They edited their response. When I responded there was only one paragraph and the stuff about the support not just being money wasn’t even aknowledged in their comment.

Obviusly.

But you can’t ask an addict to start resisting their addiction, if the have nothing else.

They need something to resist it for. If they don’t have that, their next high IS the most important thing to them.

And this whole thing where we keep saying “the addiction will win every time” promotes a defeatist attidue towards helping these people that has lead to policies that are literally killing them.

The addiction doesn’t win every time. If that were true there wouldn’t be any saving any addict ever.

Addicts can and will turn anything and everything of value given to them into money, that can then buy them another high, but that CANNOT be used as an excuse to refuse to help them.

Institutionlize, maybe, but that’s a healthcare problem, not a homeless problem. And that kind of help should be available to a person before they are ever put out of a home.

Money and shelter is always the first step.

Kicking an addiction is hard. Kicking an addiction without your basic needs met, is even harder.

People like to think that the homeless should solve the reasons for their homelessness first, and only then be helped. Because otherwise the help will just go to waste.

In reality, it should happen the other way around. The help makes it more likely they’ll solve their problems at all, and hence actually leads to less homelessness overrall.

It does. Kinda.

The police are seldom allowed to be in possession of CSAM, except for in terms of grabbing the hardware which contains it in an arrest. The database used in modern detection tools is maintained by NCMEC which has special permission to do so.

And of course there are risks, but it’s just digital data. Unless you are creating more, you’re not actively harming anyone. And law enforcement absolutely needs that data to take some of the most obvious steps to prevent it being spread further.

Obviously, someone has access, but to get to the actual media files wouldn’t be simple. What typically happens, is that anyone wanting to detect CSAM, is given a hashed version of the database. They can then scan their systems for CSAM by hashing any media they are hosting, and seeing whether there are any matches.

Whenever possible, people aren’t handling the actual media. But for any detection to be possible to begin with, the database of the actual media does need to be maintained somewhere.

AI is a touchier subject, as you can’t train a model to recognize CSAM not already in the database using hashes, so in those cases you have to work with actual real media. This is only recently becoming a thing.

It also leaves open the possibility for false positives. An oft cited example is parents taking pictures of their own children for innocent reasons, or doctors and parents handling images for valid medical reasons. In a system that flagged such content, it would mean someone else would be seeing that “private” content because it was flagged.

There are laws around it. Law enforcement doesn’t just delete any digital CSAM they seize.

Known CSAM is archived and analyzed rather than destroyed, and used to recognize additional instances of the same files in the wild. Wherever file scanning is possible.

Institutions and corporation can request licenses to access the database, or just the metadata that allows software to tell if a given file might be a copy of known CSAM.

This is the first time an attempt is being made at using the database to create software able to recognize CSAM that isn’t already known.

I’m personally quite sceptical of the merit. It may well be useful for scanning the public internet, but I’m guessing the plan is to push for it to be somehow implemented for private communication, no matter how badly that compromises the integrity of encryption.

You’d have to be immortal, first. Most kids are gonna live to see their own parents pass.

Tragedy is a part of life.

It’s easily avoidable tragedy, unaddressed by those who could do something about it, that’s the problem.

Even worse, there’s potentially extinction level tragedy happening right now, going unaddressed by those who can do something about it.

If you don’t have a kid, you’re not passing your environmental values, or you educational values, or all the other values you may have for what makes a better society. Nor do you have any reason to hold to them yourself.

…

Why does it have to be my kid for me to care?

Like actually. Are you seriously saying being a parent somehow intrinsically makes someone a better, more caring, and impactful, person? Or that parenthood is the only way to achieve true conviction? That’s literally not how any of this works.

Not bringing children into the world in no way prevents you from caring about making the world a better place, and acting to make it so. And doing the things that make the world better doesn’t functionally require having a kid. All it takes is some basic fucking decency.

