The only ones who really care about time of birth are astrologists, because within astrology apparently the time you were born makes a difference.

Mom is assuming that the only thing that would make OP care about when he was born is a girl who was into astrology, so she’s just skipping to the end of the conversation.

Aka- need to be able to screen out advertiser unfortunately content.

Give it a few years and Redditors will also be speeing brainrot like ‘he’s gonna unalive himself with a pewpew’.

Nope. Nobody’s bothered to build it.

See https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/5110

“We’re making the change because it’s better for user experience, better for our ads business, is more in line with safety regulations, and more protective of Reddit data,” he explained.

According to Huffman, Reddit has grown to the point where personalization is increasingly necessary to help users find relevant communities and discussions.

In short- we can’t datamine you if you’re not logged in, we can’t build a behavioral profile on people without accounts, we lick the boots of governments that’ll demand ID checks age verification, and it makes it harder for AI bots to scrape the site without paying us. Really there’s no downside to anyone at all, it’s a win-win. Oh it’s bad for users and bad for the Internet? Is that important? Those groups don’t pay us, right?

Network effect. The communities and discussions are still there. Lemmy has the infrastructure, mostly, but not the users and not the discussions at least not in anywhere near the same volume.

There’s also a few seriously missing features with Lemmy, for example modmail.

I have also found, overall, as stupid and crazy as this may be, when discussing anything involving politics users on Lemmy can be almost militantly closed-minded. I find more intelligent discussions on Lemmy, but I also find more of the ‘you either agree with me or you’re everything that’s wrong with the world’ type.

Nice catch. Fixed

This reminds me of a quote from Star Trek Insurrection- “We Believe that when you build a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man.”

When I first saw the film, I rejected that. Seemed like backwards thinking, ignorant Luddite ideology ignoring the reality that when the machine does the man’s work, you free up the man to do other things. When a man doesn’t have to plow the field, he can focus on art and science and philosophy and music and poetry and otherwise taking his mind to the next level. At least that sounded good in my head.

Then I look at what we have now. We have built machines to create art and science and music and poetry, so the man is left to keep taking out the garbage. This is not an improvement. The Baku may not have been totally wrong.

Ah, that’s the difference.

I hear girlboss as a compliment. You hear it as an insult. No sexism either way, just different interpretations of the term.

When I hear ‘girlboss’ I envision someone confident, competent, and in charge, who understands their business and is making the right choices.

Letting a company’s most promising products languish while the company loses what value it has left is not what comes to mind with ‘girlboss’.

And that’s why I say she ran it into the ground- because when Google demonstrated a MUCH MUCH MUCH better Search, Yahoo didn’t do anything differently. They kept going as a ‘start page portal site’, kept pushing their really shitty email system, and just rode that wave into irrelevance.
Yahoo HAD some properties that COULD have been immensely valuable, even post-Google, if done right.

Flickr is one that comes to mind. Google had Picasa, and Google was innovating and pushing updates while Flickr (app and website) stagnated. So with no innovation everybody eventually left Flickr. With some vision, Flickr could have become what Tumblr or Google Photos ended up being.

Yahoo Answers was another one. It was a forum sort of like AskReddit where you could post questions on any subject you wanted and others would answer it. Again, stagnated, became irrelevant.

I’ll give you that Mayer came in after much of the value had been lost. But she came into a diamond in the rough, a site that was ready to reinvent itself into something relevant again, and she just didn’t.

Look at Google as an example. Google started as a search engine and ad company, and has since reinvented itself with investment in new areas like photos, email, Android, etc.

Yahoo started as a search engine, ad company, ‘portal start page’, and email. They kept doing the same old thing and went nowhere.

But they still had products with value- Flickr for example. Managing photos was starting to become a big thing, but they let Flickr stagnate, it got no development, and eventually people stopped using it. Look at their email product as another- Gmail focused on making their email usable, clean, fast, great storage, and without lock-in. Yahoo email sucked and it was hard to get rid of them because for a long time they didn’t support IMAP (what you’d use to vacuum out your old messages) or email forwarding. People stayed not because it was a great product, but because they were stuck. But that’s a real missed opportunity- Yahoo Mail could have been what Gmail became.

When Google modernized their site with web 2.0 technologies like AJAX and updated the look and feel to match, Yahoo still felt like a Web 1.0 site with ads all over the place and messy design.

That’s why I say she ran the company into the ground. Just because Yahoo wasn’t leading the pack when she joined doesn’t mean there weren’t any wins to be had. It’s the job of CEO to recognize where the company should invest and innovate and where they should stay the course.

