That’s fair.
I tend to separate my own opinions from the case I’m making when I don’t have something tangible to support it with, as opposed to talk more freely in comments.
In part to keep myself honest, but also in part because it’s an old habit from a former life in which I argued cases for clients that didn’t necessarily aligned with my personal opinions or beliefs.
I mean personally I think it’s highly likely that someone at Reddit is behind it, if only because they stand to gain most of something like this and Huffman started emphasizing in interviews how the sentiment has changed in Reddit.
But out of the principle of intellectual honesty I didn’t feel comfortable blasting my personal suspicions as facts in the OP without something more concrete.
Good instinct, here’s a BBC source.
Edit: Apparently this is old news? Or the news is that lawsuits have commenced?
I would expect they’d collate that information and pass it on at regular intervals to the instance that holds the true version of the post, who then subsequently disseminates that information to subscriber instances.
Then again, I guess you could collate the detailed information in a similar manner.
Not disputing what you’re saying, I assume you’ve tested this out and that’s what you’re reporting, just commenting on the choices made by the project to implement it this way.
Is that what you found out during your experiments?
That seems like a really inefficient and useless implementation to have all instances provide those details to one another, when every instance can simply keep track of it for their own users and pass along the total number.
Wow, didn't even know this existed. What hot garbage.
Then again, like you, I don't know why I'm surprised.
Huffman et al. straight up admitted that's how they got Reddit off the ground, by making posts under fake accounts: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/reddit-founders-made-hundreds-of-fake-profiles-so-site-looked-popular/
Definitely!
I've deleted all my Reddit accounts, but from time to time I remember seeing something on some subreddit way back when that would be useful for something I'm currently working on and try to search for it.
This time I found a rabbit hole in the process and couldn't help but share what I found.
You might be onto something.
I definitely got the feeling that the mastermind behind it all is not part of the main group of hijackers, because of that one guy's attempt to reach someone on the phone.
Kind of reminds me of how Abbas was the mastermind behind the hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro back in 1985 while not being part of the main group of hijackers.
But there might indeed be a twist.
Initially I thought the hijackers were left hung out to dry because they couldn't reach the mastermind when they attempted to call them and instead got their voicemail.
But your suggestion that the mastermind might be on the plane, could be an explanation on why the hijackers couldn't reach the mastermind.
Their phone would've been taken away and presumably be off/not connected to the in-flight WiFi that had been off the whole time.
As for who that mastermind could be, I think we're thinking of the same guy: the curly haired guy that almost missed his flight and that Idris Elba's character suggested should be let on board despite reaching the gate so late.
Not just because of the subtle focus by the camera, but also because of an unresolved thing that now feels so long ago that I'm starting to wonder if I'm misremembering (I should rewatch the first few episodes I guess).
Namely, IIRC, the guy put his bag/pouch in a seemingly random overhead bin and it is this very bin and pouch the hijackers are grabbing stuff from, like the life bullets we saw the "main" hijacker grab towards the end of this episode.
The fact that the hijackers had to move up the timeline by a few hours because of the blank being found by the girl in the restroom could explain some of the genuine expressions of surprise by the mastermind and why he might not have been reachable, because all of it is happening outside of the scope of his original plan.
The only minor nitpick I'd have is that a lot of airlines nowadays prohibit voice calls via WiFi calling and other apps, and in part enforce that by blocking that kind of traffic on the plane's WiFi network.
That said, this is a fictional airline presumably with Dubai being it's home country, so it could very well be that there's no such restriction in Dubai air travel regulation and/or that this particular airline doesn't block that kind of traffic on a network level.
That's what I thought, but admittedly I had a hard time following what was going on and got distracted by the next shiny new scene the show threw at me.
Probably need to rewatch this episode.
That sounds like a gaping security hole, but with how likely it is that you lock yourself out with the current 2FA implementation, I can't be mad about it.
If all else fails you could also reach out to the admin of your instance I suppose and see if they can disable 2FA on your account, but I figured it's best to avoid the headache altogether and just not log out until you're 100% the 2FA works properly.
That's also a good way of verifying! As long as you go through the login process somewhere different than your current browser window you should be able to make sure it works properly.
This reads as incredibly condescending, naive and duplicitous, filled with hubris.
For starters, the whole “yeah sure XMPP got EEE’d but who cares, only nerds cared about that, lol” is not only false (e.g. Jabber), but also does nothing to quell concerns.
Here’s an account by someone who was in the XMPP trenches when Google started adopting it.
Notice something? The “omg so cool!”, this is exactly the same as Rochko.
It’s the hubris when you’re a FOSS maintainer who toiled away for years without recognition and now a $700B+ corporation is flattering him by wanting to use/interact with his work.
The blog is a far cry from the anti-corporate tone in the informational video from 2018.
Then there’s the fact that Rochko is extremely tight lipped about the off the record meeting with Meta and consistently refuses to deny having received funds from Meta and refuses to pledge not to accept any funds from Meta.
There’s also the unsatisfactory answer he gave to people who started questioning some dubious sponsors and the fact that he rushed to lock the thread, killing any further discussion.
I genuinely think the dude is just so hyped for the perceived recognition, that he lost the thread.
So much so that he thinks Mastodon is untouchable.
And it’s extremely naive to think that Meta has benevolent motives here or that Mastodon will survive any schemes Meta might have.
What’s more realistic is that Mastodon will die because people will flock to Threads if their social graph has moved over.
Similarly these lofty and naive ideas that people on Threads will make the switch to Mastodon once they get a taste of what it has to offer.
So now all of a sudden the “difficulty” to get started in Mastodon, that is keeping people who want a polished corporate experience away isn’t going to be an issue?
Especially when in the “extinguish” phase Meta will have siloed off from Mastodon and its portability function, having to leave their social graph behind?
It’s all so increasingly naive, one can’t help but wonder if it’s intentional sabotage at this point.
Mark my words, this’ll be the end of Mastodon especially when Meta can outspend Mastodon all day every day to add proprietary functionality.
Sure perhaps years from now a few hundred to a few thousand people might still use it, but it will be as irrelevant as XMPP is to most people, and Rochko with it.
@[email protected] in 2 years.