![](https://feddit.uk/pictrs/image/c052726d-62c3-42e2-b5b4-e87b2ac563ba.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/2665e448-91d9-484d-919d-113c9715fc79.png)
> Tango makes a great game
> Put it day one on Game Pass
> Close the studio when it doesn’t meet sale targets
Corp. logic truly is something else.
> Tango makes a great game
> Put it day one on Game Pass
> Close the studio when it doesn’t meet sale targets
Corp. logic truly is something else.
“ActivityPub’s API is how client applications interact with the data on a user’s main account server. It lets the user read data on the same or other servers, and it lets them create activities and other kinds of objects on that server that get shared (under the user’s control) with the rest of the world.”
I can’t see how Apub’s C2S API can realistically be implemented. It’s fairly light on details and if I’m understanding it correctly the only standard way to get activity from the server is to pull from an actor’s inbox, which has to be an OrderedCollection
of all the activity the actor has received (likes, notifications, posts, the lot). This shifts a lot of the work to clients which, apart from being being very classist, is very limiting for implementations.
Lemmy’s upvotes are same thing as likes, and downvotes are dislikes. This is kinda hard to tell because Mastodon doesn’t federate likes, so Lemmy posts will always show up as having no favourites.
They did mention Lemmy in the article.
No, the devs have explicitly stated they don’t want to add following users to Lemmy.
It’s performative cruelty to desperately claw back some points in the polls.
I think being indifferent to the suffering you cause on those around you is a moral failing. You said yourself you aim to treat people how you want to be treated, do you not care if those around you inflict suffering on you? I don’t see how indifference to suffering can be universalised.
Edit: didn’t see your edit before posting, I still don’t think you’ve justified why the unnecessary killing/causing suffering of a person and animal are different. Your argument seems very circular on this, killing humans and animals are different because they are different.
Why not? If actions I take cause you suffering, shouldn’t I try my best to prevent that?
Is disease prevention also amoral?
Do you think we shouldn’t try to minimise unnecessary suffering?
No it’s not. Disease is a natural phenomenon and is bad.
i don’t know what it’s like to be a chicken or a pig
But you do know what it’s like to suffer. And you know pigs, chickens, and other farm animals can suffer. Does that not count for anything? Or do you not consider suffering to be an inheriently bad thing?
OK, so this is literally an appeal to nature. I seriously don’t see why behaviour should get a free pass just because it’s ‘natural,’ except the very natural phenomenon of humans killing each other.
living things are in competition and killing is a matter of course. it is natural.
And?
i think a special case must be made against killings. among humans, there are many (distinct) arguments against killing. among the ones i’ve heard, the ones which would also apply to animals are not ones that i personally believe.
What do you believe? From what I’ve been able to gather from your replies to me and others, you put hold the following two beliefs:
I don’t think these are sound arguments.
I’m not saying there are, but just because we currently murder pigs is not justification to continue killing them.
it is obvious that there is a difference or we wouldn’t discriminate between humans and non-human animals.
Isn’t this just the is-ought problem though? Just because we currently distinguish between animals and humans doesn’t mean we ought to.
Never heard of the term before now, but yeah I suppose it is NTT.
Can’t believe they didn’t call it Stadium.