132
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
132 points (100.0% liked)
Free and Open Source Software
17922 readers
4 users here now
If it's free and open source and it's also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good news, most folks at beehaw know and the admins have decided to move to a new platform
Correct. We're moving to Sublinks very soon. Buckle up.
oh boy I can't wait for all of the integrations to break
also is it just me or is deciding what software you use and do not pay for based on the political views of the people who create it (who again in no way benefit from its use by people who don't donate) incredibly fucking stupid
Don't call people "incredibly fucking stupid". Be(e) nice.
i'm not calling people stupid, i'm calling an idea stupid. is that also not kosher?
It is absolutely a reasonable interpretation to assume you were referring to the people making the decision you didn't like. And even if it wasn't, calling an idea a group of people have "incredibly fucking stupid" isn't much different, as it carries an implication of how you see those people.
If you feel other people are getting offended too easily at what you say, I recommend spending extra time on your posts to ensure you avoid saying derogatory things you don't intend for. Something that looks good to you can be incredibly insulting to others who read differently from you, and since conversation is a two-way street, that's the kind of thing we all need to be aware of.
so you're saying i should have anticipated that people might have willingly misinterpreted "that is a stupid position to take and here is why" as "you as a person are stupid" and, instead of telling me why they thought I was wrong, try to get me banned from beehaw as a result?
i would've been okay if you'd just said yes and left it at that. but the "actually, you are calling me stupid" really rubs my fur backwards
I’m saying that if you think you said “that is a stupid position to take and here is why,” you missed the mark severely, and you should be more careful with your phrasing if you don’t want people to get upset at you in future. It’s not about people “willingly” misinterpreting anything — whether you realized it or not, what you said wasn’t the level-headed response you may have intended it to be.
Do you know what topic brought you here?
"Hey guys, let's not use this free software, because of their views."
"Maybe we shouldn't use this other free software because of their views."
"Why are you guys worried about which free software you use based on their views?"
"We can all tell you aren't new, why are you complaining about our unofficial pastime?"
It's almost like the philosophy behind a software matters to its long-term stability. Like, as if devs might find reasons to, I don't know, reject PRs, ignore bugs, and trash their users when they come to them for help.
Weird that the content of someone's mind might affect their actions or be an indicator of what level of trust they should be extended!
Programming is a form of communication. When you develop a piece of software, it will intrinsically be biased to boost the kinds of messages you believe in. This is both because you as a person think about problems a certain way, and because the code you write is meant to convey to others how you were thinking about the problem you were trying to solve. Who heads projects and how they communicate with their community matters to what the product produced will become, not just because of how the leads will think about the problem, but also because people who don't get along with them won't wind up contributing. Beehaw requested moderation tools that the lead lemmy Devs didn't view as valuable. The result is beehaw, reasonably, gave up on getting PRs merged and issues tracked in the issue tracker, instead choosing to look at Sublinks which was explicitly started in response to Lemmy's devs not behaving well with their own development community.
And for anyone saying Sublinks is splintering the Lemmy Dev community, no, lemmy's devs did that themselves
If this is provably the case, then I agree, we should stop using Lemmy. If not -- and I say this as a proud supporter of the vast majority of seemingly-pointless ideological bullcrap -- it is nothing but pointless ideological bullcrap.
Yeah. We probably should.
Changing our behaviors isn't a binary, though. It takes effort. Sometimes it takes changing the world around us first to accommodate new behaviors, or waiting for the right opportunity. And given all the other things we should also be changing, prioritizing matters.
Finding a Lemmy alternative is somewhere on that list. Is it anywhere remotely near the top? No. There are a great many other things to do. It's probably closer to the top of alyzaya or Chris's lists than mine; close enough, it seems, to be carried out even.
But it isn't about trying to figure out who's a shit and point fingers at them while loudly demonstrating non-shit behaviors. If we actually want to make the world better, we need to figure out how to work together rather than just glue everything in place.
People are so defensive about being wrong. And why wouldn't they be? Whether you look at how things are set up in school or the cruelty and corruption of the prison system, or the poverty-reinforcing measures set about in our banking and credit rating systems, the elements that we need to grow past push this tendency to categorize people and sort of socially compartmentalize their various experiences.
End up in the right categories and you don't really have to worry. Companies will throw free cellphones at you just for breathing. End up in the wrong categories, and you're going to have to struggle against a system that's built to keep you from getting back up.
We can spend eternity playing with the categories, moving around between them or building or diminishing their relative social power. We can change the criteria that we categorize people by, or try to keep them the same. But in the end we're not really going to make much forward progress until we let go of thinking we know the potential of every human being at a glance. We don't.
