TheTechnician27
@TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
- Comment on Missing project? 3 days ago:
it shouldn’t be that hard?OP, what’s your background to make you think that way, and if you’re qualified enough to make that assessment, why haven’t you hopped on what could possibly make you a decent bit of money from convenience fees?
- Comment on Judge finds police acted reasonably in shooting New Mexico man while at wrong address 2 weeks ago:
The judge also said the officers were entitled under the circumstances to qualified immunity — special legal protections that prevent people from suing over claims that police or government workers violated their constitutional rights.
And there it fucking is.
- Comment on YSK that editing Wikipedia is easier than it looks (and where to start) 2 weeks ago:
That’s mainly why I’m curious to see specific examples: I’ve fixed hundreds if not thousands of typos and can’t remember this happening, even long before I had much experience editing. I’m long past the point where I’d be considered a new editor, so any results I’d get now would be bullshit anyway short of violating the rules and starting a smurf account.
Regarding “in the clique”, people give a shit about who’s who a lot less than you’d think. Despite having 25,000 edits over 8 years, I’ve interacted with maybe three people in the top 100 by number of contributions (let alone even know who they are). I’m not a social butterfly on there, but I’ve interacted in hundreds of discussions when needed.
The only instance I’ve seen of someone trying to play king shit of fuck mountain and not immediately failing is in our article for San Francisco, where they were insistent that there was a strong consensus for using only one image in the infobox instead of the usual collage we do in 99.9% of major cities. The image used was a picture of the Golden Gate Bridge in front of the San Francisco skyline – neither of which were represented well. They’d been shutting down ideas for a collage for years, and when other editors found out about this, it turned into a request for comment (RfC). Despite their now having 500,000 edits in about 18 years (this ought to put them in the alleged “clique” even though I’d never heard of them before) this swung wildly against them to the point of the RfC being closed early, and the article now has a (I think really nice) collage.
(TL;DR: the policy against trying to dictate the contents of an article isn’t just there so we can say “but c it’s agenst da rulez so it dusnt happin!!”; it’s there because the wider editing community fucking hates that shit and doesn’t put up with it.)
- Comment on YSK that editing Wikipedia is easier than it looks (and where to start) 2 weeks ago:
If you don’t mind, I’d be interested to take a look and see what the reason edits got reverted. Obviously it’s stale enough now that I can’t ask anyone involved to not bite the newcomers or tell them why reversions they made may not be correct, but I’m still curious to see what kinds of edits by new editors commonly get reverted.
- Comment on YSK that editing Wikipedia is easier than it looks (and where to start) 2 weeks ago:
A good feature if you ever decide to edit again (on desktop, probably mobile too) is that in the source editor, there’s a
Show Previewbutton. This renders out the page as if you’d committed the change. I said in another comment that almost 2% of my edits have been reverted in some way, and many of those are self-reverts. The only reason there aren’t more immediate self-reverts isn’t because I’m making fewer mistakes; it’s because I’ve mostly replaced the “oh fuck go back” button with being able to quickly identify how I broke something (unless what I’ve done is unsalvageable).The other day during a discussion, a few editors started joking about how many mistakes we make. Cullen328 (yes, the admin mentioned in this post) said: “One of my most common edit summaries is “Fixed typo”, which usually means that I fixed my own typo.” The Bushranger, another admin, replied: "I always spot mine just after hitting ‘Publish changes’… " And finally I said: “It feels like 50% of the edits I publish have the same energy as Peter watching Gwen Stacy fall to her death in slow-motion in TASM 2.” Between the three of us is about 300,000 edits, two little icons with a mop, and over 30 years of experience editing. Not only will you fuck up at first, but you’ll continue to fuck up over and over again forever. It’s how you deal with it that counts, and you dealt with it well.
- Comment on YSK that editing Wikipedia is easier than it looks (and where to start) 2 weeks ago:
Inject whatever weird, obscure fucking drama this into my veins, please. I know Bloodborne has an indie wiki; do the Souls games not have one?
- Comment on YSK that editing Wikipedia is easier than it looks (and where to start) 2 weeks ago:
There’s fortunately no such thing as control of the page. Like I explained above, reversion is considered a normal but uncommon part of the editing process. It’s especially common for new editors to have their initial edit reverted on policy/guideline grounds but then have a modified version of the edit let through with no issue. In order not to not bite newcomers, experienced editors will often bite the bullet and take the time to fix policy/guideline violations themselves while telling the newcomer what they did wrong.
If you go to discuss the reversion with the other editor on the talk page and it becomes clear this isn’t about policy or guideline violations (or they’re couching it in policy/guidelines through wikilawyering nonsense) but instead that they think they’re king shit of fuck mountain and own the article, ask an administrator. Administrators hate that shit.
