#soylent | Logs for 2023-06-24
« return
[00:46:48] -!- dw861 [dw861!~dbrownst@riyg-9h5me2wl25mffo1te5ol4hqww.ipv9.telus.net] has joined #soylent
[01:50:51] -!- AzumaHazuki [AzumaHazuki!~hazuki@the.end.of.time] has joined #soylent
[02:11:06] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[04:38:28] -!- AzumaHazuki has quit [Quit: Leaving]
[06:13:45] -!- dw861 has quit [Quit: Leaving]
[08:38:38] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[08:40:01] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[08:40:16] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[08:41:38] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[08:41:51] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[08:43:15] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[08:43:27] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[08:44:52] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[09:14:20] -!- separatrix [separatrix!uid604772@un-620124.ilkley.irccloud.com] has joined #soylent
[09:15:49] <separatrix> Hey y’all. I just wrote a journal entry about the About page. I went looking for a mission statement for SN PBC and that was the best I found. I’ve taken the liberty of editing that text into a good candidate for a mission statement that could be formally adopted by the membership. It’s in my latest journal, https://soylentnews.org
[09:15:50] <systemd> ^ 03Journal of separatrix (29779)
[09:16:05] <separatrix> Night all.
[10:25:44] <AlwaysNever> separatrix: nice one; y posted my take at mission statement as a comment on your journal.
[10:28:25] <requerdanos> "Open Source" misses the point of free software, https://www.gnu.org
[10:31:33] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[10:32:34] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[10:32:42] <AlwaysNever> requerdanos: yes, but this is a mission statement, not a doctrinal discussion
[10:33:02] <requerdanos> what better place than a foundational document to get the foundations right
[10:33:44] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[10:33:54] <janrinok> AlwaysNever, have you looked in the Wiki?
[10:33:54] <AlwaysNever> I don't mind either way, but it is true that open-source encompasses free software, but free software does not encompass all open source
[10:34:04] <requerdanos> but pardon my lack of interpersonal skills: What I meant to start with was probably "Good work, I have one small caveat"
[10:34:18] <Ingar> +1
[10:34:26] <AlwaysNever> requerdanos :-)
[10:34:53] <requerdanos> there's a lot of overlap, but aiui soylent news is built on software that is both free and open source
[10:35:33] <Ingar> I could add "s/mankind/humankind/" because someone will whine over it
[10:35:57] <requerdanos> My take: let them whine, "mankind" is correct.
[10:36:34] <Ingar> I'll just translate it into Dutch, we have different words for mankind and man :D
[10:37:05] <Ingar> (well, we use a literal translation of "humankind")
[10:38:15] <requerdanos> beats, for example, spanish, where "non-binary" can be either no binario or no binaria depending on whether the non-binary person in question is male or female.
[10:38:44] <AlwaysNever> Ingar: I would keep mankind, as a silent affirmation of "this community is not shaken by fads and cultural wars"
[10:38:58] <Ingar> AlwaysNever: agreed!
[10:39:44] <Ingar> requerdanos: like in French
[10:42:56] <requerdanos> from the wiki "The goal is to be an excellent source for discussion and news about technology, art, science and politics. "
[10:43:06] <requerdanos> yikes, politics
[10:44:43] <AlwaysNever> janrinok: "have you looked in the Wiki?"- No, I haven't - I fear that will be like Alice's rabiit hole, U may not emmerge for several days if I dare to dive into the wiki...
[10:45:04] <requerdanos> the wiki isn't very deep, to be honest
[10:48:20] <AlwaysNever> requerdanos, and the wiki: politics almost destroyed the value of commentary in SN
[10:48:53] <AlwaysNever> I remember that well, what a cesspool of commentary it was when politics were involved
[10:49:08] <requerdanos> politics stories tend to have a high volume of low-quality comments.
[10:50:24] <AlwaysNever> the problem is that there is a cultural political war raging on, and there were politics is discussed, war will happen
[10:50:40] <AlwaysNever> I don't want that shit in SN
[10:50:52] <requerdanos> yes, unfortunately that serves to limit the ability for us to do politics stories.
