lavabiopsy

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I don't think Twitter users need to comport themselves as school teachers. Twitter (and also Hacker News) requires you to conduct yourself to a certain level of etiquette in order to use the service, and some of that may be similar to the way a school teacher would behave -- in either case, you may be in the presence of 13 year olds that could be upset by your comments. I don't get why you are saying some people don't care about that etiquette -- that doesn't matter, agreeing to the etiquette is required to use the service, if you are using the service then it's agreed upon that you care about it.

It may be obvious to you, but for someone not familiar with this person's type of humor, it might not be so obvious. Please consider that if you find yourself making sarcastic jokes in the presence of strangers and they are giving you funny looks. (It's happened to me more than once)

I'm sorry that happens on Spanish Twitter, that's really unfortunate and it sounds like not a fun place to discuss things.

I think there is some confusion here, it's not that there is assumption of ill-intent. It's just the possibility that it could be interpreted that way. From the perspective of a moderator being on the safe side, I could see how they have to always assume that a reader will ignore context, not willfully but by accident.

Edit: Imagine you owned a knife company, would you use the contents of this tweet in an ad? I personally would not.

>This appears to be the slippery slope of freedom of speech we spoke about when people on Twitter were clapping when various people got banned. Enjoy the bed you made for yourselves.

I don't know which people you are talking about specifically or who was clapping, but the slippery slope also goes the other way -- when moderators are afraid to ban people for potentially abusive language then it's very easy for the discourse to start slipping and become toxic. Even if you disagree with twitter's stance, please do your part to ensure that doesn't happen, we all deserve a place where we can be treated respectfully and have intellectually stimulating conversations.

>Something you say jokingly today is almost guaranteed to get you banned in 10 years time when political feelings change and context is removed.

I don't understand what the issue is here, if this is talking about twitter, you can just delete an old tweet if it's upsetting people later. The article even shows how twitter has a process to let you delete the tweet and restore your account.

Just from my own experiences on the net as a teen where jokes about self-harm and suicide were extremely common -- One of those reasons could be because social media is not doing enough to protect children from this type of toxic content. Obviously the deleted tweet here is on the "could be harmless" end of the spectrum of that though.

I don't understand, there's no pretending -- On Twitter, you are effectively talking to the whole world. Anyone in the world can click on your tweets and see what you're saying. If you want to have a broad reach, then minimizing the use of complicated words and language can absolutely help. That doesn't mean you can't discuss complex things, it just means being more deliberate in the way it's discussed.

I don't understand why you are saying that or what that has to do with the conversation. Please imagine a schoolteacher going into a classroom on the first day of school and saying with a straight face to students "I am going to show you a video on how to cut off your leg" or something like that and then not explaining that it's a joke. My original point is not if any given child is competent enough to see the joke or not, but that it could be misinterpreted.

And yet, all of those could be misinterpreted by someone who is not familiar with that.

>I'd be careful before invoking misunderstanding with theoretical groups of non-english speakers.

If you're being cautious (as is common for a large website to do) then this is totally backwards -- you would actually need to be careful with invoking understanding when it comes to theoretical groups of non-english speakers. You can't start by assuming that everything that is said is going to be understood perfectly (Though I really wish that was possible, it would make it a lot easier to teach math, physics, history, etc).

I understand what joke you are trying to make, but I would say the real problem here is the exact opposite: a lot of tweets that I see end up being more ambiguous because of the brevity and lack of context. So it seems what you describe is actually already happening and is one of the main problems with microblogging, and is probably what caused this person's tweet to get flagged.

Sure, but that is not made clear from the joke.

I believe children ages 13-17 are able to use twitter.

Sure. Have you learned a new language recently? If you haven't, it's an illuminating experience -- usually you don't start with the idioms until you have a really strong grasp of the basics and of some other advanced forms.

I can't answer that question because I am a native English speaker, but I can say, I would probably not use that phrase around non-native English speakers. It's confusing and could be misinterpreted. Generally one would want to avoid using idioms like that when trying to cross a language barrier.

Please avoid making these type of snarky comments with (incorrect) assumptions about me. A better way to phrase it would be to ask which persons I know like this, to which I could give a pretty universal response: children. You wouldn't expect a child to understand an adult joke. Sure, some do, but many don't -- they have to learn just like you and I did about what people's attitudes are and when they are joking or not.

Yes, the thing is that Twitter is also accessible to people who are not everyday English speakers.

