@0x0f Good afternoon, how are you?
@admin Everytime I am waiting on my program to finish a cycle of running (usually some sort of analysis on a year of stock data) I come here and comment until it is dont. Those tend to last anywhere from a minute or two when actively debugging new features, to 5 - 10 minutes when running a full backtest on minute resolution data.
Helps pass the time rather than staring at a screen waiting to finish as i cant usually code until i see the results.
Few hundred a month, i will need to check to get you exact numbers, I have posted them in the past though.
But if you run a smaller instance (such as a single person), or happen to not keep the enormous history QOTO has (which we keep for searchability) it will be much cheaper. But cheaper comes with a cost, the degree of federation of a server is determined by the cumulative number of mutual followers across all its users. So smaller instances, while cheaper, tend to have a much smaller view of the fediverse and are seen by far fewer users (mostly in terms of federated timelines but also in terms of what comes up when you search for a hashtag and other things).
Since my reply to this post back in 2018 has since been orphaned and helps give context to it, and it was used against me in various circles I wish to re-link the orphaned context that explains the meaning of this post, or at least, the meaning I had intended at the time.
@admin Indeed it is, and he even intentionally ignored context. There was a pull request on that which did not ask to take down the block but rather to include the context in which it was shared, specifically the text description I added with it. Which of course would have shown the meme was harmless, which is why it wasnt included.
Here is the link to the PR: https://github.com/dzuk-mutant/blockchain/pull/15
Attached is the image of the context that was requested to be added in the PR (and denied).
The reply has since been orphaned (though was not at the time of the PR) due to the instance/account i had replied to being no more. But you can see my actual orphaned reply still here:
@freemo I'm assuming your cum_returns were 69k?
@waltznr Every damn time!
That is possible but the timing seems a bit too on the nose. There was no sign of an increase just following new years. the first sign of increase started 4 days ago but the increase was not linear with numbers increasing by a weak-exponential curve since then.
So I have concluded it is due to recent social media censorship and banning. The first indication of increase was the day Trump was banned from twitter which is also when republicans, or at least trump supporters started to get banned, and in the day or two that followed these bannings increased along with more social media joining in.
It seems almost certain that must be the cause unless there was a similar provocative event with the exact same timeline.
@mur2501 If it pays I plays :)
Yes, I do that at times. Reason being replies dont show in ones own main timeline to their own followers typically (those this can be turned on). So if I make a post where I feel it would reflect something I would also like to say as a top-level post then rather than copying and pasting it to a new post I will usually retweet. This also allows users to see the context and contribute to the conversation in its original context if they wish.
@viv Well I kinda agree here but not entierly.
### Disclaimer
Do not take the below as me claiming that free speech is necessary or evil not to uphold. I think there is a great deal of value in tolerance and inclusivity and ejecting abusive elements from a personal space is a perfectly legitimate thing to do. My following statements are of a technical nature on the meaning of free speech as a term and how I interpret your usage in this post.
### Meaning of Free Speech
> For the nth fucking time. Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever shit you want ... It just means that the state can't take legal action against you.
Free speech is a principle (which can be encoded into law or a personal policy or even the rule of an organization) whereby people are protected to hold any opinion they wish without punitive repercussions. It does not carry over to calls to action, harassment, or similar destructive behavior.
> Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever shit you want and I have to ... give you an avenue to do so.
Presuming the things being spoken here are a reference to opinions, and not a call to action then as such this would mean, presuming you run an instance, that your server or instance does not employ free-speech principles. That would be true even if you operate out of a country that has free speech laws.
Free speech laws protect you from punitive actions from your government with regard to your opinions. Likewise a free speech instance would protect you from punitive action from your instance for your opinions.
> If I run a coffee shop and you come there and say "murder all the xyz", I can very well ask you to leave
This would not be considered an opinion but rather a call to action. Presuming there is some potential for people to follow this call to action it would not be covered by either legal free speech or a personal policy of free speech.
However if someone said "We would be better off if xyz were all dead" then that would not be a call to action. It would be legally protected in a free speech legal system but likewise if your coffee shop employed free-speech policy it too would be permitted in your coffee shop. If you kicked someone out on those grounds it would be well within your legal rights in a free speech state, but it would mean that you personally are not supporting free speech as a principle.
> because that's not suppressing your free speech.
You **would** be suppressing free speech, but you are legally permitted to suppress free speech in private spaces. Therefore you would not be violating free speech laws despite the fact that you would be suppressing free speech
> Those who don't get it can keep screaming into the void.
