My guess is it depends on the damage this attack will cause. If the missiles are all shot down or hit desert, it will be some punitive F-35 strike on an Iranian airfield somewhere. But if there’s significant damage and casualties it could escalate.

I don’t think Iran is going to risk all out war with Israel and the US. I suspect they expect most of their missiles (like the drones) to be shot down. Perhaps that’s wishful thinking though…

I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works on Lemmy. For some reason “block” here is really what “mute” is everywhere else on fedi.

Most large instances have a support community. That seems like the suitable place to raise a moderation issue with specific a community on the instance.

Are you saying it might be a crime for a President to unilaterally invent a new law and make the federal government enforce it? Well, you see…

No, I won’t give you my github.

They just gotta keep up the illusion of consequences for Trump. Fines (which will never be collected). Gag orders (which will never be enforced). Bans from business and finance dealings (which will be reversed). But hey we’re doing something!

Yeah Lemmy, besides news and technology, is very quiet and I think it suffers from having communities fractured between instances, so niche interests get even less traffic than they would on Reddit. But my Mastodon feed is always busy and interesting. If it isn’t you’re not following the right people yet. I recommend some hashtag searches for things you’re interested in.

Moderation tools on Lemmy are supposedly seriously lacking. Defederation may sometimes be the only practical option even if it’s not ideal.

The larger the group of people gets, the more likely it is to contain toxic people. Normal distributions and all that.

Mastodon is by far the largest Fedi platform, which the article points out. So it will unavoidably contain the largest number of toxic people. Also most likely the largest number of absolute saints but that’s hardly as obvious I suppose.

I disagree on giving up on a political issue only because it wouldn’t pass right now. Politics is compromise. If you only take positions which are already on the line of compromise you’ve already lost.

The same can be said for literally every issue.

“Oh if only the Democrats stopped talking about abortion, electoral reform, racial justice, the environment, education, etc. they’d be more appealing to certain voters!”

Capitulating on a widely supported issue just to possibly attract a minority group of voters is a show of weakness.

If it’s popular, why wouldn’t the Democrats keep fighting for it?

Whether it will realistically happen anytime soon, yeah I’d say the odds are very low.

But let’s not just give up as it can’t ever happen.

Also “political theater” is like half of actual politics, so don’t knock it too easily :P

This has been said about many issues in the past. Effecting change isn’t easy but giving up doesn’t help. Americans support gun control. Only our crappy political system stands in the way.

I hope instance admins can clean up their databases from this stuff, because I suspect these Reddit mirroring bots take up enormous amounts of database storage on popular instances once all those posts get pushed there.

This most extreme level can cause complete HF (high frequency) radio blackouts on the entire sunlit side of the Earth, lasting for a number of hours.

So, is that really it? A HF radio blackout? I can’t imagine most of us would even notice if HF were disrupted. I don’t know the physics involved, but if VHF/UHF were hit it would be a much bigger problem.

Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

Where art thou?

Blocking promotions of critical military roles over an unrelated social issue. Really. Why are there so many examples of how today’s Republicans would rather burn the country to the ground than concede anything to representatives for roughly the half of the population…

I’ve read these warnings for several years now and I still haven’t made up my mind about whether this is actually a bad thing or not.

If you check the numbers Japan has had economic stagnation, sure, but it’s also a stable, modern country with a high Human Development Index. I’m sure they look back longingly to the economic boom times of the 60s to the 80s but even now it seems like a fine place to live.

Perhaps infinite economic growth is not actually necessary…

Yeah I’m no economist but “Japanification” has always seemed like a likely outcome for China. Every so-called emerging economy eventually finishes its rapid growth phase, and then they’ll be faced with slower or no growth, a shrinking population, and competition with cheaper countries with lower living standards.

It doesn’t truly seem like such a bad thing to me, I mean the Japanese seems to be doing alright, but in terms of economic development it’s a big downer.