Which is something people already have, but get taken away by the grind of survival or material success. That is maybe why you have this fucked up idea that people get it by having a kid, but in reality that’s just a huge life event that wakes some people up enough to take a look around and start caring again.

And passing good things on doesn’t require having descendants. If you’ve ever changed someones mind on something for the better, you’ve successfully passed on “values you may have for what makes a better society”. The person whose mind you changed doesn’t even need to be younger than you, thought doesn’t procreate through fucking genetics.

Plenty of parents are made no more profound than they were before by the act of procreating, and will conently continue to do nothing to improve the world. There are parents who will protect their own to the detriment of everyone else.

Kids though, if raised by caring parents, care from the start, but then have that heart crushed by society until they too have a kid of their own.

But in there is way for everyone to care, all the time.

The whole idea that it’s ok not to care about and deal with bad stuff unless you personally are somehow impacted is the whole reason we’re in this mess, and it’s perpetuated by people being forced to live in a constant scramble of stress and consumerism.

Not by people not having children.

ActivityPub unfortunately does need some work, and there’s drama about properly following the protocol and not extending it with non-standard stuff that then breaks things when federating with stuff outside the given application.

I’m optimistic, but I’m also making sure not to put too much of a stake in it, as it may eventually become an inferior system when compared to some future hypothetical standard.

And other standards like diaspora and ATProto, are around, and seeing use.

Oh hell yeah!

What? It’s a great umbrella term term for exactly this type of federated social media. Lemmy is just one application, and currently the biggest, but it already federates quite swimmingly with mbin and pixelfed.

What else would you even them all together?

There are. In most states.

He’s having the suits filed specifically in one of the few states that don’t.

You do realize Bluesky also tacks on .bsky.social? (Though with a dot instead of a second @)

And even without other instances, ATProto already allows people to sign up using domains they own.

The closest you can get to using Lost_My_Mind as you Bluesky handle is by aquiring a domain like lost_my_mind.com. And that still wouldn’t prevent someone else from signing up using lost_my_mind.net.

And that’s before pointing out that Impersonation and mistaken identities isn’t a solved problem on twitter, either.

Bluesky is succeeding because its a smooth and familiar experience that obfuscates away the complexity of how it works.

Absolutely nothing about how the ActivityPub network works conceptually prevents it from being an equally smooth experience, given the work were put in.

Your first six paragraphs hit the mark, but the following rant about the “username univerasility problem” ain’t it.

Not that I’m aware.

But there are web UIs you can run that allow you to run a lemmy instance more like a forum, and that could of course be federated with other fediverse instances, including other forum instances.

But not existing forum systems. That’s something they have to implement, not lemmy.

Behind the scenes Lemmy speaks a protocol called ActivityPub. It can’t just talk to any other similar arbitrary service if it doesn’t also support the protocol.

Edit: Apparently the forum systems you mention do/will indeed support ActivityPub. There would certainly be potential for interpretability with the threadiverse, then.

No.

But they don’t need to be. They’re essentially just indexers.

If two relays index all the same content, then any services using either will be “interconnected” in the sense that any users can see each other and interact with each other.

Each relay host can choose what parts of the network they want to index, and as far as I can tell, any services could use multiple relays if they like.

I know.

ATproto has some interesting advantages, and eventually the idea is for anyone to be able to host any microservice component of the network, including relays other than the one run by Bluesky.

The relays don’t need to be centralized. They are indexers that provide functionality to others parts of the ATproto network.

The problem is that there isn’t really any incentive to do so… Any additional instances or new apps running ATproto can just rely on the one big indexer provided by Bluesky, instead of running each microservice component themselves.

I won’t be joining in until I can actually run a real instance on my own.

I don’t plan on doing that, but the important part is knowing that I could.

No.

Wasn’t there someone who bought youtube ads and had the ad be a rick roll?

I was saved by the cookie approval pop-up tho.

Ah.

I just figured out why I’ll never find true love, then.

I ain’t doing that for anyone.

Except my cat.