Black Xanthus

There are two tensions here:

1. Community building
2. Code production

Community building can be done without any coding, coding can be done without any community. However, to build a large project you need them both.

In a large volunteer project like this, not everything can be worked on. You become selective. We are going to major on this thing, or specifically talk about that project to get community engagement and get the thing done. This drives the project, she helps it to stop chasing hairs. Someone has to decide what feature is going in this release to make it ready to be a release candidate.

That group of people, ultimately making and influencing those decisions, is the CoC.

Let’s take a for-instance: Sign up boxes.

For years, Linux sign up allows you to record random data into your profile, office, phone number, etc. These are text, and can be anything. Now, what if there’s a rising need to add a minicom number(minix, used to be used by the deaf to send messages to an organisation, before email). As a hearing person, this is going to be a low priority for me, so I work on something else. I’ve got spare capacity, so if the project leaders are calling for help on this thing, I can go and help.

This, ultimately, builds a better over-all product, but it’s not something I’d have noticed by myself, because I’m not part of the deaf community.

In our example with NixOS, asking for someone from the community to be a representative on it is not about code quality, but about the issue of visibility. Is there some need that that section of the community needs? Is there a way that the community can do y thing to make the os as a whole more accessible? I don’t know the answer, because I’m not a member of that community, just as I’m not a member of the deaf community.

In this case, the merit, the qualification, for being on the CoC is being a member of a section of the community. It brings valuable a viewpoint, and adds a voice at the table that can make a real difference. Most coders know that having a wish list of features at the start can make it infinitely easier to add them, than having to go back an rewrite to make them happen. Having a voice that might need that feature makes a difference

The debate for CoC is about merit, but merit isn’t just stubbornly focused on a single talent, it can also be about life experience.

I don’t run Ubuntu, but was surprised I’d not heard of this.

This is canonical trying to make money for security updates, and stopping companies just running it for free, instead of using a licence (my own take). They are following a model by IBM, apparently.

You can get round it by getting a ‘pro’ licence for free for up to 5 machines. At least according to ask Ubuntu. https://askubuntu.com/questions/1452299/im-getting-the-message-the-following-security-updates-require-ubuntu-pro-with

More reasons to avoid Ubuntu, imo.

Quick, someone ask the lettuce their opinion! We need an experienced post-holder as a counter point!

Choose an unclear gender (other, agender, etc) and your data becomes less useful. Marketing campaigns are based on broad categories, like male or female, so choosing neither lowers your data’s value.

Similarly, lie about your education and your employment. Pick a made up job, be a wizard, or a spaceman. Jobs, again, are wide categories, so nonsense jobs, the more niche the better, the less they have to market things to you.

In theory you can do the same with hobbies, but three points of data, even made up data, is sellable somewhere.

Lie, of course, if you can. I’m sure there are more denizens of Hell on Facebook than the real place.

Where possible, choose other.

In the modern world, I’m not sure a blog without advertising is going to work - especially hosted on your own domain.

You will have better luck with substack or koffi, who’s search algorithms will at least suggest related sites - and increase your visibility.

For decent views you are going to need a way of generating audience - that used to be Facebook and Twitter, but Twitter is dead, and Facebook is showing reduced returns of a saturated market. However, reduced is but 0, so it’s still worth throwing up a page.

After that, a public Mastodon profile will help in audience creation, but that’s very much a slow burn, and you’ll have to make sure you #tag properly.

You may want to look into Lutris. They’ve done a lot of work on bringing windows games to Linux, and basically do a lot of the heavy lifting for you.

It will also link to your Steam, EA, Origen, Cog etc accounts and do the same for games there as well.

This is definately a problem with an unlicensed sector. Take 30 second with your favourite search engine and see how much snake oil is out there, most of it American.

There are good coaches out there, and a good one will have some form of qualification. However, finding them amongst the snake-oil salespeople can be tough. The number of ‘life coaches’ selling courses for stupid money is bananas. What’s maddening, to me, is people pay it.

