rimu@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
Those checkboxes have been there since version 0.9. Ages.
The problem with grabbing small snippets of code is a lot of context is lost. Don’t trust anyone who does that. PieFed has 50,000 lines of code so anyone showing you 50 lines is leaving out 99.9% of the picture.
The 99% of the code does not deal with keeping Shadow Profiles on netizens and punishing them (as well as misinforming them about what’s going on). This 50something lines, does, and thus is a weighed key on which to judge the subject.
, we need […] community evangelists
What will they be commenting to the public on the CCP-like thing?
“Shadow profiles”? Huh?
Yeah. You know, Shadow Profiles? Datasets on users collected for the purpose of control and manipulation, basically the equivalent to back when McCarthynism and the FBI had a “dossier” on you.
That’s not what’s being done at all here. It’s not that deep. It’s just a number based on downvotes received/given.
The problem with grabbing small snippets of code is a lot of context is lost.
To me, it was obvious that these parts were configurable. There were literally boolean checks for it.
But these features remind me Reddit.
Why the constant shitting on “tankies” if you’re gonna have a social credit score?
get back to work hardcoding censorship and pushing your tankie ideology in your code.
What is wrong with you? Why would you put malicious code into piefed that deliberately misleads users?
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
These 2 statements are incompatible.
Plus depending on the snippets they definitely can tell how things work
wjs018@piefed.wjs018.xyz 3 weeks ago
Previous threads about these filters were people complaining about them being hardcoded, completely ignoring that they are completely optional and off by default. It would go something like this:
Look at this awful thing PieFed does!
It completely ignored the context that the
do_the_thingfunction is only called if the admin wants to do the thing.goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
Most of the issues people have brought up have been about why the snippets are even in the code not trying to obscure what the code does.
Again it’s why is this a thing
UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
Simple != few lines of code, nothing incompatible about those two statements
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
Saying the simple code needs lots of context outside of the code block says it’s either not simple or not easy to understand
UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
« The problem with grabbing small snippets of code is a lot of context is lost.» does not mean that a lot of additional code is required to understand the context, additionally, simple code may require you to read a bit of code to understand it.
Simplicity does not mean small scale, nor that it must be understood at a glance.
Rich Hickey got a great presentation where he discuss simplicity vs complexity. It’s worth a watch if you want to better understand the concepts.
www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/