It is and I could. I’d be fine doing it, but why not just read them when they come up in [email protected]? I’ve been trying not to create communities that are going to be duplicates or spam, or split the user base between one way of reading articles and another way of reading articles. Do you want it as a DM, maybe?

I think an even better way would be software that can follow the original Wordpress feed, if they have one, but Lemmy can’t do that right now.

Not a problem at all. I think a better way to do that will be to let moderators of existing communities add the bot to their existing communities. Someone asked about doing that, and it’s easy to set up the bot to make it possible, so I think I’ll just do that instead. I don’t need to create a duplicate community for anything that’s already got one.

I’m fine with the existing structure, with one community per periodical. I tried [email protected] and [email protected] and it looks like some people are into that type of structure, but I’m thinking mostly in terms of one-periodical communities or moderators from off-instance communities being able to add things.

Are there any that you would cherry-pick that you think you would personally use? I’d be perfectly willing to add them, if so.

I don’t think that the Austin or Texas communities are useful as communities. Do you mind if I delete them?

Are there other feeds from your OPML that you would really like to have in Lemmy?

I think it’s a good idea. I want to make it possible for people to administer their own feeds, without creating spam, and I think having moderators able to add feeds to communities they moderate would be a good stepping stone.

How about adding a feature to let people write:

@bot@rss.ponder.cat add https://some/feed !some_community@instance
@bot.rss.ponder.cat remove https://some/feed !some_community@instance

in DMs or comments, and control their subscriptions directly? I’m still not sure about letting them do that to create communities on rss.ponder.cat, but for communities they already moderate, it sounds like a good thing.

I’ve banned you now, so you don’t need to worry about it.

Than there is problem with I don’t trust media will write the truth anyway, so giving them few bucks will probably not change that. But it is important for us to know what other people know.

Are there any media sources that I’m hosting feeds for which you feel that way about? I think the problem is much worse in a lot of free content, and I’ve been trying to bring in honest and high-quality sources when I’m adding news sources.

While this is outside of our current discussion, they need to find better model.

If it is a daily newspaper, maybe paywal new articles and release after sone reasonable time (like a week, or month… or a year).

I don’t understand, can you explain more?

Edit: I understand now. That’s outside the scope of my abilities… I would like to be able to offer a paid subscription with a deal that provides access to a wide variety of paywalled content, like a site license at a university, but I think that’s also outside the scope of my abilities. You’re right that they need a better model.

I like your idea of separating feeds, to keep paywalled content out of my feed.

It seems like a good compromise. I certainly understand that if someone’s decided not to read paywalled content, putting a lot of it into their Lemmy feed in a way that’s difficult to disable isn’t a good thing to do. I think separating the paywalled content into a separate user so it’s easy to block is probably a good pragmatic solution.

Most of the most popular RSS communities are free. I like some of them that are paywalled and a little way down the list, like [email protected] and [email protected], but most of the top ones are free. One of the really nice things about one community per source is that you know which ones to subscribe to and which ones you’d have to pay for that you can block.

If you don’t know the New York Times has a paywall, and you click on a link to them, that’s a learning experience for you at this point. I think some of the griping about paywalls is just entitled. It’s okay if people made content for you and they want to get paid. At the same time, I’m not trying to spam people who don’t want paywall content. If I can make a quality-of-life improvement for people who don’t want to get burned by paywalls on random links from places they’ve never heard of, then fine.

I also want to give shout-outs to some feeds that are way, way down and trying to charge money for very high quality stuff:

• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]

Changing what we’re doing to be less catastrophic isn’t what we’re into. We like assigning some scientists to make some miraculous solution, so we can keep doing the catastrophe, and then doubling down on how much of it we’re doing if they succeed.

If you showed up to say this isn’t the way to get support for Gaza, you might be right. But then again, what have you done?

If you showed up to say how dare they inconvenience these people for one morning just because there’s a holocaust happening, go fuck yourself.

They clearly know it, but they clearly have lawyers that are wise enough to see that lawsuits are one of the few things Musk can still generate. Otherwise they could have written a much shorter article:

Alp Toker, director of Netblocks, said the social media platform’s explanation of how the issue was fixed “isn’t particularly consistent” with a DDoS attack. “Given Elon Musk’s claim that X had to limit the number of live listeners to mitigate the issue, we can infer that the outage correlated to the number of live listeners,” said Mr Toker. “Limiting the number of legitimate users isn’t an ordinary mitigation for DDoS attacks and wouldn’t usually help… so Mr Musk’s own statement suggests that the platform might have been struggling with overall listener capacity.”

https://www.google.com/search?q=elon+musk+firing+twitter+engineers

🤣

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

What’s the worst part about all your toenails falling off during the marathon?

Now they’re in your socks.

There should be some exceptional punishment for things like this. Not cruel and unusual, but proportional. A fine and an involuntary tattoo, or a small amputation.

And for violating climate-change emissions standards, measured damage to your lung function, so you’re a little bit short of breath for the rest of your life. And, a fine and dissolution of your corporate structure.

Damaging a person is what the courts are set up to handle. They need extra tools for people who damage the future or the past.

Have some logos. We can say they are CC-BY licensed if you want to use one.

They might, but I think that China’s type of deception is different than most democratic governments’. They would be more likely to simply pretend the story hadn’t happened, because it doesn’t fit their narrative and goals. See how long it takes you to find the story on SCMP. It took me quite a while.

China’s deception on Taiwan is trying to find ways of doing less aggression so as not to provoke a costly conflict with the US, while presenting a posture that they are being extremely aggressive and the US is scared of them. Wanting to fight an unpopular war, and finding an acceptable reason to seize on to actualize it, is much more in line with the US’s normal behavior than it is with China’s. China’s situation with Taiwan, at least so far, has been largely the opposite.

A lot of people have been confused by complicit media about what their politicians stand for, so giving an example that can’t be explained away can be a good thing to do.

I think they’re leaving regardless. I think giving them $115 is only to provide fuel for loyal apparatchiks to argue that he cares on any level what happens to them.

Now multiply it across all of healthcare, all of teaching, civil engineering, and everything else about society.

The only reason America functions at all is because people care enough to do a good job even though the bankers are trying to make it more difficult for them at every turn, and then keeping all the money they created when people make it work anyway.

If you’re willing to believe lies, and repeat and obey them, you are signaling your allegiance to the one telling you the lies. For this purpose, something that’s obvious nonsense, or dangerous, works better than something that is sensible but happens to be wrong.

If the Republicans were simply mistaken, and their followers were repeating the lies because they were taken in by something sensible because they trusted it, it would be much less dangerous than what is really happening.