aaaa

I'm sure I'm one of these folks you would "just ignore" but that seems like a weird position to take.

So let me ask you, which scenario is better for social media: a) a group of people who hate to see AI content habitually downvote the content they don't think should be in the feed, b) this same group comments on every AI post, complaining that it's bad content, or c) telling these users not to express their opinion at all

While I'm not against AI content, I do think the crowd that is aren't wrong to feel that way and to want their votes heard. But rehashing the same arguments on each post won't help anything.

In short, the social media landscape has changed since old school "netiquette" rules. Usenet and bulletin boards didn't even have a voting system. We can express opinions without derailing the discussion already taking place. This is a better scenario.

Votes are a part of how we as a (larger) community decide what content is good or bad. We shouldn't be discouraging voting, just like users shouldn't be weaponizing votes.

It's the only way Lemmy is going to get anywhere close to a default feed that is appealing to new users. This "spend anywhere from an hour to a month curating your feed" is not working for most social media users, just us technically inclined folks who don't mind that.

You should probably just rescind rule 3 at this point

Says the guy who never tried racht. He spent a week on a Klingon ship, and now he thinks he's an expert on their culture

I imagine the dirty poutine combo was part of it

You should have kept watching. It felt like the uniforms changed from one scene to the next

I avoid eye contact and hope I didn't disrupt his day

From a project management perspective, if this feature was causing frequent test failures and required extra developer time to regularly debug these failures, then removing the feature is cheaper than maintaining it.

If very few people use a feature that has a measurable maintenance cost, then it would make sense to remove it.

It seems unlikely that new features or updates would affect this one, but we don't know. It hardly seems worth lamenting though, since we've already left Reddit.

As someone who has had 8 different cats over the years, I can verify this is not necessarily true.

In my experience it usually meant the cat preferred running water over standing water in a bowl. Sometimes it meant the cat didn't like the size or shape of their bowl.

Sometimes it means your cat is a defiant nut who doesn't like things you put out for him, but will gladly drink out of the dog's bowl, a glass of water, or the toilet.

They are far more likely to sue Luigi's parents over use of their IP

"The Good Place" suggested that what you have done is less important than what you are currently doing to improve as a person.

You may never erase the your moral failings from the past, but as long as you are still trying to be better, that's what matters.

O'Brien didn't do much improvising on the Enterprise. It was a big reason why he took the position at ds9, he wanted something that actually took cleverness and ingenuity to make work.

Like a hodgepodge of Cardassian and Federation technology.

Incidentally, Rom was the one making makeshift solutions more of the time. O'Brien had resources available to solve his problems, but Rom learned by using whatever materials he had on hand.

Voyager, in contrast, at least had the recycle bin enabled.

I would remind you that it seems to be very common in Star Trek episodes to forget how reading data works. When the doctor was first outgrowing his program, they had to use up the "diagnostic hologram"'s program to repair his. Apparently they didn't understand backups at the time. And when Ed Begley jr downloaded a bunch of data from Voyager (including the Doctor) it deleted the original.

On the other hand, the existence of the backup Doctor in the Warship Voyager episode shows that they finally figured out a way to copy data without destroying the source.