- Comment on YSK that editing Wikipedia is easier than it looks (and where to start) 2 weeks ago:
That makes sense. “Probably over 20 years ago now” probably means that there weren’t any solid guidelines or policies to revert based on, since it was only around 2006 that the community rapidly began developing formal standards. I’m betting a lot more reverts were “nuh uh”, “yuh huh” than they are today. If you still remember the account name, I’m curious to see what bullshit transpired. If the watchlist even existed back then, someone probably saw a new edit, didn’t like it for whatever reason (I have no capacity to judge), and hit the “nuh uh” button.
Something new editors get confused about (me especially; I was so pissed the first time) is that edits can be reverted by anyone for any reason. (By “can”, I don’t mean “may”; a pattern of bad-faith reversions will quickly get you blocked). Almost 2% of my edits have been reverted in some way, and plenty of those have been by people with 1/100th the experience I have (some rightly so, some not so much). Reversion is actually considered a very normal if uncommon part of the editing process, and it’s used to generate a healthy consensus on the talk page when done in good faith. But the pertinent point is that reversions can be done by anybody just like additions can be done by anybody; it’s just another edit in “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit™”. I remember reverting an admin’s edit before (normal editing, not administrative work), and we just had a normal conversation whose outcome I can’t remember.
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to youshouldknow@lemmy.world | 17 comments
- Comment on YSK some cities in the US are starting to build an affordable community built wifi network that goes around big telecom companies 2 weeks ago:
For a municipal wireless network, I’m not too bothered with how OP describes it if it’s accessed through Wi-Fi.
- Comment on Cleveland Brown from Family Guy is probably named after the Cleveland Browns, a pro American football team 2 weeks ago:
I just don’t watch American football, even the Super Bowl, so I know the team exists but have to think about it maybe once a year.
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 5 comments
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
This is an ad for a proofreading service, so nominally it’s meant for you to use in formal writing. Moreover, only a small proportion of these words are “fancy”.
That said, a thesaurus is best used for remembering words you already know, i.e. not this. Careful use of a thesaurus to find new words provided you research them first – e.g. look them up on Wiktionary (bang
!wton DuckDuckGo) to see example sentences, etymologies, pronunciations, possible other meanings, usage context (e.g. if it’s field-specific jargon), whether it’s appropriate (e.g. slang, archaic), etc. – can work, but if you’re already writing something, just stick to what you know unless it’s dire. You should make an effort to learn words over time as they come up in appropriate contexts rather than memorizing them replacements for other words; this infographic offers a shortcut that’s probably harder and less accurate than actually learning.A one-night stand with a word you found in the thesaurus is going to alienate people who don’t know what it means and probably make you look like a jackass to those who do.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
The SVG cat with the Peter Griffin ballsack chin told me.
- Comment on Grieve with me 2 weeks ago:
- Test the cable first if you have a spare.
- Test the AC adapter if you have a spare.
- If both fail, inspect the charging port with a flashlight. 4a) If it looks dirty, try cleaning it out with a toothpick (if you have a dedicated plastic tool for mobile repair, use that). 4b) If it doesn’t look dirty, refer to 4a. What often happens is that lint from your pocket compacts over time as it gets in there and then gets pressed in by the charger.
- If this doesn’t work and you have a good, locally owned mobile repair shop nearby, they might look at the port for free just to see if there’s anything you missed.
Only after all of this would I start to strongly consider the phone itself as the culprit.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
don’t say “very accurate”; say “exact”
First line of this infographic is already deeply misleading. It’s the equivalent of:
don’t say “very good”; say “perfect”
- Comment on Are you amused 2 weeks ago:
You finally got here. This is the ninth “Your Sanctuary” location. But it’s mine now. Take it from me, if you dare…
- Comment on Microsoft is putting AI actions into the Windows File Explorer 2 weeks ago:
Notepad and WFE get thrown off hell in a cell into an announcer’s table by Kate and Dolphin, respectively, but to say they “don’t work” is intellectually lazy and dishonest. Who are you trying to convince right now? Linux and macOS users are probably never going back to Windows if they can help it, and Windows users will correctly say “but it’s right there; I’m using it right now”.
- Comment on ‘It’s real y’all’: People are sharing their tariff receipts, and my wallet is not ready for what’s coming 2 weeks ago:
After the death of real, actual investigative journalism platform BuzzFeed News, should we really be posting
BuzzFeed seems like an inappropriate source for a community called /c/economics (RIP actual investigative journalism at BuzzFeed News). Given economics is a social science like psychology or anthropology, it feels like posting to /c/psychology with “If You Did More Than 14 Of These Things Growing Up, You’re Probably An Anxious Adult Now”. No offense, of course, OP; you do great work on Lemmy, and these tarrifs are fucking corroding the US economy.
- Comment on “This script is fantastic. Let’s get Julia Roberts to play Harriet Tubman.” 3 weeks ago:
Oh god, it’s real.
