There has been some confusion about this question: https://www.thewisedrive.com/turn-signals-in-dedicated-turn-lanes/ https://www.thewisedrive.com/yes-you-have-to-use-your-turn-signal/ https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2023/12/26/watch-live-trooper-steve-explains-whether-you-need-to-use-turn-signals-in-turn-only-lanes/

I think the idea of a “direct course” is useful:

No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in RSA 265:42, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway, or otherwise turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety. No person shall so turn any vehicle without giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided.

I do pay extra attention to giving a signal when I intend to make a U-turn rather than a typical left turn.

Are you saying that some functionality is not federated but some functionality is?

I suppose my main problem is lack of meaningful decentralization. I prefer to use networks that allow me to contact people using a local public Wi-Fi service or someone’s home internet connection, and I believe it would be expensive or impossible to do that using ATProto without depending on infrastructure maintained by Bluesky.

The only program I wanted to use but haven’t managed to access using the openSUSE package management system is one that’s unlikely to be available using Fedora’s either.

When there is a package provided by the original creator of a program, it’s less likely that openSUSE compatibility will be tested, and it’s probably more likely that compatibility will not be tested as rigorously. In my experience, a package intended for use with Fedora will be useful to use with openSUSE without needing to modify it most of the time (the names of basic dependencies/capabilities are probably the same for both operating systems in many cases). I think coverage is expanding over time, since the examples I thought only explicitly supported Fedora currently do support OpenSUSE too: https://brave.com/linux/ https://vscodium.com/#install-on-fedora-rhel-centos-rockylinux-opensuse-rpm-package

I don’t like the idea of using Flathub, but most programs that aren’t accessible while only using YaST are available using GNOME Software, and it might be true that the exact same set of programs is accessible using that method while using either Fedora or openSUSE.

Bluesky and ATProto are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated either.

This seems to be a general overview of (the history of) Bluesky, rather than being focused on “nontoxic social media”

When I swear, I tend to use “fuck” or “bitch”, and maybe “shit”

Maybe the author meant to express, “Regardless, if the global system of interconnected computer networks is functioning properly and you have a connection to it, you can host a document on the web.” since a “global system” and “your connection to it” are separate things, and either can have a problem while the other does not have a problem. That’s me being charitable though, and I agree that it’s more likely that they were being redundant.

I also find it interesting that the original sentences reference “the internet” (with a lowercase “i”) rather than “the Internet”. “The word is sometimes still capitalized to distinguish the global internet from smaller networks”, so it’s interesting that the author might be referencing an internet that is not global rather than a global network. They probably are referencing “the Internet” though, since “many publications, including the AP Stylebook since 2016, recommend the lowercase form in every case”.

I’m not sure that your reply is directly related to my comment. The full sentence I quoted is “Under these definitions, Bluesky and ATProto are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated either.” by Christine Lemmer-Webber, but Daniel Holmgren talked more directly about “decentralised distribution of data”.

Because of what I quoted, I don’t think that “Bluesky” or “ATProto” are decentralized or federated, so it’s extremely unlikely that I’ll interact with them anytime soon. The particular reason that they are not decentralized or federated is not really interesting to me.

To get specific: it is a significant issue for me if “everyone can access the data but before it reaches the end users it goes through centralised applications”. A “centralised application” is able to restrict my ability to contact other people, whereas with a federated and/or decentralized/distributed system, it’s more likely that I will be able to contact someone that I want to communicate with. For comparison, consider how people would feel if using the United States Postal Service meant that all physical mail had to pass through the District of Columbia or if sending an email message required interacting with BBN-TENEXA just because that was the first machine to be capable of sending networked electronic mail. In the ideal case, the recipient of a message I send would not have to coordinate with me at all before they receive the message: “The first use of network email announced its own existence.”

This is interesting, but I don’t yet entirely understand it.

My first thought after trying to read the entire document was that the author seems to suggest that “AT Protocol” is a natural result of the movements they describe, but I find it hard to believe that the “peer-to-peer (p2p) movement” could naturally result in things that “are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated”.

In my experience, I find it difficult to change what communication network I use to talk to each friend of mine. This has been especially difficult for networks that don’t use a phone number to identify people. For a few relationships, we are beginning to shift to a new network (in part due to following advice and the fact that we’re passionate about security), but most relationships get “stuck” on whatever network we first used to communicate.

So far, my solution has been to do a complete hard reset: I told people that I’m changing my phone number and that my contact information is available from my website (which is just a static page hosted for free using a public Git forge website) and that I’m not sharing my phone number with anyone who knows what my legal address is (since if they really need to get in contact with me, they can just show up or send me mail, and if they have any technological problem, I’d give them an old laptop I have and help them set it up and/or let them use my WiFi to bootstrap getting their own internet connection). After I did that, everyone who actually talks to me regularly set up their phones so that they can contact me using networks I actually pay attention to. I believe part of the reason this was effective is that I usually wouldn’t communicate using SMS or the public switched telephone network even if someone tried to contact me using them and would instead wait to talk to people until we met in person at regularly scheduled events, and it’s well known that depending on the public switched telephone network makes me uncomfortable. Also, I am much more communicative using the networks that I’m comfortable with, and when I point that out to people, they agree.

Hopefully the “hard reset” method works for switching between Internet-based networks rather than only from the public switched telephone network, but I haven’t tried that yet.

In general, to transition people from using one network to another, I would describe how to contact you using a profile for an internet service you’re comfortable using (for me it was a static website, but it could be anything that has high uptime and can be updated (like the “About” field for an Mbin profile or a LinkedIn profile)), and then give that profile provenance (like by linking to it from an “About” section or changing your display name to be a URL for your “contact me” profile), and then tell people that you’re not going to send messages using networks that you don’t like using. That means that people who actually want to contact you will still be able to figure out how to do so, even if it’s been a long time since you stopped using the old communication network.

In the future, I’ll avoid sharing any contact information directly, and instead I’ll share the URL for my static website (which is essentially just my name (so it’s unlikely anyone will forget about it)) and help anyone that’s actually interested in talking to me set things up. This means I avoid advertising networks that I don’t actually want to use, so even if a new relationship still gets “stuck” on a particular communication network, it will be one that I’m comfortable with using instead of one that I’m not comfortable with using, and people will know how to get in contact with me in case something changes.

Initially, when I navigated to https://ibis.wiki/ I saw “502 bad gateway”. That is not a good first impression…

Reloading the page let me see more useful things though.

There is a bit of a Pink Floyd trend today: https://mander.xyz/post/27564901

This is true. However, if a service uses a “recovery question” at all, and doesn’t allow me to use a physical security key, it means they don’t really care about security. Moreover, it probably means that they will want me to answer a “recovery question” while talking on the phone or visiting somewhere in person, and I would probably prefer to not appear to be different to other people in a situation like that.

I refuse to answer, since “what is the first country you traveled to” is a recovery question used by at least one online service I’ve used, and I don’t want to risk letting someone else have a better chance at guessing the answer I used.