[10:51:55] <requerdanos> in the past (week? couple weeks?) there have been stories submitted, one about AI-faked photos in a political ad, one about a 5 million dollar judgment against robocallers, that nobody wanted to run because both stories mentioned former president Trump.
[10:57:40] <AlwaysNever> A lesson I learnt about grass roots politics, is that he who has the most free time available, can disrupt and win any assembly of the commons, for real working people have to keep on with their duties
[10:58:37] <AlwaysNever> and they can also disrupt any commentary system
[11:03:24] <requerdanos> moderation helps of course, but can be overwhelmed
[11:09:53] <janrinok> The base for submission acceptance regarding political stories is that Politics is not a topic in its own right, it is a nexus. The story must also contain material that IS covered by one of our core topics i.e. business, hardware, digital liberty etc. Otherwise it just becomes a shouting match which contributes nothing to our knowledge.
[11:11:00] <janrinok> Mentioning any politician by name is an invitation to bring the discussion down to the lowest possible level of discourse.
[11:11:03] <requerdanos> I would argue that faked AI images, and possibly robocalls, would contain material in our core topics, but were not worth the political angle throwing off discussion in that direction.
[11:12:02] <janrinok> I agree with you.
[11:13:12] <janrinok> However, stories that relate to the action of a government - any government - are usually fair game but also tend to deteriorate into the sort of discussion that is best left to the journals.
[11:13:48] <requerdanos> The EU AI rules seem to be an exception to that (valid) principle
[11:14:47] <janrinok> Well, we will have to wait and see. But usually somebody comes out with a comment criticising the political organisation of the EU rather than the decision that is being made.
[11:15:04] <AlwaysNever> janrinok: I don't know what's the best course of action to keep a high signal-to-noise ratio, whatever it works! The Editor sure know more how to achieve that
[11:15:18] <janrinok> It can be managed by careful moderation - but that is not always easy.
[11:16:46] <janrinok> There is nothing more soul destroying for an editor that to see a story that has taken some time to prepare simply get trashed by a minority in the community. It is something that we all experience from time to time.
[11:18:41] <AlwaysNever> janrinok: yes I understand, I don't know how you find the energy to keep pressing into such a thankless job
[11:19:27] <janrinok> Weekends used to be particularly difficult because we have another audience who appear just a weekends who have no intention of having an intelligent discussion. It is slightly better now on the front pages but worse in the journals.
[11:21:05] <janrinok> We have a good team of editors. The are all equal inasmuch they have an equal vote in what we choose to publish, they can each stop a story if they can justify it, and they tend to help each other rather than compete against each other.
[11:22:11] <janrinok> In 9 years there has only been one editor that didn't meet the self-imposed standards that each of us have accepted when we took on the role.
[11:22:34] <janrinok> That was not the end of the world though.
[11:23:13] <requerdanos> that's not bad, statistically speaking
[11:23:46] -!- norayr [norayr!~norayr@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[11:23:59] <AlwaysNever> The Editor team certainly is crucial, as this is not Reddit when anyone can post a new "article"
[11:24:37] <janrinok> That is very good. I think it is mainly due to the type of person who wants to give the job a try, but also that we have clear Terms of Reference and an equal say in what the team does.
[11:25:32] <janrinok> Perhaps I am wrong and it is a completely different reason....
[11:26:23] <AlwaysNever> if we analayze it, reddit is more democratic (anyone can post a new "thing"), and SN is more aristochratic, only a small team of trained people can post a new "thing"
[11:26:32] <AlwaysNever> And I like is as that
[11:26:40] <janrinok> we post what YOU submit
[11:27:23] <AlwaysNever> yeah, but you know what I mean, SN is "curated"
[11:28:16] <requerdanos> of course, anyone may journal
[11:28:40] <AlwaysNever> therefor, it stands to reason that SN should have more curated, known to be good, content
[11:29:10] <janrinok> The priority is subs from named accounts before anything else. If we had more editors we could push out more stories. But what we try to do is have a balance of topics from whatever submission we have to choose from. Half a dozen very good subs on AI will mean that they are either merged, or one is accepted and then we move onto another topic.