As usual with these posts, I don't really find this convincing, that joke is not obvious to someone who doesn't know this person. The tweet can very easily be misinterpreted by someone who does not get the joke. Please keep in mind that this is not just a Twitter thing, many decentralized communities may also not want to host jokes about self-harm or suicide.

>There is no unified 'will of the people.'

I don't think this is a useful thing to say, it seems to suggest that a given group of people can't reach consensus, when this is not really the case.

>Communities that want to wear masks continued to do so [...] and communities that wanted to never wear masks stuck to their plans

In my opinion that illustrates why I think any kind of reactions to this are a bit odd. It's very hard to enforce a mask mandate in every possible area in a jurisdiction. So the strategy has to be done by tackling big targets (enforcing the mandates only in densely populated areas, empowering private businesses/organizations to kick people out who endanger other people's safety, stopping people from mass spreading misinformation on social media, etc).

What I've seen is that people who were discreetly throwing parties and were being cautious about the virus didn't have any problems. But it's still risky and they still face penalties if they get get caught, because of course once someone causes a super-spreader event and people end up in the hospital, then it can easily be traced back there, and that's where I'd expect those people to be held liable. So in that sense, yeah you could say they could take blame for their actions after the fact, but that doesn't really help much either if it caused a large number of other people to get sick. We could very directly trace that back to deliberate actions taken by someone knowing full well that it could harm others.

>If you don't want Gnome theming, don't use libadwaita

This is not accurate, the current plan seems to be for libadwaita to gain a new theming API. Additionally, apps can still load CSS themes on top of libadwaita.

That's generally the problem with theming, if some app does not support the theme (e.g. legacy apps that were not designed with theming in mind) then it will be in a broken state. Unfortunately not much can be done about it besides fixing the apps one by one.

>Humans made these policies.

Yes, but my point is that those policies were only made in response to the virus. They were not made for no reason, and of course different groups of people will respond to the virus in different ways.

>The government is enforcing the will of the medical establishment.

I don't understand what the difference here is supposed to be, anyone who seeks medical care in that country could be considered part of the medical establishment, or at least considered as having some kind of investment in the will of that medical establishment.

>We didn't get polled on "6' vs 8' social distancing" or "should cloth masks be required or is a bandana acceptable?".

I'm also confused by this complaint, how often do questions like these show up on a ballot? Usually ballot measures are not this specific.

I commented on this before, but GNOME is not preventing theming. The Solus developers have made their decisions based on missing and/or false information, and this article has unfortunately repeated that. See my longer comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28548467

Also see this longer comment from a GNOME community manager that further explains it: https://old.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/pokint/i_themed_http...

If you mean GTK3/4 supports system themes, then no, that's false, it has never really supported doing that. The theme was meant to only be changed by the app, users changing the theme was always consider unsupported. Of course you could previously attempt to override it by setting an environment variable but this could cause any number of things to break because of missing or incorrect CSS classes. These distros were warned about this issue a long time ago.

Just to clarify: The reason for this is not because GTK's CSS classes themselves are not stable (you are correct that they are stable). The issue is that a theme's CSS classes cannot possibly be stable with respect to any given app's CSS classes, unless the app has explicitly enabled that theme, which is not possible with the current API. If you are using the environment variable then apps do not even have a reliable way to check which theme is loaded.

The feeling with GTK4/5 seems to be that GTK itself should only supply some basic default styles and should not bother handling theming at all. Instead that should be handled by another library which knows more than GTK about which CSS to load and when. This is what is essentially being done with the libadwaita theming API.

That's really interesting, I feel like I've experienced the opposite, most people I know have had some kind of interaction with the "hand of government" in some way, if not themselves then second hand. At least in the US with our incarceration rates, statistically it's still more likely that any given person knows someone who is in prison than knowing someone who has died from COVID-19. And COVID-19 has killed a lot of people.

Also maybe you might want to help by explaining to them: it's not the government that was doing those things, it's the virus that was making it so they can’t buy something, they they have to wear a mask, they have to inject something in their body, they can’t go to a concert, etc. The government can only enforce the will of the people, which in this case happens to be fear of an unprecedented attack by a deadly virus. It's totally understandable that this type of global pandemic would be new and remarkable for a lot of people.

How is there asymmetry of information? AFAIK there have been just as many tech advances in police accountability as well, such as the prevalence of body cams, or the ability to see these warrants as they are issued in real time on a police web site, etc. Of course there are other issues at play but I think you may have missed some things that are on the other side, it's very feasible for one person to track many police officers much in the same way that you describe. What would be questionable is if the police were trying to stop the public from doing so.

