are probably two completely separate circles. Heck, banks seem to regularly have terrible security, actively breaking best practices.

Well, this "eventually" thing wouldn't be until we can automate away so many jobs that we simply couldn't (meaningfully) employ a significant chunk of people. We're not there yet. Though we shouldn't wait till we reach that point to get some form of UBI available. It's at that point where UBI would be critical and needs to be at a living wage level.

Com is not used for commercial anymore. It's basically the "default" TLD.

Good ol "hover bike", as most call it. It's ludicrously useful, in large part frankly because the game nerfed most forms of flying, with balloons, wings, and those floating blocks around sky islands always disappearing after a minute or two (which bizarrely sometimes doesn't seem long enough to reach some of the furthest away sky islands -- particularly where King Gleeoks are).

Only downsides are that the hover bike will constantly rise with no means to descend and I was never able to make one that didn't drift in one direction (requiring constant correction). I assume my fans were just ever so slightly off center or not placed on a flat enough surface or something, but I never could get it to work better).

I just hope it won't get quite as toxic as the reddit sub could get (at least back when I checked it a long while ago). If a sub has to make a "LowSodiumCyberpunk", that means the community has serious problems. I hope this time around, we won't need to split the community in half.

Unsafe isn't the right way to put it. Lemmy, being so new, has limited admin tools, especially for cross instance interactions. They saw an unusually high number of bad posts from people in the biggest instances, which is frankly expected for being the biggest open instances. Since they didn't have a better way to deal with people not from their instance, they decided to just defederate from the biggest instances for now.

My understanding is that they don't like that "solution" and intend to refederate once there's better admin tools. They want to focus on providing a safe space and the it's not that the instances they blocked are unsafe, but that the people from those instances make it hard for beehaw to provide their desired safe space for their local instances. They don't want to change other instances. They just want to make their own communities higher quality.

Personally, I purposefully chose an instance that beehaw hasn't defederated cause their communities are very good. It's a shame they aren't accessible to most of the threadiverse.

What makes it unethical? How is it different from advancements in technology taking away any other job, like elevator operators, numerous factory positions, calculators (the human kind), telephone operators, people who sew clothes (somewhat), and so on?

It seems to me that automating away jobs has historically bettered humanity. Why would we want a job to be done by a person when we can have a machine do it (assuming a machine does equal or better)? We can better focus people on other jobs and eventually, hopefully, with no mandatory need for a job at all.

But if we're drawing the line at "did it for profit", how much technological advancement will happen? I suspect most advancement is profit driven. Obviously people should be paid for any work they actually put in, but we're talking about content on the internet that you willingly create for fun and the fact it's used by someone else for profit is a side thing.

And quite frankly, there's no way to pay you for this. No company is gonna pay you to use your social media comments to train their AI and even if they did, your share would likely be pennies at best. The only people who would get paid would be companies like reddit and Twitter, which would just write into their terms of service that they're allowed to do that (and I mean, they already use your data for targeting ads and it's of course visible to anyone on the internet).

So it's really a choice between helping train AI (which could be viewed as a net benefit for society, depending on how you view those AIs) vs simply not helping train them.

Also, if we're requiring payment, only the super big AI companies can afford to frankly pay anything at all. Training an AI is already so expensive that it's hard enough for small players to enter this business without having to pay for training data too (and at insane prices, if Twitter and Reddit are any indication).

Musk is an idiot and his handling of Twitter is even more idiotic. But can we not use unsourced screenshots of note taking apps for this community? If there's substantiated news, post a link to a decent source. If we allow these kinda posts just because we agree with them, we're gonna be very vulnerable to misinformation (case in point: the fact that there's articles saying that they resumed paying this bill).

Is that what Apollo was like? I'm an android user, so never actually used Apollo. The sliding to vote, collapse, and reply is kinda neat (if perhaps not very obvious at first -- I saw a comment mention it, which is the main reason I even knew it was there).