Still can’t really hold them liable unless they deliberately sold a weapon to someone who legally was prohibited from having a weapon.

That’s a very American point of view though - America isn’t holding those who create/sell tools that do bad things to account. If gun manufacturers were held responsible for how the things they created were used, you can bet anything suddenly they’d be hell of lot safer. Which is the exact same point about AI.

(Obviously not holding manufacturers/sellers to account is not an America-only issue, but this article is about AI and the USA so that’s the example I’m using.)

The bigger question is why did someone feel the need to kill others?

As a non-American, I think the general question is why on earth does the general public need semi-automatic weapons. Or really, any weapons.

Yes, this, not the school.

Well the American way is not to hold the company accountable, I.e. school shootings, so yeah.

I switched to an amd card not that long ago so I could use wayland.

Way too many issues, games being jittery, crashing, graphical effects with it to continue trying. I ended up switching back to x after a couple of days and then instead went for an amd card for the wayland benefits.

Considering the mass exodus of Dr’s abroad, who exactly do they expect to do this. The only way to achieve this is to improve conditions, pay, and invest in the training of new Dr’s.

Nice, I’d seen you’d stopped a while ago but I’ll look at hosting it if it’s back alive.

It has

Or do you have an existing project that requires additional effort to enable further development?

So I assume the Lemmy devs should be good to reapply.

Here’s a handy site to check your federation status: https://phiresky.github.io/lemmy-federation-state/site?domain=social.packetloss.gg

It looks like all the sites are lagging, which can sometimes mean there is an issue. What’s the specs of the server? Can you try restarting it and seeing if that helps?

There are issues for servers hosted in places like Australia because of the latency in communicating with .world due to how big it is and how much data it sends because of this.

Pop got me into Linux in July 2021 (i switched the same time as the steamdeck was announced) and I ran Pop for a good two and a half years. Great distro.

Now I’m on EndeavourOS, but it was Pop that helped me make the transition.

Not directly, but you can go to browse.feddit.de and type the instance into the search bar to get a list of communities

Most other social networks allow users to select whether they are reporting a violation of community rules, or site rules as whole.

Why not take this approach to simplify it then?

Asking the user to specify who they think should receive a report feels like it will add confusion (not to mention is subjective anyway), and could create delays in responding to important stuff if the user picks the “wrong” option. If a user picks the mod option on csam report then it might get missed by an admin? At least the option between “this community” or “site rules” is a bit clearer.

This is to prevent cases of admins accidentally preventing mods from moderating according to their own community rules

As an admin I should be able to respond to a mod report on a community if I’m there first and its urgent, i.e. csam. This is a policy/discussion point between mods and admins on any given instance and shouldn’t be enforced in the software. Separation for clarity’s sake is fine, I even encourage that as I don’t tend to touch a report for a community anyway as it stands, but I should be able to mark a report complete if I have dealt with it. Otherwise I’m just going to go to the post and sort it out anyway, so its just adding complexity.

Admins can still always explicitly take over communities by making themselves mods, in this way, they are able to handle mod reports for any abandoned communities, etc

Barriers/extra steps to administration is not the way forward here. Continuing with Admins being able to mark reports resolved just makes sense.

Alternatively, we could make reporting even more granular. It would be possible to allow users to select only a specific instances admins as the intended report audience, for example.

No. This is a step backwards in transparency and moderation efforts. Granularity and more options is not always a good thing. If you’ve ever had the misfortune of using Meta’s report functionality you’ll know how overly complex and frustrating their report system is to use with all their “granularity”.

Simplicity of use and getting a report to someone who can do something about it quickly should always be the priority, adding options and functionality should be secondary and support this. If you don’t want to be stepping on moderators toes, make that clear in your guidelines and processes.

I am legally on the hook for content on my instance, not the moderators, and proposing changes that make it harder to be an admin is a touch annoying.

To add: I would suggest thinking about expanding this to notify the user a report has been dealt with/resolved, optionally including rationale, because that feedback element can sometimes be lacking.

Nice solution, thank you :)

Thanks, this doesn’t pull only unread comments - if I pull the latest 5 comments and then mark those overarching posts as read, I get this:

2024-02-02 09:52:11,278 - INFO - Requesting API Request.GET /comment/list
2024-02-02 09:52:11,507 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9335073
Comment ID = 6915381
2024-02-02 09:52:11,629 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9007864
Comment ID = 6915380
2024-02-02 09:52:11,742 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9319139
Comment ID = 6915382
2024-02-02 09:52:11,916 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9334778
Comment ID = 6915379
2024-02-02 09:52:12,100 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9283396
Comment ID = 6915378

If I then pull the 5 latest comments again:

2024-02-02 09:52:12,238 - INFO - Requesting API Request.GET /comment/list
2024-02-02 09:52:12,380 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9335073
Comment ID = 6915381
2024-02-02 09:52:12,521 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9007864
Comment ID = 6915380
2024-02-02 09:52:12,673 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9319139
Comment ID = 6915382
2024-02-02 09:52:12,835 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9334778
Comment ID = 6915379
2024-02-02 09:52:12,977 - INFO - Requesting API Request.POST /post/mark_as_read
Post ID = 9283396
Comment ID = 6915378

Which is the same 5 comments - so what I’m looking for is a way to pull only previously “unseen” comments - that would reduce the amount of data returned from the api each time i check the list if there was only 1 or 2 comments rather than returning all 25.

Apps can indicate that there are new unread comments on a post, but I assume they’re not doing this via the api and its a UI thing to do with caching?

I may not have explained myself clearly here, though!

I could entirely be wrong, but I dont see anything obvious in the api that indicates this is a function of the api. You could potentially use markPostAsRead after scanning each comment, but I don’t see a way of pulling only new unread comments after that. Would love to be proven wrong though :)

I’ve pushed the change so operators can change those values in the env file or via docker. Btw let me know if you do start work on the megathread thing, it does pose an interesting challenge in terms of structuring posts and handling that data.

+1 for pop, used it for 2 years with very few issues on an nvidia gpu

It’s in json format so in reality it’s very little data. There’s no way (that I know of) to grab only “new” comments - I don’t think the lemmy api has anything like that.

Even if you put seen comments in a db you’ve still got to pull them to check if they’ve been seen or not which defeats the object.

25 every 5 seconds might be a touch overkill too but it does stop the bot missing any comments. I can certainly move them to variables that can be set in the env file/docker.

Edit to add: if it is locked down to one community then yes its way overkill, so will add them as variables and update docs to reflect.

Exclusive, it is currently active across all of lemmy and mods can pm it to exclude their community from it.

While the legolas bot is a joke/proof of concept, mods can use a bot like this to support users with various things, respond automatically to key words (especially negative key words).

If you don’t like it, block it and move on.

Apparently legolas likes to repeat himself