That’s neat. Until a representation of something on a blockchain has any legal meaning regarding authenticity, ownership, or anything else, and until the overwhelming majority usage of NFTs isn’t as a scam, NFTs remain a pathetic and comically stupid class of speculative asset constituting a pyramid scheme that also happens to destroy the environment.
Whether something is open-source or not is dependent on what license if any its creator chooses to put it under. a) This comment confuses me more than anything, and b) if you want to make a better Flappy Bird game, you’ll probably have a better shot forking one of the existing clones than waiting for whatever steaming, uninspired pile of shit comes out of Belfort’s wallet.
Oh, what’s that watermark at the bottom right? Oh, the site whose bread and butter is unsubstantiated, pseudoscientific conspiracy theories? Wow, I’m so surprised. I guess astrophysics journals aren’t credible now either because some shitty flat Earth website says they’re all secretly controlled by NASA.
Hi, MBFC bot, you forgot to account for the fact that this is a wire story from the Agence France-Presse, one of the best, most credible news agencies in the world. As usual, you’re less than worthless.
MBFC calls both The Guardian and Breitbart “MIXED” in their factual accuracy. For Breitbart? It’s because they’re an alt-right disinformation factory which as a policy denies fundamental and provably true scientific facts like climate change, spreads baseless, trivially disproven conspiratorial nonsense, and intentionally misleads readers left and right. For The Guardian? Well they’ve failed five fact checks in the last five years, and these fact checks are as robust as, umm…
“Private renting is making millions of people ill.”
“Private renting is making millions of people ill, but maybe this happens with other housing situations too, we don’t know, so we rate this as false.”
MBFC is a joke, and this bot is a pathetic sham.
MBFC calls both The Guardian and Breitbart “MIXED” in their factual accuracy. For Breitbart? It’s because they’re an alt-right disinformation factory which as a policy denies fundamental and provably true scientific facts like climate change, spreads baseless, trivially disproven conspiratorial nonsense, and intentionally misleads readers left and right. For The Guardian? Well they’ve failed five fact checks in the last five years, and these fact checks are as robust as, umm…
“Private renting is making millions of people ill.”
“Private renting is making millions of people ill, but maybe this happens with other housing situations too, we don’t know, so we rate this as false.”
MBFC is a joke, and this bot is a pathetic sham.
Is there such a community here? Maybe you could start one.
“Air Canada believes there is still time to reach an agreement with our pilot group, provided ALPA moderates its wage demands which far exceed average Canadian wage increases,” CEO Michael Rousseau said on Monday.
Petulant little bitch who’s getting their airline shut down says what?
I reported like three of their comments, and they were:
Was there a fourth one? Was that the abuse of the system? I’m just confused here. (Didn’t downvote you, btw; just genuinely perplexed.)
Edit: in fact, ironically, this user’s account seems to have been banned ostensibly for the things they’ve said here, and while LW’s ToS aren’t the exact same as PS’, they’re extremely similar. I can’t think of anything weird or out there that PS does in their ToS that means would’ve gotten banned on PS but not on LW.
Also, “I am not advocating genocide, but” is so telling about how they actually feel. They’re reveling in this but have to hide their true colors. Good thing they’re really awful at doing that.
“Genocidal zionist furries” definitely aren’t the first thing I expected when I came to Lemmy, but here we are I guess.
The quote above is literally a verbatim ruling by the ICJ telling Israel to “immediately halt its military offensive” because it could “bring about the destruction in whole or in part” of the Palestinian people living in Gaza. I’m sorry that basic English literacy is antisemitic to you.
First sentence actually: “Experts, governments, United Nations agencies, and non-governmental organisations have accused Israel of carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people during its invasion and bombing in the Gaza Strip during the ongoing Israel–Hamas war.”
You know who else was found to have committed genocide through accusations by international organizations, NGOs, governments, and experts? Literally every government that’s committed genocide in the history of fucking anything ever because there’s not a god of genocide that descends from on high to inform humanity that a genocide has been committed. Like I know this genocide-denying argument is being made in bad faith, but can you at least have some dignity about it and make it seem like you’re at least trying to be intelligent?
The ICJ – which Donoghue is a part of – speaks for itself, and the ICJ tells Israel to stop their genocidal invasion. Israel as a rogue state run by a far-right government aided by its corrupt supreme court refuses to cooperate with this order and continues to commit genocide.
And your source is UN Watch, a lobbying group tied to the Israeli government. In the BBC interview, she clearly gets into pedantic legalese about how “the court determined that the Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide”, and the fact that UN Watch is taking that as some kind of pedantic “own” is pretty telling. What’s especially curious to me is that this video was posted in April, but you fail to acknowledge that the ICJ a month later ordered Israel to halt its offensive in this case.
The State of Israel shall, in conformity with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and in view of the worsening conditions of life faced by civilians in the Rafah Governorate:
Immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
Your entire comment history is genocide denial; go deny it somewhere else.
Not really. In terms of engaging with posts, oh my god, absolutely it’s worse. Twitter and its clones suck when it comes to engaging with things people post (but Mastodon at least makes it a bit better by increasing the character limit). But there’s just something different about following a hashtag versus following a Lemmy community. Like for example, when it comes to getting highly detailed, up-to-the-minute news about things, Mastodon beats Lemmy every time. Additionally, I can see people’s random, one-off takes that wouldn’t really warrant a post on Lemmy.
I would argue too that it’s not even true that you should just be focused on following hashtags, but rather that you should be trying to do both.
To me, Lemmy is the type of place I could kill two hours; for Mastodon, it’s maybe 15 minutes, but that doesn’t make it inferior, just a different use-case. It’s pretty apples-to-oranges.
And if you haven’t used it in a while, we recently made a blog post giving a rundown of the changes leading up to our most recent major release.