[11:29:12] <AlwaysNever> only a carefully orchestrated sabotage effort in the comments can subert that
[11:31:04] <requerdanos> I dunno, mention a US president and chaotic, non-orchestrated comments almost constitute sabotage
[11:31:39] <AlwaysNever> I've never submitted a story, mainly beause I alwasys arrive late to all "news", so I just rely on the Editor's work
[11:31:42] <janrinok> We are currently limiting ourselves to weekend posting rate all the time because there is so much extra work being caused by the site changes. Once the current situation is resolved then we will, I hope, return to the normal daily rate throughout the week.
[11:32:47] <janrinok> But until recently I was spending at least 6 hours a day on the site and sometimes as much as 14 hours. That became unsustainable for me.
[11:34:18] <requerdanos> especially given the rate of pay you receive
[11:34:25] <AlwaysNever> janrinok: yeah, it's that against-all-odds dedication that I cannot fathom
[11:34:32] <janrinok> AlwaysNever, the secret is to search for a topic that is relevant but which has not been mentioned recently. It stands a much better chance of being accepted than another copy of an ars technica story - as good as they are.
[11:34:49] <janrinok> requerdanos, yes but it has been doubled!
[11:38:07] <janrinok> AlwaysNever, another rule that most teams adhere to is that volunteers only give what they want to give when they want to give it. If editors, sys-ops or whatever have other priorities then the site must wait. People are far more important than stories on the front page. Nobody is pressured into doing more than they are comfortable with.
[11:39:32] <janrinok> AlwaysNever, and you do understand the joke about our pay being doubled, I assume?
[11:40:00] <AlwaysNever> janrinok: yeah, double zero
[11:40:13] <AlwaysNever> janrinok for President!!
[11:40:35] <janrinok> exactly - I had to point that out because what usually happens is somebody quotes it in a comment that we are actually being paid!
[11:40:59] <janrinok> No thanks - editor will do me fine.
[11:41:18] <requerdanos> this is literally all volunteer, not a single person receiving a single dime in exchange for working on the site
[11:43:29] <janrinok> Anyway I cannot be President or even on the SN Board - I am not an American
[11:44:14] <janrinok> About half the staff at the moment are not American or are resident outside of the USA.
[11:47:28] <AlwaysNever> SN is such a jewel, in Spain we had Barrapunto.com which was Slashdot.com clone, and Barrapunto.com closed down, and only after it closing down many people in Spain (and other Spanish speaking places) realized what we had lost
[11:48:22] <requerdanos> from SN we have learned that you could run it with a pretty small, lean team, if there is enough interest to resurrect. I'd read it even though my spanish is terrible
[11:50:19] <AlwaysNever> requerdanos: it only takes a small team to keep it working, but it's a thankless job, and people get tired of being abused by "the world"
[11:50:34] <requerdanos> fair enough.
[12:01:45] <janrinok> It is chicken and egg. You want to attract more to the site, but they don't want to join a site that has a front page that is unacceptable to many. So you clean up the front page, and then you lose some more people because they liked the chance to argue about irrelevant things.
[12:03:35] <janrinok> First Bytram and subsequently me have chosen to clean up the front page that the public view and then hope to attract more people to the community. I started the second phase of this in late October. The membership was just beginning to show signs of a slow recovery when Nov/Dec came along, Once it is all stable again we can perhaps try again.
[12:04:02] <janrinok> *subsequently myself
[12:20:01] <AlwaysNever> janrinok: efforts to bring in more interested people is certainly the way to go
[12:33:58] -!- separatrix has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
[17:09:51] -!- dw861 [dw861!~dbrownst@bcmi-5q4jy9ks37vxsoebe0v454am2.ipv1.telus.net] has joined #soylent
[18:31:14] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[18:42:37] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[18:45:46] -!- fliptop has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[18:51:01] <fab23> WeeChat https://www.youtube.com
[18:51:02] <systemd> ^ 03Live - 20th anniversary + release of v4.0.0
[18:51:45] <fab23> starts in 8 minutes
[18:52:10] <ted-ious> v4.0.0 what? :)
[18:55:52] <fab23> ted-ious: which version are you currently using?
