It's been a while since I used Arch, but it was smooth sailing while I did. In general, gaming means Steam, and Steam ships with its own runtime so it is not really impacted by whatever library versions are packaged by the distro. Gaming is a very common use case. You'd have to pick a pretty obscure one to find something where it isn't tested and somewhat streamlined.

I thought communities synced over instances so if an instance goes down, communities are still accessible. Is this not true?

This is not true. ActivityPub (the protocol Lemmy instances use to speak with one-another) does not intend to be a redundant, distributed datastore. There are a few reasons for this. One is practical. It needs to be affordable to start a new instance. If the requirements for starting a new instance entail mirroring significant parts of the fediverse (a network of over 2 million users and 22,000 instances) it would be impossible for anybody to do it unless they were Google/Facebook.

Another has to do with trust. A community has a home. That home is chosen (ideally) because the admins can be trusted. That instance is the universal source of truth for that community. If communities didn't live on a specific instance, they would be vulnerable to various forms of hijacking. The home instance has the final say on who has permission to comment, and who has permission to perform moderator actions. None of these actions could be trusted if they weren't cleared by the home instance first. Third party servers perform basic validataion against the currently known ban list / mod list / etc, but this could easily be spoofed by malicious instances.

Finally (though not really), ActivityPub isn't designed to be a broadcasting protocol. In the case of Lemmy, and other Reddit-like clones, it effectively acts as such, but it is intended only to send messages to the places they belong. If you post a message and the subscribers to that message only exist on 3 servers, that message ONLY gets sent to those three servers, even though there are thousands of servers in the network (at least, this is how it is supposed to work in theory).

Liberalism has an actual definition, and it is not the colloquial definition used in mass-media to refer to "the left half of what is acceptable."

Liberalism is an idealist (another word which has a very specific definition) political philosophy which champions private property, constitutionalism, republicanism, rule of law, and free trade. It has a philosophical canon, flowing through writers like Locke, Montesquieu, Mirabeau, Rousseau, Paine, etc. Further economic works, like Smith's "Wealth of Nations," are built on this philosophical underpinning.

Marxists are materialists. This is in contrast with the idealism of Liberals. While Liberals believe ideas are the force which drives change in the material world, Marxists understand that ideas are just a reflection of the material conditions they emerge from.

Liberals find themselves banging their heads against the walls of the institutions time and time again, because from their perspective, these institutions are just a reflection of ideas, and as long as the justification for an institution on paper is sound, there is no reason to think it cannot be reformed. An institution like the US Congress, or the Executive Branch is never at fault. It is simply a good institution simply being run by bad people. Marxists (and Anarchists) reject this quite simply, by looking at the material incentives involved, and the long ghastly history surrounding these institutions.

"Combating liberalism" does not mean being a piece of shit to anybody to the right of Bernie Sanders or Jeromy Corbin. There is a genuine struggle to ensure the new crop of social media platforms don't simply end up defending the legitimacy of the established institutions at the expense of genuine radicals who find themselves at odds with the actual longstanding policy and practices of these institutions. To avoid situations like when mastodon.lol banned CODEPINK, a prominent anti-war organization, for being "Tankies." This is Liberalism, and it should be combated.

It’s to push their beliefs and ideology.

What the FUCK do these liberals think they are doing every day on social media?

For the love of god, listen to some Citations Needed and stop self-congratilating your media literacy because some fucking dork with a website tells you the New York Times and Washington Post aren't biased.

Fuck off. People post all sorts of news on Hexbear. From sources like the US business press, to foreign state media, to individual radical organizations within various countries. Despite the shitposting, we actually do have a modicum of media literacy. We understand that if something is coming from RT, it is obviously going to paint the Russian Federation in a favorable light. We understand that if something is coming from the Wall Street Journal, it is Murdoch slop but needs to be honest about the money. We understand that if something is coming from Telesur, it is sanctioned by the government of Venezuela.

Still, we have a much clearer picture of what's going on in the world than you do. We don't just browse the whitelist of news sources made available on r/Politics and base our worldview on the congressional kayfabe. We don't just float from headline to headline like a bunch of fucking goldfish. We also study history and political theory. We understand there is a context for all of this shit.

On Discord, you cannot host your own server, and you cannot use any third party clients (without the threat of being banned).

You can host your own Matrix server, either on physical hardware, or a generic virtual machine you can rent from any number of ISPs. There are over a dozen compatible third-party clients (though many lack full feature coverage).

In summary, Discord is strictly a service. Matrix is a tool you can apply however you see fit.

Support for groups (i.e. communities on Lemmy) is coming to Mastodon sometime soon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_für_Sexualwissenschaft

In the state of Florida, it is illegal for school teachers to tell their students WHICH books the Nazis chose to burn first.

