133
submitted 5 months ago by Recant@beehaw.org to c/foss@beehaw.org
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] millie@beehaw.org 104 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Who cares? It's run by reactionary incels, transphobes, and racists. https://cmdr-nova.online/2024/07/03/serenityos-and-ladybird/

[-] mox 87 points 5 months ago

Who cares? It’s run by reactionary incels, transphobes, and racists.

Wait until you find out who runs Lemmy development.

[-] Vodulas@beehaw.org 28 points 5 months ago

Good news, most folks at beehaw know and the admins have decided to move to a new platform

[-] remington@beehaw.org 50 points 5 months ago

Correct. We're moving to Sublinks very soon. Buckle up.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 21 points 5 months ago

oh boy I can't wait for all of the integrations to break

also is it just me or is deciding what software you use and do not pay for based on the political views of the people who create it (who again in no way benefit from its use by people who don't donate) incredibly fucking stupid

[-] Lionir@beehaw.org 15 points 5 months ago

Don't call people "incredibly fucking stupid". Be(e) nice.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

i'm not calling people stupid, i'm calling an idea stupid. is that also not kosher?

[-] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It is absolutely a reasonable interpretation to assume you were referring to the people making the decision you didn't like. And even if it wasn't, calling an idea a group of people have "incredibly fucking stupid" isn't much different, as it carries an implication of how you see those people.

If you feel other people are getting offended too easily at what you say, I recommend spending extra time on your posts to ensure you avoid saying derogatory things you don't intend for. Something that looks good to you can be incredibly insulting to others who read differently from you, and since conversation is a two-way street, that's the kind of thing we all need to be aware of.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 months ago

Do you know what topic brought you here?

"Hey guys, let's not use this free software, because of their views."

"Maybe we shouldn't use this other free software because of their views."

"Why are you guys worried about which free software you use based on their views?"

"We can all tell you aren't new, why are you complaining about our unofficial pastime?"

[-] millie@beehaw.org 11 points 5 months ago

It's almost like the philosophy behind a software matters to its long-term stability. Like, as if devs might find reasons to, I don't know, reject PRs, ignore bugs, and trash their users when they come to them for help.

Weird that the content of someone's mind might affect their actions or be an indicator of what level of trust they should be extended!

[-] Cube6392@beehaw.org 9 points 5 months ago

Programming is a form of communication. When you develop a piece of software, it will intrinsically be biased to boost the kinds of messages you believe in. This is both because you as a person think about problems a certain way, and because the code you write is meant to convey to others how you were thinking about the problem you were trying to solve. Who heads projects and how they communicate with their community matters to what the product produced will become, not just because of how the leads will think about the problem, but also because people who don't get along with them won't wind up contributing. Beehaw requested moderation tools that the lead lemmy Devs didn't view as valuable. The result is beehaw, reasonably, gave up on getting PRs merged and issues tracked in the issue tracker, instead choosing to look at Sublinks which was explicitly started in response to Lemmy's devs not behaving well with their own development community.

And for anyone saying Sublinks is splintering the Lemmy Dev community, no, lemmy's devs did that themselves

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 5 months ago

If this is provably the case, then I agree, we should stop using Lemmy. If not -- and I say this as a proud supporter of the vast majority of seemingly-pointless ideological bullcrap -- it is nothing but pointless ideological bullcrap.

[-] millie@beehaw.org 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yeah. We probably should.

Changing our behaviors isn't a binary, though. It takes effort. Sometimes it takes changing the world around us first to accommodate new behaviors, or waiting for the right opportunity. And given all the other things we should also be changing, prioritizing matters.

Finding a Lemmy alternative is somewhere on that list. Is it anywhere remotely near the top? No. There are a great many other things to do. It's probably closer to the top of alyzaya or Chris's lists than mine; close enough, it seems, to be carried out even.

But it isn't about trying to figure out who's a shit and point fingers at them while loudly demonstrating non-shit behaviors. If we actually want to make the world better, we need to figure out how to work together rather than just glue everything in place.

