To be social, 3 people, maybe 5 is all you’d need
That’s called a group chat
To be social, 3 people, maybe 5 is all you’d need
That’s called a group chat
Hello from Lemmy! Can you see this or do I need to @ you?
And we see the post, but I don’t think it has a title.
Eta: @uhrbaan@mastodon.social?
Edit2: it’s a title now!
OK setting aside the Q thing, am I the only one who had a weird number of those growing up?
And Racoon
? Was there supposed to be a picture?
(Its been a thing since the 40s)
That sounds like it punishes small instances… a lot. What would starting an instance look like? Do you start with a huge list of servers to inspect and approve?
Tbh I’m struggling to imagine what this would look like in something like Lemmy. It seems to be describing an extreme form of setting your account to private, but this only really makes sense in a situation where you have followers who are friends and family. How would I decide who to “approve”?
But people who don’t return carts are just as bad as landlords???
Source: xkcd
Oh you’re right, I read that as 490,000, sorry. Thanks
OK, but what arithmetic?
Where did those numbers come from? MAU/users ismore like 25%?
I had a dm who would tell us to roll. And then say “you fail” before hearing the number
I think these are great rules, so long as they never have any teeth.
That’s really the entire article. “Yeah, for now its run by hippies who care about privacy and run servers out of a sense of civic duty, but we can fix that”
I mean, they’re doable, but they’re cultural goals, not technical ones.
I’d argue that really all of these are on a spectrum between the two though.
Good, that’s what women want too
What is it? Just signal’s webapge? I’m a coward.