What we can do though is be patient, speak our minds honestly, set boundaries, allow others their own autonomy, and try to help ourselves and other humans open up and grow rather than close off and shrink.
In any case, the world is complex. It's silly to try to boil it down into absolutist binaries. It's also probably really bad for your cortisol levels.
I wasn't making any judgement on this, although if I were, I would point out that one of the benefits of open source is the ability to fork projects and move away from the elements you have a philosophical issue with, such as what the OpenOffice developers did when Oracle purchased Sun and started imposing their unplayable rules. What I was half-jokingly pointing out was some guy coming in deep into the conversation of highly opinionated people and acting like the conversation wasn't about their various opinions.
People talk about forking open source projects as if you just push a button and it happens on its own. I mean, okay, that's the first step, but maintaining an repo is a whole thing. Saying 'well just fork it then' is only a viable solution if you have the the means, the time, and the inclination. It isn't really an exclusive alternative to criticism, but another, much narrower, potential additional path.
It would certainly be good if people would fork all the useful projects made by devs who are interested in promoting social conservatism masquerading as 'apolitical actions' that attempt to reinforce the existing status quo of power. I'm not sure how likely it is, though. Certainly less so than bringing criticism to the table.
@AVincentInSpace @remington The Lemmy devs are infamously difficult to work with. They've repeatedly shown an unwillingness to even acknowledge the existence of the many problems that instance admins face. That has been a big driver in Beehaw's decision to move platforms, not just because of a difference in political views, and they've been pretty open about discussing it. You're way off-base.
That is not the reason for the Beehaw switching to another platform, but here's a few of the true reasons why.
Will it federate with Lemmy? I would miss you folks.
It's my understanding that it will...I believe that's, also, what it means when they (Sublinks developers) said it would be "Lemmy compatible".
That could also mean client API-compatible, so Lemmy apps would work with it, which doesn't address federation.
Maybe so. We should, probably, ask @Penguincoder@beehaw.org about this.
Pong. @mox@lemmy.sdf.org , in sublinks, the federation services are entirely separate from the API of the instance. So much separate, the federation services are written in a programming language called Golang. The API service is written in a programming language called Java.
One aspect does not require or preclude the other with Sublinks.
Indeed, protocol is independent from implementation language, but that isn't the question at hand.
Do you know whether Beehaw will still federate with the lemmyverse (and therefore the rest of us) after moving to Sublinks?
The current aim of Sublinks is Lemmy parity for V1 release. So yes, I do see Beehaw still federating with Lemmy instances at the on-set.
Thanks for clearing that up!
then what's the point if you're still not getting away from the same people?
Y'all just don't even bother moving your eyes over the text before you post, do you?
That's like saying what is the point of misskey (and its forks) when it can be seen by people on mastodon. Isn't that the whole point of the fediverse?
Yes I don't understand the point of misskey either. It just seems to be a Japanese clone of mastodon with a small, differing interpretation of some parts of ActivityPub.
Sublinks exists because the developers of Lemmy have repeatedly ignored feature requests from instance admins and acted in a hostile manner towards them. They're unpleasant to work with, so a bunch of people decided to no longer work with them and create their own project.
It feels like you're only capable of seeing the "logical" point for something to exist friend. Misskey is to Tumblr as Mastodon is to Twitter.
I am overjoyed to hear that we'll be staying in the fediverse and I can stay with beehaw.
It will be "Lemmy compatible", so hopefully all of Lemmy apps should work fine.
That's splendid, though I'll continue to use the web interface of beehaw honestly.
The demo on that link is literally Lemmy lol
Is it maybe that they're using the Lemmy frontend, but Sublinks for the backend? But yeah, still a bit weird...
deleted - moved instance
Probably because the project is just taking rust and making it Java....
Because they hate/don't want to learn rust and think Java is a superior language
You know, that's not what I've read. It's worth mentioning that it doesn't just use Java.
why do something original when we can just copy because we say we don't like the devs?
Its better to fork than recreate the wheel.
Well, PRs are better, but when the devs ban their contributors or don't accept PRs, then at some point its best to fork. Lots of people have come to this decision
I'm looking forward to switching to Sublinks but it isnt ready
Oh nice. Hadn't heard a platform had been decided upon.
Is it anywhere near ready yet?
I can't give you a date. However, I can say it will be very soon.
It's a lot of work, give them time
I'm not the one saying they're gonna switch to it very soon
Great! Must have missed the announcement as usual but no matter, looking forward to it!