@ity@lumi oh I don't care for his dramatic "analyses" on messengers but as far as I can tell his other work is good, and I like the idea of key transparency. I'm also sympathetic to his cause of getting furries to stop using telegram.
@lumi There are people/creatures/entities working on various parts of it. I think it'd be cool if they're able to pull off key transparency from the start rather than trying to bolt it on later
Maybe I see it this way because I deeply struggle with executive function, and I myself can't just DO things even if I really want to,
I've seen people argue that these tools are great for helping manage executive dysfunction and have it write a calendar, todo list, break something it steps, or whatever, and it's frustrating to see them sold as an accessibility tool. I'm not sure what to think about people that say it does help them. If a todo list were enough then I'd have solved everything by now.
@TakeV Only tangentially related, the latest article by Doc Impossible touches briefly on her friendship with someone without empathy (most of it is not directly related though).
@areon I think post visibility and it all being "one big square" is a part why my social media of preference is pseudo-anonymous chatrooms under a certain size. Even if you use the same identity in multiple chat rooms, they're still separate places.
Posting on fedi feels too much like shouting into the void, and the post visibility doesn't offer fine grained enough controls. Closet like you mention is having multiple accounts. Maybe google+ style circles could be a thing. But also follower-only posts are broken in my opinion; if someone I follow replies to a post by someone only they follow, I don't think I should automatically be able to see their reply. In my opinion the default visibility replying to followers only should make the post visible to people who follow the top of the thread, but this would require followers to be public or the first server acting as a relay.
@counternotions Late enough that I still encountered it naturally it in the wild but it initially confused me because I was already used to having a unified search bar.
re: view on christianity@anarceus For what it's worth not all versions of Christianity believe in original sin. I don't know enough to confidently say which ones do or don't, and if you asked any random individual believer in enough detail you'll probably get different answers.
But needing to believe in Jesus or some other sort of repentance for your own sins is a common belief still. I bet there's some exception there but I can't think of any.