People are so defensive about being wrong. And why wouldn't they be? Whether you look at how things are set up in school or the cruelty and corruption of the prison system, or the poverty-reinforcing measures set about in our banking and credit rating systems, the elements that we need to grow past push this tendency to categorize people and sort of socially compartmentalize their various experiences.

End up in the right categories and you don't really have to worry. Companies will throw free cellphones at you just for breathing. End up in the wrong categories, and you're going to have to struggle against a system that's built to keep you from getting back up.

We can spend eternity playing with the categories, moving around between them or building or diminishing their relative social power. We can change the criteria that we categorize people by, or try to keep them the same. But in the end we're not really going to make much forward progress until we let go of thinking we know the potential of every human being at a glance. We don't.

What we can do though is be patient, speak our minds honestly, set boundaries, allow others their own autonomy, and try to help ourselves and other humans open up and grow rather than close off and shrink.

In any case, the world is complex. It's silly to try to boil it down into absolutist binaries. It's also probably really bad for your cortisol levels.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I don't understand at all where you're going with this. Either Beehaw uses Lemmy on the backend or it doesn't. Either you're using Ladybird or you're using a different browser. These are pretty binary choices.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

I wasn't making any judgement on this, although if I were, I would point out that one of the benefits of open source is the ability to fork projects and move away from the elements you have a philosophical issue with, such as what the OpenOffice developers did when Oracle purchased Sun and started imposing their unplayable rules. What I was half-jokingly pointing out was some guy coming in deep into the conversation of highly opinionated people and acting like the conversation wasn't about their various opinions.

[-] millie@beehaw.org 5 points 5 months ago

People talk about forking open source projects as if you just push a button and it happens on its own. I mean, okay, that's the first step, but maintaining an repo is a whole thing. Saying 'well just fork it then' is only a viable solution if you have the the means, the time, and the inclination. It isn't really an exclusive alternative to criticism, but another, much narrower, potential additional path.

It would certainly be good if people would fork all the useful projects made by devs who are interested in promoting social conservatism masquerading as 'apolitical actions' that attempt to reinforce the existing status quo of power. I'm not sure how likely it is, though. Certainly less so than bringing criticism to the table.

[-] chamomile@furry.engineer 12 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

@AVincentInSpace @remington The Lemmy devs are infamously difficult to work with. They've repeatedly shown an unwillingness to even acknowledge the existence of the many problems that instance admins face. That has been a big driver in Beehaw's decision to move platforms, not just because of a difference in political views, and they've been pretty open about discussing it. You're way off-base.

[-] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 2 points 5 months ago

based on the political views of the people who create it

That is not the reason for the Beehaw switching to another platform, but here's a few of the true reasons why.

[-] mox 14 points 5 months ago

Will it federate with Lemmy? I would miss you folks.

[-] remington@beehaw.org 16 points 5 months ago

It's my understanding that it will...I believe that's, also, what it means when they (Sublinks developers) said it would be "Lemmy compatible".

[-] mox 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That could also mean client API-compatible, so Lemmy apps would work with it, which doesn't address federation.

[-] remington@beehaw.org 8 points 5 months ago

Maybe so. We should, probably, ask @Penguincoder@beehaw.org about this.

[-] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Pong. @mox@lemmy.sdf.org , in sublinks, the federation services are entirely separate from the API of the instance. So much separate, the federation services are written in a programming language called Golang. The API service is written in a programming language called Java.

One aspect does not require or preclude the other with Sublinks.

[-] mox 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Indeed, protocol is independent from implementation language, but that isn't the question at hand.

Do you know whether Beehaw will still federate with the lemmyverse (and therefore the rest of us) after moving to Sublinks?

[-] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 9 points 5 months ago

The current aim of Sublinks is Lemmy parity for V1 release. So yes, I do see Beehaw still federating with Lemmy instances at the on-set.

[-] remington@beehaw.org 4 points 5 months ago

Thanks for clearing that up!

[-] refalo@programming.dev 3 points 5 months ago

then what's the point if you're still not getting away from the same people?

[-] millie@beehaw.org 6 points 5 months ago

Y'all just don't even bother moving your eyes over the text before you post, do you?

[-] yessikg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 months ago

That's like saying what is the point of misskey (and its forks) when it can be seen by people on mastodon. Isn't that the whole point of the fediverse?