- Comment on The scandalous story of Fred Trump: how Donald Trump's father made his millions 3 weeks ago:
OP, come on, this is from a crap website called Love Money It’s overwhelmingly likely that it was written entirely or predominantly by an LLM at worst or researched by skimming Wikipedia at best.
For context, Yahoo! News is two things:
- Yahoo! News is a real thing that employs its own writers. It’s hosted on news.yahoo.com.
- news.yahoo.com also syndicates news. This ranges from highly professional and credible to bottom-of-the-barrel slop. Effectively, news.yahoo.com will host anything as long as it gets clicks, and those clicks ride on the idea that people see Yahoo! News and think it sounds vaguely credible.
- Comment on When you think that YOU are always correct 3 weeks ago:
9gag-ass meme tbh
- Comment on There should be something like a flea market where hobby gardeners go to share sprouted seeds 4 weeks ago:
Maybe my farmer’s market is really lax, but I’ve seen people sell young plants there (also mushroom starters, which I thought was super cool but had no room for).
- Comment on Pope Joan 4 weeks ago:
Transvestigators: “Trans X will never be real X!”
Also transvestigators: “Trans X are apparently so functionally indistinguishable from biological X that you can’t tell from thousands of hours of footage (including their voice) from public appearances and paparazzi voyeurism taken at almost every possible angle over dozens of years, including childhood pictures. Instead you need to resort to convoluted, pseudoscientific, unreproducibly arbitrary, per-person diagrams. This applies to dozens of celebrities. But they’ll never be a real X tho!”
Transvestigators are scum, but I feel if I were trans that these “investigations” of obviously and openly cis people would make me feel more affirmed than basically any other form of external validation.
- Comment on i truly believe that there's an open war between Humanity vs. Advertisers and their allies. 4 weeks ago:
It’s a job that only exists in capitalism
Not true.
- Comment on LibreOffice: We still see people on the fediverse recommending OpenOffice, despite it having year-old unfixed security issues 4 weeks ago:
Outdated on Windows? Because on Linux, the LibreOffice UI is great, imo.
- Comment on LibreOffice: We still see people on the fediverse recommending OpenOffice, despite it having year-old unfixed security issues 4 weeks ago:
Lee-bruh is definitely the way to go since it fluidly connects to the first syllable of “office”. If you do “lib-ray” or “lee-bray”, you’re forcing a ton of unnecessary annunciation on yourself.
- Comment on Shinji need a little bit of motivation 4 weeks ago:
bruh OP, Asuka is 13, and Rei is 14 and
(spoiler)
basically Shinji’s mom??
Go to horny jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.
- Comment on That's all folks, Plex is starting to charge for sharing 5 weeks ago:
Why pay for anything ever if it’s going to potentially get taken away?
Because it’s called “lifetime”? As in the entire point of the product is that it will not ever be taken away with the exception that the company goes out of business? “Why pay for anything if there’s nothing enforcing the core premise of the product?” The gardener advertised a “whole-yard mow” for $100, but I’ve already gotten the area around the driveway, and honestly would it really be that bad if they just stopped right now?
You can talk about odds all you want (although I think around $100 million in VC funding puts those odds squarely in favor of “lifetime” users getting the floor sawed out from under them Looney Tunes-style), but the fact it’s even possible is what’s deeply disturbing, because it’s deliberate. Lifetime’s meaning should be unambiguously stipulated in a contract, not inferred. Know why? Because companies out there advertising “lifetime” subscriptions right now have little disclaimers like “approximately like five years or so but honestly we don’t really know or care lol this license disappears whenever we want it to”).
People are assuming it’s for the lifetime of your Plex account, but my response is: based on fucking what? Plex on their website doesn’t seem to specify this anywhere, even in their terms of service. People asking on their official forums receive responses saying things like “probably for the lifetime of your Plex account” with no sources to anything. I’m not trying to sealion here; I literally can’t find a single instance of Plex stating officially in writing or verbally what “lifetime” actually means to the end user. If Plex isn’t going to rugpull, why can’t they add a single sentence to their TOS saying something like: “The purchase of a lifetime pass grants the user a non-transferable license for [blah blah] starting from the date of purchase. This license will not be revoked unless 1) the associated account is terminated by the account holder or 2) the aasociated account is terminated by Plex for one or more of the reasons outlined in section [blah]”?
They could, they should, they don’t, and you have no good explanation, otherwise you would’ve offered one by now. They have enough money to afford a legal team that wouldn’t overlook that. The answer is that they want to reserve the right to destroy the “lifetime” pass whenever they want. If you can find official documentation from Plex Inc. saying that if I buy a lifetime pass today for $250, the license will only end with the termination of the account, then I’ll have no idea why they make this too hard to find, but I’ll take back everything else I said in this comment and stop using “lifetime” in scare quotes. I genuinely want to know if they say anything about this anywhere.