Spooky Key πŸŽƒ πŸ—πŸ¦Šβœ…

Spooky Key πŸŽƒ πŸ—πŸ¦Šβœ…

@keytryer.net

He/him. Fox gamedev irl. Machine pervert. Furry stuff here and opinions about technology, games, movies, AI, VR. Banner 🎨 by @Perpleon.bsky.social https://ko-fi.com/keytryer

2.8K followers819 following21K posts

It seems totally absurd that right wingers would care about spreading the right wing to the world when right wing ideology isn't internationalist. Like wtf do you care, you can just close yourself off like you were planning to do anyway.

Spooky Key πŸŽƒ πŸ—πŸ¦Šβœ… reposted

being anti AI is a luxury belief only available to first world people, especially Americans imagine how important machine translation is for people whose first languages aren't that common

Spooky Key πŸŽƒ πŸ—πŸ¦Šβœ… reposted

Replying to @keytryer.net

Do you guys not also have rich dads who give you money as a collateral for your multi-million box office failures and to take over some other dude's company?

Spooky Key πŸŽƒ πŸ—πŸ¦Šβœ… reposted

All the people complaining about AI in game code have never received actual, real half-baked projects from other companies and seen what horrors actual, real professionals were doing.

Twitter now treats verification as a subscription donation system, but I wasn't a fan of the previous Twitter centralized verification either. A true verification system simply ensures that a user is part of a computer network that belongs to an organization.

3. Likewise, nodes should have been able to defederate or disconnect from other nodes. 4. Verification is stupid. Verification should be obvious and inherent, not a centralized body. For example, if someone's handle is "@cnn.net" that already certified that they're a journalist.

If you email someone or receive an email from an official domain from an organization, you trust (Unless they've been hacked) that that person belongs to a real organization who set up the email system in the first place and can be easily be checked.

Not even Mastodon has this! because Mastodon depends on users signing up for individual node domains. No social media site has used the most obvious verification system since the Internet was invented. And Bluesky could have done that, but they were captured by their idiot users.

I do actually like what Bluesky could have been, the idea of a real decentralized social media with a free and open API based on a complex graph network. I'm not even against the blocking feature, but I think it could have been handled differently. But,

View full thread

I do actually like what Bluesky could have been, the idea of a real decentralized social media with a free and open API based on a complex graph network. I'm not even against the blocking feature, but I think it could have been handled differently. But,

View full thread

Bluesky started with this goal but the population thought it was Twitter 2. So they demanded that everything should be centralized, with strong central moderation, and a governing body (whom they hate). A lot of journalists wanted to make a home on Bluesky and instead of--

--using handles as a verification system, they wanted a centralized verification like Twitter does, which enforces "de facto fame", and not real inherent verifiability like email. Blocklists became a tool for power users to tighten control of the site and limit--

I do actually like what Bluesky could have been, the idea of a real decentralized social media with a free and open API based on a complex graph network. I'm not even against the blocking feature, but I think it could have been handled differently. But,

View full thread

3. Likewise, nodes should have been able to defederate or disconnect from other nodes. 4. Verification is stupid. Verification should be obvious and inherent, not a centralized body. For example, if someone's handle is "@cnn.net" that already certified that they're a journalist.

How's that different from Mastodon? Mastodon has massive trouble with user identity. Someone can't transfer their identity to another node without starting from scratch. The goal of Bluesky should have been to make a portable system that enforces single user identity and history.

I do actually like what Bluesky could have been, the idea of a real decentralized social media with a free and open API based on a complex graph network. I'm not even against the blocking feature, but I think it could have been handled differently. But,

Several things went wrong: 1. Blocklists are one-sided, can't be removed, and allows power users to blanket ban and slander others, taking control of the network. 2. It should never have implemented dedicated moderation. Moderation should be handled by node owners and users.

I feel like Sol 6.1 is extremely dumb, it'll give a lot of weight to random stuff in the conversation and has little intuition, will just say shit just to say something. But it's very persistent in researching information. Fable 5.1 is very clever and intuitive but it's lazy af