[-] refalo@programming.dev 3 points 5 months ago

Yes I don't understand the point of misskey either. It just seems to be a Japanese clone of mastodon with a small, differing interpretation of some parts of ActivityPub.

[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 months ago

Sublinks exists because the developers of Lemmy have repeatedly ignored feature requests from instance admins and acted in a hostile manner towards them. They're unpleasant to work with, so a bunch of people decided to no longer work with them and create their own project.

It feels like you're only capable of seeing the "logical" point for something to exist friend. Misskey is to Tumblr as Mastodon is to Twitter.

[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 12 points 5 months ago

I am overjoyed to hear that we'll be staying in the fediverse and I can stay with beehaw.

[-] remington@beehaw.org 11 points 5 months ago

It will be "Lemmy compatible", so hopefully all of Lemmy apps should work fine.

[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 7 points 5 months ago

That's splendid, though I'll continue to use the web interface of beehaw honestly.

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 11 points 5 months ago

The demo on that link is literally Lemmy lol

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 8 points 5 months ago

Is it maybe that they're using the Lemmy frontend, but Sublinks for the backend? But yeah, still a bit weird...

[-] Auzy@beehaw.org 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

deleted - moved instance

[-] goferking0 2 points 5 months ago

Probably because the project is just taking rust and making it Java....

Because they hate/don't want to learn rust and think Java is a superior language

[-] Lionir@beehaw.org 5 points 5 months ago

Because they hate/don’t want to learn rust and think Java is a superior language

You know, that's not what I've read. It's worth mentioning that it doesn't just use Java.

[-] goferking0 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It was their announcement reasoning. And notice none of it is rust

https://discuss.online/comment/5276375

[-] Lionir@beehaw.org 3 points 5 months ago

announcement reasoning

...no it wasn't?

[-] goferking0 3 points 5 months ago

Oh sorry they'd rather not contribute to lemmy and not use rust

https://discuss.online/comment/7560301

Java isn’t my preferred language. I did learn Rust to try to contribute but found the code base in less than ideal state and the process of contributing to risky. They don’t always accept all PRs. I also have low faith in the success of Lemmy due to it’s poor QA process and it’s major lack of features.

I believe Java is the best option for this type of application, I almost did it in PHP. My goal was to attract as many people as possible to want to contribute. It’s worked, I have a ton of people contributing in some way, Sublinks roadmap is clear and organized, and we have a super-motivated and driven team.

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

Man, even if I somewhat understand Java as a choice, because it's basically the lowest common denominator for lots of devs, it is also that. It's not very fun to code in Java.
I've only looked into Spring Boot shortly, but that also looked like the antithesis of fun to me. Tons of boilerplate, heavy-handed processes, a million best practices and documentation to read before you know how to correctly use it.

I mean, if they want to do this, then more power to them. But fun is still important for projects that people do in their freetime...

[-] goferking0 2 points 5 months ago

why do something original when we can just copy because we say we don't like the devs?

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 4 points 5 months ago

Its better to fork than recreate the wheel.

Well, PRs are better, but when the devs ban their contributors or don't accept PRs, then at some point its best to fork. Lots of people have come to this decision

I'm looking forward to switching to Sublinks but it isnt ready

[-] Vodulas@beehaw.org 6 points 5 months ago

Oh nice. Hadn't heard a platform had been decided upon.

[-] goferking0 4 points 5 months ago

Is it anywhere near ready yet?

[-] remington@beehaw.org 5 points 5 months ago

I can't give you a date. However, I can say it will be very soon.

[-] storksforlegs@beehaw.org 2 points 5 months ago

It's a lot of work, give them time

[-] goferking0 3 points 5 months ago

I'm not the one saying they're gonna switch to it very soon

[-] jherazob@beehaw.org 3 points 5 months ago

Great! Must have missed the announcement as usual but no matter, looking forward to it!

load more comments (42 replies)
load more comments (49 replies)
load more comments (148 replies)
this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
133 points (99.3% liked)

Free and Open Source Software

17984 readers
2 users here now

If it's free and open source and it's also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS