I’d start watching the MCU again if there was a she-shrimp superhero with pistol-shrimp powers

You can disagree without a downvote option.

It’s more constructive to formulate a response for disagreement anyway.

I legitimately don’t even know why someone might think this.

Why? I don’t see a benefit to the button at all. Even being able to register disapproval is better done via comment, anyway, and having to articulate it makes you far more likely to self-reflect and temper yourself than if you can just downvote every comment in a thread

This is just further evidence that we just shouldn’t have a downvote option at all.

That’s just how a federated exchange needs to work, though. Without sharing which user is creating activity, there would be no way of verifying the legitimacy of activity without some convoluted blockchain process. On the other hand, sharing IP addresses isn’t just unnecessary but more involved.

There’s frankly no point in making votes private, anyway. Why should it matter who knows how you vote?

Important to note here, too, is that ip addresses of users arent synced across instances.

This is only a problem for people who care about the reputation of their user account - which is something people should be rotating out anyway if they care about their privacy.

IP addresses are not something that can be pulled from just any instance. You would need to be the administrator, and even then you’d only get access to the ip address of just your own instance users. AFAIK, at least - maybe they’ve made efforts to mask ips, too, but im not even sure how that’d work.

Federated posts and comments are copied from server to server. When someone from .world is looking at a comment from .dbzer0, what they are seeing is information that was synced from the dbzer0 server address, not the user’s.

There was a brief moment when there was a vulnerability with linked images sent via DM that could route you to an external server and log your IP address, but that has been patched now by most instances.

As with anything on the internet: assume your activity is not private at all times, or take active precautions to mask your identity, or both. No opsec is perfect and often the only thing standing in the way of a hack or dox is the endurance and motivation of the bad actor.

A simple toggle, secured with a password would do it.

Yea, that’s the thing - I don’t think it would ‘do’ it for legislators. Like you mentioned - it’s not really about protecting children, but also the only way to enforce a law like this would be to log or register devices to specific people or children. This would essentially just shift the point of verification from the individual website to the point of sale of the phone or tablet. Verifying the age is the part that necessitates identification - the only thing a hardware-locked strategy does is centralizes that verification to a governing body instead of individual websites, but it still associates individuals with specific devices.

I get why this might seem preferable, but the problem of online privacy still persists.

I’m so tired of this civility meta.

Lemmy is half as uncivilized as any other social media space I’ve ever been in, including reddit or Twitter. I think people are just confused by a lack of centralized authority to settle disputes on what is or isn’t ‘civil’ behavior - but it certainly isn’t the case that it’s any less civil than just about any alternative.

Maybe this places extra stress on instance admins for constantly addressing complaints of users on and off their server, but that has less to do with the kind of user civility people are talking about and more with a culture of mob justice evidenced by communities like MoG and PTB.

People seem uncomfortable with multipolar systems, and maybe it’s because of my political bent but I think distributed systems are way better.

I don’t think this is a good idea…

This is even more invasive - it would mean all the traffic and activity in every device would be traceable to a registration. Whereas now they might have a pretty good lock on individual device ids, they’d then have an actual registry of devices and owners to verify it against

K but who gets the fatwa? The doctor?

Yes, and they are not required to run in a primary because those are run by each party (being independent means you don’t have a party to begin with)

There’s no limit (AFAIK) to the number of candidates on the ballot, but there is a deadline to file and that deadline has passed. Cuomo had preemptively filed as an independent candidate in case he didn’t win the primary (I think Mamdani did this too), but had not publicly stated whether he would use it until now.

It was a reference

Did you know that it’s illegal to say, “I wish someone would kill the president of the united states”?

Im not saying it, im just letting you know that it’s illegal. Like a public service announcement.

voting heavily

That’s not how that works.

Lesser, greater, middling.

Force ranked choice voting by… loudly supporting them no matter what they do?

Force is a relative concept, it seems

My BIL who works in ecology asked me why people are freaking out about low birthing rates, because in his area of specialty most people are still talking about the need to slow population growth down.

If Cuomo runs independent, the democratic party loses any hope of keeping their progressive base and it might actually split entirely.

After bullying their base for the last 10 years to get in line behind their shit moderate candidates, if they were to suddenly decide that primaries don’t mean anything then they’d never be able to convince progressives to vote against their interests again.

Cuomo is backed by the democratic establishment and the DNC’s donor class. It doesnt matter if he’s independent, he’s the establishment pick and would be running with their funding.