Your oversimplification makes it sound like this is just my personal preference, and not a natural tendency of humans or social media interactions.
This is not just “I like X more”, this is “humans on a large scale act like probabilistic decision trees and will converge on lowest common denominator dopamine fountains without careful checks and considerations”
The latter is necessary for high quality networked media and discussion
If an account is upvoted because it’s posting high- quality content, we’d expect those votes to come from a variety of accounts that don’t otherwise have a tendency to vote for the same things.
No, I completely disagree and reject your premise.
Many times really high quality content will be voted for by only a small subset of the population.
In general people will vote for lowest common denominator widely appealing click bait. That type of content will get varied voters because of wide appeal. Discerning voters represent a smaller but consistent subset of the population, and this proposed algorithm will penalize that and just lead to more low quality widely appealing click bait.
What if account B only ever posts high quality content? What if everybody upvotes account B because their content is so good? What if they rarely post so it would be reasonable that a smaller subset of the population has ever seen their posts?
Your theory assumes large volumes of constant posts seen by a wide audience, but that’s not how these sites work, your ideal would censor and disadvantage many accounts.
“why did my rent go up by 400 dollars?” “Because my favorite bagel spot raised prices by a dollar”
When you buy a ticket to see a movie at a theatre, you don’t own the movie.
Correct and not letting you make up definitions or ignore reality just to support a separate point that you agree with?
Sounds like you’re a bad husband.
I never said anything about it being wrong or that anybody was getting hurt.
I just said under current definitions it is illegal. Legality != morality.
According to the law or dictionaries? Yes.
I’m not in that mindset. Doesn’t mean laws and definitions of words don’t exist law. We can say fuck them and that we don’t care, but they still exist.
What does a lack of enforcement, or other bullshit that the government does, have to do with the fact that OPs post made no sense.
I totally agree.
That’s not related to the original post though.
Especially when the statement makes no sense
No, that would harm whoever was in possession of the room at the time (owner or guest).
This would be more akin to sneaking into a movie theatre to stand in the back and watch.
But that would still be theft of service.
While I appreciate the sentiment, theft of service is a crime. You don’t have to be able to own something to be able to steal it.
While I appreciate the sentiment, theft of service is a crime. You don’t have to be able to own something to be able to steal it.
What the fuck are you talking about? How does quantity have to relate to quality at all. Find anybody that’s played all Pokemon games that will say the latest installments are best.
The game is garbage carried by nostalgia and people that will buy the games regardless of how shit they are because they love being pokemon fans
Let’s be real though, the pokemon card game always was awful, we were just too young to play it and evaluate it properly. The games are now shit, the franchise is in the toilet because of obsessing over merchandising.
I’m glad I have other good relics like my heroscape pieces or my pog collection.
Any company can be unprofitable if you have 100x the staff you need working on features that make the site worse or are scams
Using a term associated with tragedy and human right abuses for ‘fun’ is a very interesting take.
Words can be used in multiple contexts. When somebody does well and I say “hey you’re killing it” I’m not condoning murder. I don’t cry for all car and plane crash victims when my computer game crashes. Life is better when you don’t look for the most offensive way to interpret everything.
Maybe do your research before you sign up. I didn’t know what federation was before finding about Lemmy either, yet I already knew the basics when I made an account.
I did. But a ton of people are about to come to reddit from here, and despite how much we want them to, and how reasonable we think it is, most of them won’t and don’t care to do even 3 minutes of reading to understand how the basics work. This is just how large populations function.
Did the writer give me permission to read their book, which I used to learn to write better and sell those works?
Did Michelangelo give every art student that learned from his works permission to learn from his work and then produce works in a similar style on their own to sell for profit?