Elections aren't going to save us. I will make sure to vote against anybody who has the slightest whiff of engaging in this anti-trans hysteria, but you could hardly describe this place as a democracy to begin with. The desires of the people have absolutely nothing to do with what gets enacted as public policy in this country.

We need to prepare as if the state will do NOTHING to protect us, and treat any counterexample as a pleasant surprise.

In general, I find the term "democratic socialism" to be pretty cringe. It's like saying right up front "I'm not like those OTHER socialists!" Socialism is a liberatory project. Socialism is the auto-emancipation of the working class. THAT is what democracy looks like. Rule of the people.

Liberation comes hand in hand with revolution though. Socialism will certainly NOT be very democratic for the people who own vast amounts of real estate, productive machinery, and propaganda media empires. Those people will certainly need to end up on the wrong side of a gun for the project to succeed. The wise ones among them won't force us to pull the trigger.

It will be a hostile take-over. It will be a break from the constitutional order. It will be a break from the "rule of law." When the ruling class starts losing the game, they will flip over the table. All your precious civil liberties will be torn to shreds. Fascism is simply capitalism under crisis.

The Liberals commit themselves to playing by the rules even when the fascists never would. Salvador Allende (the world's first elected Marxist head of state) tried to do this, and in three years it ended in his death and a fascist military dictatorship. There is no room for idealism in revolution. The stakes are very real. You need to crush your enemies by any means necessary. Maybe you don't give Rupert Murdoch the freedom of speech. Maybe you don't respect Jeff Bezos's property rights. Maybe you stuff all the Proud Boys into a mineshaft.

A lot of people whine about authoritarianism in the English speaking left, but the English-speaking left has no power to speak of. Just a bunch of very online sectarians bickering. We run around trying to cancel internet forums which amount to little more than fucking book clubs, as if they were the embodiment of high Stalinism.

X11 used to require very cumbersome MANUAL configuration, where you would specify the exact parameters of your keyboard, mouse, monitor, and other peripherals. If you accidentally ended up overclocking your monitor it would melt. For at least a decade, it has been able to run with no configuration file at all, but in the 90s/early 2000s you had to produce a unique >75 line xorg.conf file for your specific hardware.

You should be aware that the people over at Raddle have a massive grudge against Lemmy and they post shit like this all the time.

It is true. You can host an image somewhere (i.e. actually run the web server) paste a link to it, and if anybody clicks on it they will show up in your web server's access log. Typically this will include an IP address and a user agent string (indicating OS, browser version, etc.). To mitigate this, Lemmy would need store copies of any media which gets linked here and serve those instead of allowing hot-links. Mastodon does this, but for the same reason it requires hundreds of gigabytes of storage to run a small instance.

I feel like PeerTube hasn't broken through yet in the way Mastodon has, and Lemmy is kind-of broaching on. Mastodon itself is heavy for what it does. I need 8GB of RAM, >600GB of storage, and 2 CPU cores to run a 100 person instance. Lemmy is leaner (as well as some microblog style alternatives to Mastodon like Misskey / Pleroma). Peertube, on the other hand, can only get so lean. Hosting video content is orders of magnitude more intensive than hosting a text-based message board. It is much more costly to do this, and to compete with platforms like YouTube, it is not sufficient for just spin up a single instance. You also need to work out CDNs, caching, load balancing, etc.

Like Jack said, I'd just find an instance you vibe with and post stuff there, but it will take a lot of resources to grow the network as a whole.

This sounds like a comedy bit.

AFAIK the problem with resin printing is vapors, not particles. A respirator may help, but it is no substitute for proper ventilation.

If some fuckstick from Nebraska asked me to snitch on my users for something which isn't a crime in my state, I would simply tell them to fuck themselves, go ahead, and try to have me extradited. If my instance were bordering on a trillion dollars market cap, I'd hire a fucking lawyer.

This has been the dynamic on Mastodon for years now, and I don't think it is really a problem. Framing the problem itself as "free speech" vs. "censorship" itself is often used as a fascist canard when it is really a matter of the freedom of association. Communities choose who to associate with and who not to associate with. Moderation, to prevent harassment and abuse, to keep the discussion on topic, to remove illegal content, is a very NORMAL thing. It starts with small tools like temp-bans from communities, and increases in scale to permanent bans from instances, or de-federation if an instance proves to be a continuous torrent of abuse.

There are a lot of cases of genuine censorship which take place on commercial platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit, but these "free speech extremists" are always more concerned about whether or not they can use slurs and spew blood libel than they are about what happened to r/BlueLeaks.

Or is it usual for people to run instances from their homes using common ISP subscriber variable IP addresses?

No. That that would be absolutely ridiculous for anything beyond an ephemeral CounterStrike server.

Channeling Stallman and referring to the Windows 32 bit Application Programming Interface as lose32 instead of win32.