I do agree with the fact that a lot of people don't get or understand the nuance here. Many people think that you must enforce free speech in your cafe as a legal right, and you are correct that you are free to suppress free speech. However I think many people who object dont do so because they feel you would be in legal violation but rather because free speech as a principle is the morally right thing to do and by not upholding free speech principles in your cafe you would be in moral, not legal, violation of ones perceived sense of right and wrong.
@viv Well I kinda agree here but not entierly.
### Disclaimer
Do not take the below as me claiming that free speech is necessary or evil not to uphold. I think there is a great deal of value in tolerance and inclusivity and ejecting abusive elements from a personal space is a perfectly legitimate thing to do. My following statements are of a technical nature on the meaning of free speech as a term and how I interpret your usage in this post.
### Meaning of Free Speech
> For the nth fucking time. Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever shit you want ... It just means that the state can't take legal action against you.
Free speech is a principle (which can be encoded into law or a personal policy or even the rule of an organization) whereby people are protected to hold any opinion they wish without punitive repercussions. It does not carry over to calls to action, harassment, or similar destructive behavior.
> Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever shit you want and I have to ... give you an avenue to do so.
Presuming the things being spoken here are a reference to opinions, and not a call to action then as such this would mean, presuming you run an instance, that your server or instance does not employ free-speech principles. That would be true even if you operate out of a country that has free speech laws.
Free speech laws protect you from punitive actions from your government with regard to your opinions. Likewise a free speech instance would protect you from punitive action from your instance for your opinions.
> If I run a coffee shop and you come there and say "murder all the xyz", I can very well ask you to leave
This would not be considered an opinion but rather a call to action. Presuming there is some potential for people to follow this call to action it would not be covered by either legal free speech or a personal policy of free speech.
However if someone said "We would be better off if xyz were all dead" then that would not be a call to action. It would be legally protected in a free speech legal system but likewise if your coffee shop employed free-speech policy it too would be permitted in your coffee shop. If you kicked someone out on those grounds it would be well within your legal rights in a free speech state, but it would mean that you personally are not supporting free speech as a principle.
> because that's not suppressing your free speech.
You **would** be suppressing free speech, but you are legally permitted to suppress free speech in private spaces. Therefore you would not be violating free speech laws despite the fact that you would be suppressing free speech
> Those who don't get it can keep screaming into the void.
I do agree with the fact that a lot of people don't get or understand the nuance here. Many people think that you must enforce free speech in your cafe as a legal right, and you are correct that you are free to suppress free speech. However I think many people who object dont do so because they feel you would be in legal violation but rather because free speech as a principle is the morally right thing to do and by not upholding free speech principles in your cafe you would be in moral, not legal, violation of ones perceived sense of right and wrong.
@pgn Cool, good luck! Whats your background?
@0x0f This is where I am at.. not compile but every iteration i need to run it against the stocks to backtest improvements and simulate a years worth of the algorithm running. It takes a few minutes and its really annoying.
If the majority of your network is engaging in hatespeech than the scenario you describe of someone privately posting hate speech to their own page is not at all what you have.
If the majority of people behave that way then you will find the majority of new followers you get will behave that way, the majority of the comments left on your post will be hateful, and the majority of comments you see on posts of your friend's will also be hateful.
It will not be isolated, everyone will be exposed to it when it is the majority, and no one will (other than those who enjoy such hate) will enjoy themselves. Therein lies the problem.
Jeffrey Phillips Freeman
Innovator & Entrepreneur in Machine Learning, Evolutionary Computing & Big Data. Avid SCUBA diver, Open-source developer, HAM radio operator, astrophotographer, and anything nerdy.
Born and raised in Philadelphia, PA, USA, currently living in Utrecht, Netherlands, USA, and Thailand. Was also living in Israel, but left.
Pronouns: Sir / Mister
(Above pronouns are not intended to mock, i will respect any persons pronouns and only wish pronouns to show respect be used with me as well. These are called neopronouns, see an example of the word "frog" used as a neopronoun here: http://tinyurl.com/44hhej89 )
A proud member of the Penobscot Native American tribe, as well as a Mayflower passenger descendant. I sometimes post about my genealogical history.
My stance on various issues:
Education: Free to PhD, tax paid
Abortion: Protected, tax paid, limited time-frame
Welfare: Yes, no one should starve
UBI: No, use welfare
Racism: is real
Guns: Shall not be infringed
LGBT+/minorities: Support
Pronouns: Will respect
Trump: Moron, evil
Biden: Senile, racist
Police: ACAB
Drugs: Fully legal, no prescriptions needed
GPG/PGP Fingerprint: 8B23 64CD 2403 6DCB 7531 01D0 052D DA8E 0506 CBCE