Can 'o Beans — Into the Fediverse

  • 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle
  • A TV Series can have an IMDB ID set: click the three dots on the series, click edit metadata, scroll down to External IDs, fill in as needed, then click save. (This alone doesn’t update the metadata though)

    To refresh metadata, click on the 3 dots again, select refresh metadata, and select replace all metadata. It should use the IMDB ID provided to fill in & replace the metadata.

    As for subtitles: sorry, dunno anything on that. My subtitles come from DVD rips 😅. I’ve been too lazy to setup any subtitle downloader.









  • Don’t take my opinions too seriously, I’m just referencing my Astronomy notes (of which come from a single semester of a single class). With that said, here’s my 2¢ guess:


    I think they’re trying to say that the last time the universe as a whole was 0°C, was probably before the formation of matter in the universe (I’ll guess the inflation era, just after the birth of the universe, somewhere 10^(-35 to -33) seconds).

    At this point in the universe, atoms cannot form (as the nuclear forces binding atoms are overwhelmed by the gravitational forces of all the energy in the Universe — you ever crush a cracker? It’d probably be like that). Perhaps even sub-atomic particles (protons, neutrons, etc.) can’t form. All that’s there is sub-sub-atomic particles (which we don’t know much about, from my understanding).

    So basically we (and the world, etc.) would be ripped apart at the sub-sub-atomic level by the immense forces (gravitational, etc. — remember, all of the matter/energy in the universe is being concentrated in a small place) of the early universe.

    So, it’s not that we would necessarily evaporate, nor that touching sub-sub-atomic matter would kill us, but more-so that we’d be crushed, at the sub-sub-atomic level, by the gravitational forces of the early universe. It’d probably be painless though, at least.


  • There’s a concept called Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (seemingly coined, in that form, in a Microsoft antitrust lawsuit). Here’s the Wikipedia page on it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

    As I understand, people argue that Facebook/Meta, via Threads, will use this strategy in the long-term to either kill, or make effecitvely obsolete, the open technology behind Mastodon. If not that, then they could easily make the federation part of Threads buggy & unreliable, souring their users’ opinions on the “fediverse”.

    They don’t need to control anyone; they only need to host a majority of the userbase (by being the most popular federated site). And they’re not starting from a user count of 1 or 10, unlike a lot of Mastodon sites.

    Obviously, Mastodon & Lemmy, and the sites that run them, can keep chugging along just fine, but it’s argued that if Meta makes their federation implementation sub-par (or otherwise sabotages it), it’ll hurt the user-base growth of sites that use these projects (as people will see begin to see it as unreliable or what-not).

    Is it as doom and gloom as people make it seem? Idk, I haven’t had time to care.