Agree. Sometimes my notifications are a war zone, with up and down mods. back and forth.

Yes, I've seen downright seditious and threatening ov violent harm in a few groups, and the person suffers no consequence. Someone might have reported you for just having a different opinion. When spring outside of an echo chamber, people in the echo chamber go Reeee!

Especially if you answer certain groups who appear to enjoy "punishing" those who disagree with them. Some even enjoy the experience.

Want to make social media utterly irresistible to young people?

Ban it for them.

I recall as a rebellious 13 year old, I started smoking. Developed a 2+ pack a day habit. Started drinking. It wasn't because I enjoyed it all that much, but it was an adult thing, and forbidden. Turned 19 and quit. Wasn't fun any more. Now it's coffee, and the occasional wee dram of a good bourbon or perhaps tequila on date night with the missus.

But now there is a new "adult" thing for the kids.

It is not to say that social media is not bad for them. It certainly is. That shit is ruining prople, ruining relationships, and spreading lies and disseminating malware. But banning it is certainly an enticement for the kids.

I know, right?

I suppose you could just claim I'm making shit up. I'm not complaining about being targeted unfairly, but allow me to explain.

If you get banned, then whine about it, saying "They're so mean!" That is complaining about being unfairly targeted. Exactly.

I noted I was, then surmising what I might have done wrong. In your world, is everyone of one mind? And all thinking in lockstep? And that any decision among all would be the same? Perhaps you live in an alternative universe of puppy dogs and rainbows. In the real universe, there are differing opinions. Sometimes certain opinions are prioritized.

Bloody hell, there are a fair number of people In here who would love to have me banned from Slashdot. Although I seldom swear, some find themselves violently disagreeing with me - I even have a few stalkers, who mod me down when I post objective truth. So you're claiming I am dissembling, or posting violent threats or whatever you made up in your head that I'm omitting for - what - internet pity? That's rather amusing.

Set up two companies in a state or country where there are no legal issues. One says "invest in us, if [event] happens by [date], we will pay off more than you invest because company #2 will turn all their assets over to us" and the other says "invest in us, if [event] does not happen by [date], we will pay off more than you invest because company #1 will turn all of their assets over to us." Set up both companies to liquidate and return assets to stakeholders on [date].

Then list the companies on an exchange accessible to US residents or if that's not possible, create a pair of holding companies or closed-end mutual funds that own 100% of company #1 and company #2 above and list them on an exchange accessible to US residents.

If this would be a legal way for New York residents to invest in the outcomes of events, it sounds like Kalshi is just doing the above but without all of the middlemen and inefficiencies that come with middlemen.

If this is not legal, I would ask "why not?"

Back before Youtube became a little more inclusive I got banned from an address, and they wouldn't say why. As far as I can tell, it was a post I made about some women seem to always pick abusive mates. I must have been reported for that. Unfortunately, that is an objective truth. But not one that was politically correct at the time. So I pissed off someone that made a complaint, and that complaint landed on a person who shared that. Or maybe an algorithm issue - who knows?

https://www.psychologytoday.co....

And yes, Slashdot's moderation method, which allows people to mod posts up or down, then allows users to block out posts below a certain level is the best moderation concept ever.

Not certain where to put this in, but has anyone else noticed that license plates are getting a little bland? https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/im.... In real life, the liberty bell is much more subdued. And many other states are switching to what has to be a lot more easily scanned.

The irony is a plate that is designed to be surveilled has "Let Freedom Ring" on it.

It's a little like in here. I'll post objective truth, but since I pissed off someone that week that got some mod points, I get modded down. At least on Slashdot, it doesn't disappear.

That's sex, not gender. And sex is not so simple either.

This seems like essentially a variant of the Waluigi effect hypothesized here https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/D7PumeYTDPfBTp3i7/the-waluigi-effect-mega-post which had the advantage of a pretty fun name for the situation, and is worth reading. . There's also some related prior work by Ball, Gluch, Goldwasser, Kreuter, Reingold, and Rothblum https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.07341 which suggested that fundamental information issues or computational complexity issues meant that making an LLM AI "safe" from jailbreaks by having a less computationally powerful/less intelligent AI system look over its input would always fail, since one could construct inputs that would be complicated tasks or essentially hidden puzzles that the less powerful AI would fail at but would expand out by the more powerful AI into instructions/jailbreaks. Ball et. al's work is also discussed in detail in this Quanta piece https://www.quantamagazine.org/cryptographers-show-that-ai-protections-will-always-have-holes-20251210/ There's also some similar work by Rao, Choudhury, and Aditya https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.12702 which I haven't read in detail but seems also thematically very similar.

Im intimately familiar with range-payload charts.

You have to take my sentence as a whole - I say that its both low density and premium heavy. The low density is because of the range-payload drop off, the premium heavy is because Qantas will make more money with the premium cabin, so thats where the bulk of the weight allowance goes.

Because they're the most powerful and easy to use, and likely only, data manipulation tool a person with no hint of computing-specific education is likely to run across.

on second thought, run for the hills!

I have to add - the "would it make people blind or lose hair" was a reference to when the light bulb was invented.