banner pic is With You by Artkitt-Creations

Max & Chloe ♥ 4 ever

  • 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle




  • b3nsn0w@pricefield.orgtoLemmy@lemmy.mlDealing with Bot Accounts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    the only mass solution i found to this was that i installed pgadmin, logged into the db, and manually removed all the bot accounts from local_user. you should also remove them from the person table as well (you can easily find them if you do SELECT * FROM person WHERE local = true ORDER BY published DESC in the query tool), that way they don’t show up in your instance stats, but removing them from local_user would be enough to stop them from logging in.




  • Only reason I see is because of phones breaking. My current Mi 10T Lite was great for the first two years, then it started getting annoying. I can no longer use Wallpaper Engine because of a stupid system update, notifications started getting stuck, sometimes it has other minor annoyances. The hardware is still fine, there’s no reason this phone shouldn’t work, but it doesn’t. Xiaomi clearly wants me to go buy another phone.

    So I did. Just not from them. My Fairphone should be arriving any day now. My friend already got hers, and she got me super excited for it.




  • yeah, it’s very ingeniously limited, although i kind of take an issue with the specific consequence posited in the ending. subtracting that, i think it would be somewhat OP, but not more than rapid health regen or respawn.

    life is strange spoilers, DO NOT OPEN IF YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED THE GAME. seriously, it's an amazing experience, don't rob yourself of this one.

    you opened it. don’t. go back. seriously.

    Kate kills Victoria.

    alright.

    if you’re still here, i guess you have played, and you also likely know that’s bullshit, lol. let’s get serious.

    so the game tries to tell us in ep5 that Max is responsible for the storm, and that going back and not using her powers to save Chloe is going to stop causing that. but honestly, that theory is propped up by a ridiculous amount of one-off rules:

    • when Max saves William, she somehow brings the storm with herself to that timeline (the bathroom scene does not happen in this timeline for obvious reasons but the storm is still coming). however, she doesn’t bring it with herself to the bay ending timeline, even though she enters that one the same way.
    • whether Chloe is alive or not is posited to have an effect on the storm but the same is not true for Kate
    • Max gets a vision of the storm before she “created” it by saving Chloe
    • she also rewinds three times before taking the butterfly pic, which apparently don’t cause a storm
    • if the problem is deviation from the “original” timeline (which is weird, how does the universe remember what’s original and what’s not?) why does the deviation only create a storm 5 years later when saving William, but arrive in only 5 days, on the exact same day, when saving Chloe?

    in the end, so many rules and explanations have to be fridged for this to work that there are only two logical explanations: that there is an intelligent universe that just has it out for Chloe, or that Max didn’t create the storm. she isn’t the only thing that’s supernatural and weird about arcadia bay, so while she clearly can stop the storm by some miracle, it’s very unlikely that she put it in place.

    therefore, if we are to consider the consequences of one of us gaining the rewind,

    • if the universe just has it out for Chloe, we’re safe, unless we meet Chloe
    • if Max didn’t create the storm, we’re safe, we won’t create storms

    that said, i doubt i’d use the photo-jump much. you can lose so much to the effects of chaos theory – and i’m not talking supernatural storms, i’m talking very natural things in your life not happening.



  • I think it should go on the client, and the hash is pretty much a space saving measure. There are three options, as far as I see it:

    1. Assign random colors every time a page is rendered. This could get confusing on repeat visits, but it would come with the added perk of ensuring the impostor has a low chance of hitting the same color as the person they’re trying to impersonate every time.
    2. Assign random colors and save them on the client. This would probably balloon without an LRU data structure, but it could work.
    3. Use the hash. This basically generates random colors in a predictable way, implementing #2 without having to store anything.

    Given that Lemmy does a lot of reloads on navigation I don’t think #1 would work well. The hash is a quick and easy way around the complexities of other implementations.

    And yeah, in theory the server could store the client secret, making the colors consistent across all devices of a user, but it has to be non-public info. If it’s public, an impersonator could target a specific person and find a collision that fools them in particular.


  • As an instance admin having to post ads is literally my worst nightmare. Honestly, I might just throw in the towel if that ever becomes necessary.

    Do not ever open that Pandora’s box willingly. The cash advertisers give you is a honeypot, it’s something that ensnares you and sends you down a rabbit hole of “targeting” on which a whole industry of surveillance has been built in the past decades, one which you would slowly and inevitably be forced to join. On the scale of the entire internet, we need to grow up, learn to say no.

    If large instances get to a point where their staff cannot afford to host them, we can maybe chip in if needed. It’s already happening a lot on Lemmy and it’s great to see that – but honestly, it’s just also not that expensive to run the platform. I hope that doesn’t change in the future.

    In the long run, it’s less expensive to chip in than to watch ads. Those ads only work if they do actually have an effect on your spending (and I worked with marketing experts, you can trust them to meticulously track every single dime your site brings in for them), so you’re still making people spend money, but now you make them spend money on someone else’s product because that someone else will give you a small share, as opposed to having them spend that money directly with you. And that spending not only has to pay for the service you provide, it also has to pay for an entire industry fine-tuning the best methods to waste people’s time and deteriorate their attention spans to send them down a rabbit hole for what they should buy – in the end, you’re literally making the user experience worse and having your users pay for it.

    There is only one business advantage in ads: they are a form of forced revenue. When you ask someone to buy something or donate, you’re asking for their consent. When you shove an ad in their face you’re ignoring that, and they need to resort to adblockers to gain back the control you’ve taken from them. Which is also one of the many reasons I don’t ever want to see ads on the fediverse.


  • yeah, the point is that if hyazinthe@feddit.de hashes to, say, blue, they can try to find a similar-looking username that also hashes to blue, therefore helping with the impersonation. if you hash a client nonce that’s different for everyone, you may hash to blue on my screen but green on yours, and there will be no relation between who hashes to which color on your screen or mine. the impersonator will have no way to guess if their name would match colors on either of our screens, and if we have, say, 25, colors, it will be a static 4% chance no matter what they do.





  • display names kinda run counter to this and I’m not certain they’re a good idea

    i think they would be a good idea if they worked like they do on mastodon: you get the display name and profile pic displayed prominently, but you still have the full username displayed below, with the domain included.