[Sarcasm] Can't see how this will go wrong at all, nope.
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
56 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37708 readers
401 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Could you explain why [it will]?
We're very nervous about anything that claims or wants to index the fediverse. Which is what we thought this was wanting to do at least in part, but reading through we aren't sure if it does or not want to do that or will.
Who're "we"..?
We're plural.
Lol, but no. That's not what we mean.
We do.
Okidoke
I don’t follow. You’ve referred to yourself as “I” several times recently. I’m not trying to antagonize; but rather understand. Is a plural pronoun something you can set aside when necessary? Are all pronouns interchangeable at will?
I am genuinely curious as I know very little of how it all works aside from the basics.
Oh, well we can explain that.
Firstly it depends on if all of us are saying something or think a certain thing or just one of us.
Secondly if you're referring to our post history it was a mixture of that and not wanting to be out here but we've had enough of hiding what/who we are recently and now it feels wrong to do that so we decided to be more 'public' about it.
Does that help?
Edit: And who can blame us really for not wanting to be 'out' about it when we get reactions like we did earlier?
We've only encountered somemany try to invalidate our existence once before and we were physically in a room with them (they are plural also) and the vitriol that spewed from their mouth was worrying, we didn't out ourselves to them.
However, we had to to a friend who was also there which we did much later when she said that the other plural group knew more than us because she assumed we weren't plural incorrectly, so we outed ourselves and that was that. Since then we've met other plural groups and felt more comfortable being who we are and knowing that we exist.
We are very tired of hiding our existence and wish the world was accepting and understanding of us, but it seems it still is not and a lot of people both plural and singlet have a lot invested in invalidating our existence or trying to twist it to how they exist and only accepting 'medical' 'scientific' ways of us existing.
This isn't useful because not every{one/many} works the same way nor is everymany who are plural 'disordered' in the sense that the plurality itself causes problems or distress.
Only people whether singlet or plural telling us we don't exist, don't know what we're talking about or trying to invalidate us just because people now spread knowledge of it online (and sure there are some fakers out there but like, we don't hate them and hope they find what they're looking for or discover they are actually what they thought they were 'faking') causes us distress.
Really though, I don't want to have to justify our existence every time we use a different pronoun, just like being transgender (which we also are). We see so much hate about that too and it would just be so much simpler if people just believed us and stopped trying to play armchair psychologists or 'spot the faker' that shit doesn't help anyone and people will figure themselves out in time and will probably be honest if they aren't what they claimed to be, so why not believe them? What does it cost you to believe them?
Maybe it does cost something and we're sorry if it does but we just don't like what we experienced today or back several years ago and would like it to stop.
I think it does. Thanks.
Sure! Happy to help.
You're saying that this could be some sort of Morris… Worm?
After reading up about it on Wikipedia, no we don't think that is what we mean.
We don't understand.
I'm a bit concerned about the block synchronization part. Mainly whether it can be used for some form of enforcement. My major concern is regarding shadow libraries, because I believe knowledge should be accessible to everyone. Can someone familiar weigh on?
Knowledge, perhaps but there are alredy places knowledge can be acquired publically like libraries etc.
No{one/many} are entitled to people's personal spaces or thoughts especially if they are harrased a lot or the admins of an instance don't do a good job protecting people from harrasment etc.
Folks have the right at any time to block others from seeing whatever they put out for any reason, instances the same, otherwise bad or insufficient moderation and harrasment happens just like on commercial social media (we bring that up because commercial social media cares even less a lot of the time).
Folks can and do release their knowledge publically (sometimes for payment) as well, so bookshops and perhaps video sites, more personal blogs etc might be a good place to find that stuff instead of trying to get into people's personal spaces if they don't want you or any{one/many} to.