• 0 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle

  • That’s not an entirely accurate representation, because after taxes you still use that money for housing and food and transportation etc. In business terms that 50k would still contain operating costs. So that $120 might still seem a lot.

    That 50k a year should be extra money, the money left in your pocket after taxes, housing, groceries, other necessities and debts are paid off. That would give an accurate representation of how insignificant a $120 ticket would be.






  • We could split the difference and users could get auto-notified if their vote was viewed and by whom. That way it’s a two-way street. The mod/admin can see your votes, the users know that their vote was accessed by that mod.

    It would be pointless to do. Anyone can view your votes without notifying you. Just set up your own instance, download the data (that you need to do anyway because of how activitypub works) and then just open up the database with a different software to access the data. No notification can be sent because the application doesn’t know the data was accessed.

    Second choice would be that all users are anonymized by a hash so that bad vote actors can be removed via their hash being associated with malicious or other bad acting, but to discover who individuals are the admin would have to do the legwork of follonf multiple posts/ comments to associate the hash.

    This opens a door to vote manipulation. If you can’t verify users someone can send random hashes.

    Otherwise hide the votes if trust of anonymity is paramount.

    The votes still exist in the activitypub. They’re already publicly available, the question is how accessible they should be because right now if you want to track downvotes you need to put in some effort. Upvotes you can already easily check from any mbin instance












  • So what are we supposed to do, halt all space flights until we figure this out?

    Without further research going into how much damage it’s doing there’s no way to say what our next steps should be. Maybe everything we’re doing is still within acceptable limits? Maybe we need tighter regulation on materials going into space. Maybe some materials need to be outright banned.

    The only reasonable thing we can do is study it further. Expecting instant result based on one study that only outlines a potential risk is quite frankly just doomerist behavior.


  • Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending corporations here. I’m simply stating the fact that climate change denial wasn’t the case of waiting until it’s “fully confirmed”, it was pretty much confirmed back in the 70s. They even had predictions for the next century on how things will go bad if nothing is done and the last time I checked we were pretty on course with their predictions. When it came to the scientific consensus, it was pretty much “fully confirmed”. It was simply the public opinion where it wasn’t “fully confirmed” because corporations deliberately ran disinformation to make it seem like scientists didn’t know what they were talking about.

    But this paper isn’t really confirming anything. The paper itself says that the model does not account for all the factors and to literally quote the paper:

    As reentry rates increase, it is crucial to further explore the concerns highlighted in this study.

    This paper is not presenting a final conclusion, it’s presenting concerns that need further studies. let’s wait for further studies and if there’s scientific consensus about it being an issue I’m all for bringing out the pitchforks. In the mean let’s keep calm and dread over the doom and gloom that is climate change.