Another example- one of her big decisions was ending all remote work for Yahoo employees, without consideration for employees that didn’t live near a Yahoo office, or even how much office space Yahoo had. I remember reports of people working in hallways and sitting on the floor because there weren’t enough desks for everybody that was forced to come in.

To be clear- I’m NOT saying she’s stupid. She’s obviously very smart. But I am saying she wasn’t a good leader, and made many decisions that were obviously wrong both at the time and as seen historically. She does not seem to be a person with good business sense or the right kind of leadership, for a great many reasons.

I don’t understand why people are still taking this woman seriously. She is not a ‘girlboss’. She is the woman who ran Yahoo into the ground, taking it from one of the giants of the dot com era into a largely worthless and useless has-been by grossly mismanaging every single one of their formerly valuable properties.

The fact that she is involved immediately makes this company lose credibility in my eyes.

The fact that she apparently needs an AI model to come up with three compliments for her own daughter only reinforces my opinion.

Yeah exactly. What I read here is ‘if you’re vibe coding all your shit and can spout off a bunch of AI workflow buzzwords you can keep your job or get promoted if not you’re probably getting canned’

This is why The X-Files doesn’t hold up as a TV show.

‘Agent Mulder, if this is correct, the government is tracing every phone call in the country’.

Not scary, we saw that on the news, that’s not a whackjob conspiracy theory that was on the front page of the Times’.

Doesn’t surprise me. But I’m talking all the way up to the Pope.

As an example of how to do it right, I present this video. There was a scandal in the Australian army where a group of male soldiers were sexually assaulting female soldiers and sharing video of it over military computer networks. That video is the response from the guy in charge of the army. It’s worth a watch.

That is what I expect. Especially from an organization that involves children. Until and unless I see something like that and the associated action coming from the very top, I have no choice but to conclude the entire organization is rotten or includes patches of rot at all levels that leadership is not addressing. And this is one of those situations where you are either taking a hard stand against it or you are complicit.

So if I was the pope I would be arranging for a broad spectrum investigation of the entire organization all the way from myself down to the last choir boy with the goal that anyone who molested kids or helped cover it up or even knew about it and did nothing is exposed and removed. That would seriously harm the organization, as I suspect it affects a great many people, but it is necessary to burn the rot out to restore credibility and trust.

The thing that gets me isn’t the money.

The thing that gets me is we have known this is a problem for some time, but I have yet to hear any real accountability or apology from the top.

The fact is these people were trusted by parents to provide a safe environment for kids and they became the biggest threat to those kids.

There should be a giant public apology, a very public cleaning of house, dig through the records and find every last priest who was shuffled around to avoid accountability and drag them the fuck out into the light. Refer them to police if there is evidence, dismiss them from the church if there is not. But just overall make it clear that this is not acceptable and this will not be allowed to continue.

I have not seen that. Maybe I have just missed it, but if it was big enough to make a difference I don’t think it could have been messed.

I mean I don’t have that much love for Google, but I gotta feel bad for Sundar Pichai. Here’s a guy just trying to run his company, and the (supposed) leader of the free world calls- not about something important, not about a threat to the Internet, not about the future of online policy, but about renaming an ocean on a whim.

And it’s your job to talk him down.

I could see him saying like ‘secretary, cancel the rest of my day, I need to go home and cry for the future of the country’.

Hotels give you so much more for your money now

That’s exactly it. The value proposition isn’t there.

You want to sell me a place for $30-50/night sure absolutely I’ll take out the trash.

You want to sell me a place for the same cost as a hotel or even more, I expect hotel level service.

Oh I agree paying to rent a cloud xbox when you have one sitting at home is fucking stupid. A lot of cloud everything is fucking stupid, and I say that as an IT person who’s been fighting cloud-itis since the term ‘cloud computing’ became a thing.

This is long overdue, and stuff like this is why I don’t use Airbnb anymore.

When it started, rentals used to be generally cheaper than hotels and easier to deal with. Than people started buying houses for the express purpose of listing them on Airbnb. It became a profession. And things got stupid. I don’t want to pay more than hotel prices in order to get a tiny cottage that doesn’t come with any of the amenities a hotel room would.

The only time I even consider it these days is if I’m doing something with a bunch of people where we need a whole house and a hotel would be prohibitively expensive. Other than that I stay away.

Changes like this make me more interested in giving it another shot.