[19:02:36] <ted-ious> Oh is this supposed to be about weechat?
[19:03:28] <fab23> yes, what else did you think?
[19:06:10] <ted-ious> I had no idea what it was until it started. :)
[19:06:35] <ted-ious> And even now all I know is that a french guy is talking about weechat but the stream isn't very watchable for me.
[19:06:55] <ted-ious> But if you're excited about it then I'm excited with you. :)
[19:07:23] <fab23> CLI IRC client
[19:07:38] <fab23> ted-ious: https://weechat.org
[19:07:40] <systemd> ^ 03WeeChat, the extensible chat client
[19:08:17] -!- separatrix [separatrix!uid604772@un-620124.ilkley.irccloud.com] has joined #soylent
[19:08:33] <ted-ious> Yes I've used it. :)
[19:08:54] <ted-ious> I'll have to let you watch it for us and proide highlights.
[19:09:04] <ted-ious> It's too stuttery for me.
[19:10:13] <fab23> ted-ious: hm, I guess it will be available as well afterwards to watch.
[19:10:35] <ted-ious> Youtube usually is.
[19:11:49] <separatrix> AlwaysNever: “A lesson I learnt about grass roots politics, is that he who has the most free time available, can disrupt and win any assembly of the commons, for real working people have to keep on with their duties.” I agree with this…
[19:13:18] <separatrix> …in fact, this is a principle undergirding Robert’s Rules of Order. “Debate” is defined as two bites of the apple: a speaker speaks, another may respond, the speaker may rebut, and the responder may rebut the rebuttal. But that’s it. Not one bite of the apple — it’s not fair to whoever spoke first. Not three or more bites of the apple — that’s the problem AlwaysNever describes above.
[19:14:30] <separatrix> But too many sites, SN included, have built into their discussion forums the assumption that unlimited bites of the apple is a good thing. It’s not. One limitation I’d propose to Rehash is to limit commenters to two comments on an article.
[19:16:09] <separatrix> The thing about Robert’s, though, is that it presumes a body of equals. That’s not the case most of the time, and many commenters certainly don’t treat each other like equals, with equal rights to the forum. So maybe we don’t get so strict as to limit commenters to two opportunities to comment. But some kind of limit would elevate the discussion. As AN points out, nobody has all day to debate.
[19:23:05] -!- fliptop [fliptop!~fliptop@67.231.puh.pl] has joined #soylent
[19:38:56] <ted-ious> fab23: Can you see how many people are watching the stream live?
[19:41:09] <janrinok> separatrix, interesting points, thanks.
[19:45:25] <fab23> ted-ious: is says 15, but not sure if this is correct, as many more are active in #weechat-live on libera
[19:45:46] <fab23> ted-ious: maybe it counts only logged in users on yt, and I am not :)
[19:47:52] <fab23> ted-ious: hm, now 18, but it quickly changed to 21, but over 70 in the IRC channel :)
[19:54:45] <ted-ious> I'm sure youtube doesn't count irc users. :)
[19:59:17] <fab23> ted-ious: no I mean not logged in YT users, as I am.
[20:27:55] <fab23> ted-ious: stream had finished ~20 minutes ago, so you can watch it now
[21:02:21] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[21:06:30] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[21:12:04] <ted-ious> fab23: I think youtube counts anonymous viewers as part of the number.
[21:42:43] -!- fliptop has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat]
[22:31:01] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[22:44:44] -!- norayr [norayr!~norayr@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[22:49:19] -!- norayr [norayr!~norayr@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[22:49:39] -!- norayr [norayr!~norayr@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[23:00:21] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[23:10:13] -!- norayr [norayr!~norayr@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent
[23:10:45] -!- norayr [norayr!~norayr@37.252.sq.ypj] has joined #soylent
[23:54:51] -!- lilitsyunetsi [lilitsyunetsi!~lilitsyun@37.252.sq.ypj] has parted #soylent