DABDA

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's an entirely different kind of IP theft, altogether.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'd guess it's largely just a consequence of the Tragedy of the Commons. My favorite example demonstrating the effect I read in Meditations on Moloch:

The Fish Farming Story

As a thought experiment, let’s consider aquaculture (fish farming) in a lake. Imagine a lake with a thousand identical fish farms owned by a thousand competing companies. Each fish farm earns a profit of $1000/month. For a while, all is well.

But each fish farm produces waste, which fouls the water in the lake. Let’s say each fish farm produces enough pollution to lower productivity in the lake by $1/month.

A thousand fish farms produce enough waste to lower productivity by $1000/month, meaning none of the fish farms are making any money. Capitalism to the rescue: someone invents a complex filtering system that removes waste products. It costs $300/month to operate. All fish farms voluntarily install it, the pollution ends, and the fish farms are now making a profit of $700/month – still a respectable sum.

But one farmer (let’s call him Steve) gets tired of spending the money to operate his filter. Now one fish farm worth of waste is polluting the lake, lowering productivity by $1. Steve earns $999 profit, and everyone else earns $699 profit.

Everyone else sees Steve is much more profitable than they are, because he’s not spending the maintenance costs on his filter. They disconnect their filters too.

Once four hundred people disconnect their filters, Steve is earning $600/month – less than he would be if he and everyone else had kept their filters on! And the poor virtuous filter users are only making $300. Steve goes around to everyone, saying “Wait! We all need to make a voluntary pact to use filters! Otherwise, everyone’s productivity goes down.”

Everyone agrees with him, and they all sign the Filter Pact, except one person who is sort of a jerk. Let’s call him Mike. Now everyone is back using filters again, except Mike. Mike earns $999/month, and everyone else earns $699/month. Slowly, people start thinking they too should be getting big bucks like Mike, and disconnect their filter for $300 extra profit…

A self-interested person never has any incentive to use a filter. A self-interested person has some incentive to sign a pact to make everyone use a filter, but in many cases has a stronger incentive to wait for everyone else to sign such a pact but opt out himself. This can lead to an undesirable equilibrium in which no one will sign such a pact.

Until it's more profitable to do the right thing it's likely we'll continue doing nothing, if not outright exacerbating things, just so we can get ours before it's all gone.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Definitely less than credible - check out the footer links:

  • The disclaimer switches the domain name partway through
  • "Contact Us" page is just a gmail address
  • "About" isn't even in English

So far I've seen two other newly-created accounts linking to that domain today (@[email protected] [banned] and @[email protected])

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

Can't speak for the veracity, but I've got two magnets with the following:

1934

Average income = $1,601.00
Loaf of bread = $.08
Gallon of gas = $.10
Gallon of milk = $.45

New car = $625.00
New house = $5,972.00

1958

Average income = $4,650.00
Loaf of bread = $.19
Gallon of gas = $.24
Gallon of milk = $1.01

New car = $2,155.00
New house = $11,975.00

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

I don't know if the functionality exists yet for the mods/admins, but I think it's pretty safe to assume any links pointing to that domain are coming from bots/spammers and the accounts should just be automatically banned. I first saw that site linked to about 2 days ago from variations on the username "johnson", then from a (new) account named debbie, and today from kelvinwashington to worldnews and now here.

It's all clickbait ad-laden garbage and it's getting tiresome having to report each instance of it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Seems more economic than political to me, but also why such the strong reaction to an on-topic reply? As you even said yourself:

I don’t really care all that much about any particular issue. I enjoy copying the ideas suggested by others in the fediverse and transforming them into new issues, as many individuals do not take this initiative.

Your account has existed for all of 3 hours and you're trying to come off like a well-known fixture of the community whose opinions are above reproach. I'll also say it seems suspect how quickly detracting comments are earning downvotes but not replies in this post.

In short, I don't believe you, your post or its engagement, are sincere.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Imagine a social media landscape where every piece of content is perfectly tagged

working tirelessly to make your online experience safer and more enjoyable

All of this feels a little disingenuous when it's not even mentioned that all this tagging and classifying would also make it much easier for training LLMs or tracking groups/individuals/movements.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago
[–] [email protected] 32 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Username Johnsoncentral, registered ~50 minutes ago, linking to the domain central24 -- pretty sure their intention isn't to inform but to drive traffic to their site.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don’t mean that the contact should be deleted, I think it should still be in the database. For the reason you said, so you can see the history of activity. But I’m saying there should be a way to mark they’re not at that organization anymore. A one click button that flags them as past employee rather than active - and then those contacts are still in the database but displayed differently to make it easier for the sale team to direct their attention.

The database does not include that boolean field that can be queried and acted upon. The front end viewer class doesn't have methods to change the presentation of results. It would require someone to implement those features and that would either cost money or development time.

What's a philosophical equivalent of the above response to your open ended, no specific answer, question?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I get that I'm either the guidance counselor in Clerks searching for the perfect carton or Harry from In Bruges [NSFW], but I still believe that rules and principles are important and there's no reason to have them if they aren't enforced.

view more: next ›