Untitled attachment

Notices where this attachment appears

1. Embed this notice
   Chris Trottier (atomicpoet@atomicpoet.org)'s status on Thursday, 28-Mar-2024 03:54:17 JST Chris Trottier

   On my timeline, some people are saying that if you are federating with Threads, you are a terrible person.

   But these folks don’t seem to have any plan for migrating people off Threads. And should they have a plan, what’s their plan for getting them to migrate to a server that de-federates Threads – and ensure they’re happy when they do it?

   The ironic thing is that a lot of these “morally upright” folks came to the Fediverse during the #TwitterMigration. They benefitted from tools to make the transition easier. They used auto-crossposting, look-up sites to find their old friends, and various importing tools to help them ensure their switch to Mastodon was a success.

   In other words, they benefitted from connecting their Fediverse accounts to Twitter. They can’t use these tools right now, mind you, but that’s not because Fediverse developers were so outraged by Elon Musk that they pulled the plug. No, it was Twitter that pulled the plug by entirely killing off API access.

   But now that these folks “got theirs”, they want to kick the ladder off the roof. Should there be some sort of crisis on Threads – and there likely will be – what’s the migration path for Threads users to leave Threads? Why should they trust some random Fediverse server that they’ve never interacted with instead of continuing to deal with the devil they do know, Threads?

   By no means am I telling you to federate with Threads. As a server operator, that decision is entirely up to you. Yet I am very skeptical that if all Fediverse servers de-federated Threads, it will make the world a better place. On the contrary, no migration path from Threads makes the world worse.

2. Embed this notice
   Futurist Jim Carroll (jimcarroll@futurist.info)'s status on Friday, 06-Oct-2023 19:42:01 JST Futurist Jim Carroll

   Daily Inspiration: "Problems can't be solved if nobody has discovered that they exist!" - Futurist Jim Carroll

   Everything is beta, it seems.

   If you use popular software programs, no doubt you've heard of the phrase, and have often sought access to the newest version in order to try the latest, greatest features. You might have friends who are using a beta or 'developer' version of an iPhone software update. Others might be using a 'beta' version of a software program in order to try out the latest features. Anyone who uses Tesla's (so-called) Full Self-Driving software knows that has never been anything but a 'beta' version.  'Beta' software makes the world go round.

   The concept of 'beta' versions goes beyond software to the very idea of trying to do new things - the essence of innovation. Organizations that are working hard to align to a new and different future, are in 'beta mode' all the time. They are trying new ideas, implementing new concepts, and chasing new methodologies. Inevitably, things will go wrong - and accepting this fact, AND learning from them, is what will provide for real success.

   In effect, the idea of communicating about flaws, problems, and mistakes is critical to future success, and so there are valuable lessons here for corporate efforts and innovation. When you are chasing new ideas, developing new products, and implementing new ways of doing things, you are operating out on the 'bleeding edge.' You are doing a 'beta.' You must be prepared for things to go wrong, for ideas to go off the rails, and for concepts to be malleable and risky. it's the only way to get ahead. but at the same time, you need to ensure that you have an honest and open culture of sharing, in which people are willing to communicate what they've discovered that isn't quite right - and with the opportunity to suggest how to fix the wrongs.

   Original post: https://jimcarroll.com/2023/10/daily-inspiration-innovation-communications-problems-cant-be-solved-if-nobody-has-discovered-that-they-exist/

3. Embed this notice
   alcinnz (alcinnz@floss.social)'s status on Sunday, 11-Dec-2022 02:05:52 JST alcinnz

   A bit of history for you: The reason why we tend to use the metonym "Linux", as opposed to e.g. GNU/Linux like FSF begs, is because GNU is a victim of their own success.

   In the 1980's whenever you got a UNIX machine no matter what the brand you installed a GNU userspace replacing whatever came with it because they appreciated GNU's quality. So once an opensource kernel came in the 1990's noone felt the need to mention which userspace they installed on it, ofcourse it'd be GNU!

   1/2