I'm just curious: What exactly is seen as being new or remarkable about the failure of some leaders during this pandemic? I share the frustration about these failures, but are your friends/family too young to know about other spectacular failures like Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or the Iraq War, etc? (I could go on)

Edit: I just realized my second question is somewhat US-centric so if you aren't from the US then I apologize, please disregard that comment.

>Evidently not to a sufficient extent.

Please avoid these snarky comments, this is also rude and unhelpful and against the rules. I'm continuing to talk to you as a show of good faith even though you're discouraging me from doing so, I ask that you please be respectful to me and maintain the same show of good faith. We can disagree and still respect each other.

>Roughly 100% of Linux users are extensive GNU software users.

If you meant just people using the Linux kernel, then this is very wrong. Android is the majority of users and does not really use any GNU software. If you meant people using Linux on a desktop or server, then it's still probably not 100%, there are various non-GNU distros. Also this is really not related to the FSF/GNU relationship at all so I'm not sure why you brought it up.

>And Linux uses a license whose authorship and legal defense both fall under the purview of the FSF.

This is also false, the defense of the license of Linux falls to the authors of Linux. The FSF has no bearing on their actions, they can attempt to influence them but it carries no more weight than any other outside group. For some obvious examples: the FSF asked them to switch to the GPL3 but they declined. People have asked them to follow the FSF's interpretation of the GPL, but they declined. In any case I think you may be confused as to what the FSF actually is.

>Would you argue that Richard Stallman, the founder of both the FSF and GNU and the author of both gcc and emacs, might not still do something to benefit the FSF and GNU software--and therefor all Linux users--in his remaining life?

I'm sorry, I don't understand this question. Many people could theoretically do or not do things at some point in the future to benefit any given piece of software, so any answer would be purely speculative. Also, enhancements to any given GNU software do not benefit all Linux users. There are a large number of GNU packages that aren't popular at all and aren't even available on some Linux distros. Also, Richard Stallman is not the sole author of gcc and emacs, and AFAIK has not contributed code to either of those projects in many years.

>It really sounds like you need a better email client, or you just need to learn how to use the one you have better.

I have heard this sentiment a lot and tried a lot of email clients and personally I still don't enjoy using any email client for this task. A properly designed forum software is always going to be easier to use for its express purpose than a mail client.

This is quite the negative and cynical comment and includes quite a bit of misinformation, I suggest taking a break from the net for a while. Your mental health is important.

>Large parts of it are about politics and the different ways their system affects different kinds of politics and politicians

This again would be a side effect. Obviously it's not irrelevant but I have seen no reason to prioritize that over anything else.

>because the concerns are fundamentally political to their core

If by political you mean "needs to be solved with politics" then I can't necessarily agree, this is also a technical problem. To put it another way, it wouldn't just magically get fixed if you elect some new congresspeople or replace Zuckerburg, the new people still have to take additional technical steps to fix the problem. If the solution already exists and is being ignored then I would agree, but I have seen no solution offered in this thread. Instead of trying to present the solution, which I have asked you to do repeatedly, it seems you're still trying to make this a political argument, which I wish you wouldn't do. I don't know how many times I need to say that it's not convincing to me to come at it from that angle. I'm sorry if that seems rude but it's the truth of the matter. If your end goal is to campaign for me to vote for somebody, please stop, I'm not interested to hear it (again nothing personal).

On the rest of your comment: I honestly have no idea what your examples are supposed to mean, why you are making these assumptions or why the political motives or policies of some other parties matters. There will always be some users that take issue with any kind of filtering and it makes no sense to me to prioritize ones who happen to have adopted something as a political position at some arbitrary point in the past. If your issue is "unequal enforcement" then can you please elaborate on how a different kind of filtering would help with any of these examples? Why would a different system result in not needing to step in and reverse controversial decisions? I asked for proof of this a few posts ago and you didn't give any.

>You're just being intentionally obtuse.

Please avoid assuming bad faith, this is against the rules here, and it's pretty hostile to me and makes me not want to talk to you.

I don't see how that argument follows, as I have said, Richard Stallman does not develop GNU software, very rarely influences its development regardless of his position, and also one does not need to have any presence at the FSF to influence the development of GNU software. In general the FSF does not drive development of GNU software, the contributors do. And many GNU contributors are not involved with the FSF at all (similar to how many Linux contributors are not involved with the Linux Foundation).