Depends on where on the scale between legit and scam your business is. I see three options:

• 1, It’s a scam: Terrible news for you, but good news for everyone else. In that case, your wellbeing is a sacrifice we’re willing to make.
• 2, It’s legit: Then it’s even good news for you, as it takes away the shady competition.
• 3, It’s legit, but still treated as if you’re the bad guy: That’s the interesting point. If that is the case, can you show where the ban fails?

Just a guess: to prevent bots from scraping the full content?

As phrased in a recent anti-union campaign by Amazon: Watch out, your co-workers might be “vulnerable to organizing”.

Distinguishing that from just an algorithm

How do you distinguish intelligence from just an algorithm, for example our own?

I assume this was nothing more but a wild assumption on thin ice personal belief.

Edit: Next downvotee please enlighten mee. How do you distinguish the two?

One reason might be: Each instance only has a partial knowledge of content in Lemmy. It can be unaware of certain communities on other instances, if your instance has not discovered them yet. Hence the need for all these meta-search tools.

Then null will be returned, as the value of b.

That’s kind of two of my main points:

1. Treat your volunteers well, or why should they continue volunteering?
2. Kernel maintainers have plenty of other opportunities.

I don’t know if they are volunteering or being paid. The other person said they are being paid.

Either way, no one deserves being talked down to like that, even if they made a mistake. It’s a matter of respect and self-respect. And as a skilled person like a kernel developer, it should be trivially easy to find other work in a more appropriate environment.

That being said, maybe I’m missing something. Torvalds has been known to be like that for a long time (although that seems to be over now). And still, Linux has been developed over decades. So apparently, skilled people flocked around Torvalds, or maybe rather his project. Not entirely sure why, but I’m taking it as a hint I might be missing something.

I would not work with or even for someone with such an attitude, not even for money. Ok, do it yourself, bye. Got better places to be.

False dichotomy.

I feel like I’m pretending to know what I’m doing.

I guess that explains the observation. As kids, we’re fooled by the pretenders. So we grow up with this expectation.

That’s a weird take. Methane emissions are one impact, land use change another. There are even studies arguing in both directions.

Meat production is a main driver of rainforest deforestation. All three of these claims are well documented and easily searchable.

So either way, it’s evidently wrong to say cattle don’t had any impact.

We need to do all of it, it’s not an either-or. That luxury is long gone.

Oh, alright. Seems you would have been fine if I had written “Some people” instead of just “People”. As a non-native speaker, I’m not sure wether “People” actually means some or all people.

Like when I say “People like the new iPhone”, are you sure that means all people like it? Or can that sentence be said when a large number likes it, although some don’t, and the overall majority didn’t even consider to buy it?

Either way, I could have clarified with a short emphasis, yes.

There were lots of posts and comments how Israel killed 500 civilians. A lot of people seemed to care who did it.

With that background, it’s worthwhile to post additional information if the previous was misleading. Doesn’t matter if it’s the same people (not exactly sure to who you’re referring), neither did I create an enemy.

Apparently there was demand for the information who did it, so it’s good to post updates, even if other people think it doesn’t matter.

And this wasn’t just any but fuck man. It was the “perfect but fuck man I love”!

It’s dishonest to pretend the other side shares your point of view, thus ignoring their point of view, as if it would not exist.

A bit ironic to do so in a subthread which is all about the two sides should talk to each other.

Maybe it only underlines how hard that is. We here have no stakes in that game and still cannot at least acknowledge other positions.

Ok, that qualifies. Only question is how realistic that is. Requires lots of trust and giving up power while being tried for war crimes for IDF.

So what’s the solution without any ethnical cleansing?

🤔 Can you check if it’s still available to you?

404 Page Not Found

Maybe the situation has changed. Some parts of Palestine see themselves as opressed, see negotiations and compromise as futile. They want their land back. Some parts of Israel will not want to cede that without a fight. Others are worried of being suicide bombed in coexistence.

People in general can coexist peacefully. But in the current timeline, it isn’t obvious how peace could be achieved without anyone moving.