I think this post violates Rule 1 (I don’t think it counts as a fact).

There is already the Conservapedia doing the same thing. […]

Interestingly, the site is timing out for me right now ^[1], but I’ve been able to find some interesting archived information: for example, they have a page titled “Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia” ^[2]. To say the least, I take issue with some of their rationale.

I don’t understand what exact problem Grokipedia ^[1] is even trying to solve.

TikTok To Be Sold To Trump’s Right Wing Billionaire Buddies And Converted Into A Propaganda Mill ^[1.1]

The title feels misinformative to me given, the following from the article:

[…] Trump insiders claim to be zeroing in on a deal that would sell 80% of TikTok’s U.S. assets to […] ^[1.2]

To me, the title infers that TikTok is being sold with certainty, whereas the content of the article sates that a deal has yet to even be reached.

This is ironically an inevitable consequence of Wikipedia’s centralization undermining its strategic objective of making knowledge free and accessible to all. […]

Perhaps you’d be interested ^[1] in Ibis ^[2]?

Chromium? More like copium. /j

IMO, one of the worst parts of the article is this quote:

[…] “We might have to put DOGE on Elon,” [Trump] said. […] “If DOGE looks at Musk, we’re going to save a fortune,[sic]” […] ^[1]

To me, this reads as an admission of guilt from Trump that he instructs DOGE to withhold its scrutiny from entities favorable to him, and that he biases it towards entities unfavorable to him.

[Tesseract is] a Photon fork.

TIL that Tesseract is a Photon Fork. Would you know, by chance, at what point in Photon’s development it was forked to form Tesseract, and what the rationale was?

That’s pretty neat!

You’re welcome! 😊

IDK if they’re “Fediverse specific”, but I love SSTF’s (@setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world) art.

Transphobic main dev […]

Do you have a source?

“The President has invited you to the Gulf of Laogai.”

[…] it doesn’t remove admins from the equation and users still have to choose an instance to be associated with […]

I think that’s a fair point! At any rate, I do agree with you in that I think that users should be completely portable for a truly sustainable federated service.

It could be done without having to clone all data though. Reddit is hosted by AWS and their data is distributed on multiple servers, so replace AWS by a bunch of people like you and me providing disk space for the data and tada, you can decentralized the database and just give people access to interacting with it directly (through code) or via various front-ends that people would create. […]

If I understand you correctly, there is an open issue for Lemmy for an, I think, similar idea of co-hosting communities.

[…] they’re always using the same credentials no matter the website they use and no matter the website they can interact with everything that ever happened on the servers, no one has the power to prevent users from seeing some of the transactions that happened (no admins) because the website they use are just a front used to simplify interaction with the servers. […]

Hm, IIUC, this is one of Bluesky’s issues that the linked blog post was pointing out — if joining the network requires one to mirror all existing data, it makes it prohibitively expensive for anyone to spin up a server to join the network if the size of the network is enormous.

If things were decentralized in similar way to crypto it would be way better for user adoption.

IIUC, are you perhaps referring to something like Nostr?

🐻 “it’s not. it’s not. it’s not. …”

🐻 “it’s not. it’s not. it’s not. …”

🐻 “it’s not. it’s not. it’s not. …”

/j

Oh damn, that’s a lot of cross-posts. I didn’t know this had already been posted so many times before.

Isn’t that for U.S. law? Given that the law in the post is a Canadian law, I think it would be better to have a Canada-specific source.