Sven Slootweg (soft-deprecated) @joepie91@pixie.town

https://soc.kouett.net.eu.org/objects/b360c238-66eb-41df-aab1-3f939ec92588

Het zou fijn zijn als gemeentes eens zouden stoppen met het neerleggen van spekglad siersteen als bestrating in herontworpen voetgangersgebieden, waardoor je bijna op je bek gaat als het even geregend heeft

Rust ecosystem document your expected error handling patterns challenge 2024 (still failing)

This is really one of those "I wish I had been wrong" moments

Quickly checking up on the state of public opinion about ESM in JS and it kind of feels like by this point pretty much everyone who has actually worked on JS tooling (which ESM was claimed to make easier) has come around to the view that ESM was a mistake and not worth the ecosystem misery it caused

Not remotely the first time I'm bringing this up, but: a lot of services don't actually need federation (with all the tradeoffs and caveats that come with that), they just need a mechanism for zero-effort account/profile creation and management that doesn't rely on a third-party service.

That's the sort of thing that could plausibly be solved with a browser extension or feature. It would be nice to see more interest of developers in doing so.

If you can eliminate the whole "pick username, enter personal details, generate password, keep track in password manager, confirm e-mail address in site-specific way, have to keep updating avatars/names across sites forever" dance, then "needing an account per site" suddenly isn't a problem at all anymore...

"Defederation, a way of addressing moderation issues in Mastodon by disconnecting servers, is not as relevant on Bluesky because there are other layers to the system. Server operators can set rules for what content they will host, but tools like blocklists and moderation services are what help communities self-organize around moderation preferences. We’ve already integrated block and mute lists, and the tooling for independent moderation services is coming soon."

That sure is a lot of words to say "we have no way to deal with clusters of targeted abuse" and make it sound like it's a *good* thing

Sigh, I guess I should've expected corporations to try and coopt "harm reduction"...

To be clear about this, "harm reduction" is what you do when you cannot solve the situation fully because of circumstances or (more frequently) an oppressive system that you do not control, and so the best you can do is mitigate the impact.

It is NOT an acceptable thing to do or argue when you *are* the ones in power and responsible for the problem existing in the first place, like tobacco companies are trying to do! The only valid approach in that situation is to stop harming people entirely.