There are things you can do to help find a good life coach.

1. Check out their socials. If they are selling the ‘work harder, get benefit’ model, that are likely snake-oil. Life Coaching is about taking a client where they are, and to help them article their goals, and work towards them. Not everyone’s goal is to be rich
2. Life Coaches that say they can make your rich. It’s a lie. You can’t ‘coach’ your way out of poverty
3. They have developed a ‘guranteed course’ that all one-to-one clients follow. That’s not life coaching, that’s reading from a book. Life Coaching is bespoke, and works with where the client is at. You’d be better off buying a self-help book and using what sticks.
4. They offer a quick fix.
5. They market themselves as some form of Therapist. Life Coaching is not therapy. Similar skills, different game.
6. A life coach won’t sell ‘woo-woo’. They won’t suddenly suggest ‘taint sunning’ as a cure for depression.
7. A good life coach will offer a free first session, and no tie-in. While you can often get discount prices for block booking, they are not required to access the service.

Life coaches in my country mostly operate as part of the mental-health and wellness movement. With clear lines, and clear limitations. They have clear ethical Frameworks, and work within them.

The people above saying a ‘life coach is a therapist that doesn’t listen’ are people who’ve met the bad life coaches. A good life coach is interested in their work, shares their knowledge, and is genuinely working from a place of care.

I believe in what I do. I’ve seen the changes it has made in people. It has not worked for everyone.

I believe so much in what I do, that I offer my services with a minimum cost of minim wage in my country, but with an option to pay as you feel. If you think I’ve made a difference, great. But there’s no pressure too it. I’ve felt the the high cost of life coaching was a barrier to those who need it - those often lacking a way to articulate their goals in life, much less with towards them.

A good life coach is not a scam. Sadly, not all life coaches are good.

Life Coach. Would love to turn it into my main hustle, but I like doing the work cheap/free so that it actually helps people rather than makes the rich feel good about themselves.

Edit: I charge ‘Pay as you feel’.

Why do big companies always mark you as spam, and why is it always Hotmail?

My experience is that I have to remove myself from spamhouse once every couple of months, because Hotmail decided that my 5 emails to different accounts was spam. TBF, it’s better than silently failing which is annoying as hell.

The problem with email is the same is always been: antiquated software.

The email protocol was never designed for an internet with bad actors and bots. It’s from the early hopeful days. We absolutely need a better email system - however, it’s simple use, the fact anyone can run one, it’s simplicity, is what made it so useful.

The difference with Lemmy(et. al.) Is that the protocol is designed in the modern age, and isn’t required to also keep up with bad actors for legacy reasons. If Meta decide to join and fill it full of bad actors, Lemmy has a choice email never had. Lemmy can choose to add verification, peer-conversation, trust keys.

It however still has the same basic problem: to be useful for everyone, it has to work with everyone. The discussions and decisions about how that happen are not just technological, but also moral and ideal-based.

Meta, then, in this context, is the first spam email server. How Lemmy/the community/etc respond will be the challenge.

I have to say this is quite a worrying abuse. Both of software, and of privacy.

It’s being deployed for something it’s not meant for, and being used to remove liberties for it. Of course, much of this will be lost to media circles as in CSA cases, the presumption is guilt in the public’s mind.

Whatever the truth of the original conviction, the use of this software as a condition of bail should be banned, and abhorrent to anyone who values justice.

That is not to say the software doesn’t have it’s uses - especially in cases of porn addiction. However, the software is nowhere near good enough to be used in legal cases. It says so itself. It errs, intentionally, on gathering more data, on being more conservative, simply because it’s not good enough to make the judgement on its own.

That’s before we look at the unintentional consequences of impinging on the freedom of an innocent person (‘Hannah’), and the way in which the software is not ‘intelligent’ enough to make judgements on whether or not it should take a photo of emails. It also led to fear of accessing help (and an inability to access help).

Use of this software in this way is an abuse.

Are…are you okay? Do we need to get you anything?.. Blink twice if your in danger…