What kind of info?

If you are scraping the project sites and having an LLM put together guides, they will likely go out of date over time and likely contain vital errors already. It would be much better if you simply direct users to where they can read the current up to date information.

How would this be better or more helpful than selfh.st? It is more reputable and more likely to stick around

Oh I see, that makes sense :)

Maybe these communities then:

• !opensource@lemmy.ml
• !opensource@programming.dev

You could also post about the community in !communitypromo@lemmy.ca

This sounds good to me, thank you for putting in the time for this!

I didn’t know about your project, it looks cool! I think you could share it outside of your community some more, maybe you can crosspost them to !fediverse@lemmy.world?

I feel that some further refinement is needed. I agree with the sentiment behind the latest version of the rule, but I think it still doesn’t address the recent issues.

The way I see it, there is a very specific type of post that has started showing up very recently, and is getting lots of downvotes. Users here are justifiably suspicious of the pattern.

The ones that get downvotes are usually:

• from new accounts
• the user makes one post, and at most they only responds to comments in that one post
• the software uses the help of LLMs, while the post and/or comments are also helped by LLMs
• the software is made to look “professional”, whether it is the UI, the demo, or the README

I’m not sure what exactly the end goal is, but I don’t believe the story that they all use where they “had this problem and now want to share their solution”. I’m concerned that there is some other end goal, whether it is link farming, SEO manipulation, LLM search result manipulation, or it’s the setup portion of a cyber attack where questionable code will be added later (if it isn’t already).

Normally I would suggest to just moderate it based off of “you know it when you see it”, but in this case it’s difficult since it’s very similar to legitimate posts. There are real users that want to post with a new account, such keeping their professional life separate from their main account. It’s also hard to differentiate it based on licenses, because those recent accounts almost always license it as FOSS. I also don’t think it’s fair to exclude all AI assisted code, since it’s very common to have that now.

Perhaps instead of a rule, we could even try some of the following:

• To reduce the risk of OpenClaw style bots creating content here: AI is ok for the code and external text (ex. the README), but the post here should be written by a human. It’s not like the post needs to be that long to express why someone should look at it, and it won’t go through that many edits. Translations should be done through traditional translation software.
• To prevent driveby posts, we could automate a comment on new posts see if a user knows where they are posting. Asking about their favourite threadiverse community, or how long they have been a member here, or even how they learned about the community might separate bots from real users. It works pretty well for our registration applications on lemmy.ca / piefed.ca etc.

On top of being suspicious, I think it boils down to “projects that have a future” and “projects that don’t have a future”. People in this community want to run software that is likely to stay useful and safe over time, and that’s at the core of why these recent ones are downvoted.

Is ambitiousslab@feddit.uk also the author of the blog?

A blurb about the article is nice and helps to convince people to click on the article, but it isn’t necessary. From what I can tell, ambitiousslab seems to be sharing things that they find interesting and doesn’t follow the pattern of the usual bot spam we deal with

They put out a LOT of updates in a row a few months ago

Hopefully the maintainers are taking a break, and they aren’t burned out.

It might also be the kind of data center that is being built. Cheaper data centers are noisier, inefficient with water, etc

Working class areas may already be distrustful towards large companies coming along and using up all of the local resources

My bad, I missed that 😄

The links are dead for me, maybe it’s set to private? The first one doesn’t open anything, and the second one takes me to a login page

From what we can see on our end, this account doesn’t match the pattern of the other harassment accounts

That might be interesting! If you build on this idea, it would be cool to see ping times with location data, so instance operators can see what the performance is like with real world data. That was something we were concerned about when trying out different alternatives when leaving CloudFlare.

I think the original title was more helpful because it shows that this is a recent development. Maybe you can add “new CEO”?

Bitwarden scrubs ‘Always free’ and ‘Inclusion’ values from its website as longtime execs step down

In February, longtime CEO Michael Crandell moved to an advisory role, according to LinkedIn, with no announcement from the company. His replacement, Michael Sullivan, former CEO of both Acquia and Insightsoftware, touts his experience with “all facets of mergers and acquisitions” on his own LinkedIn page, including experience working with leading private equity firms.

CFO Stephen Morrison also left Bitwarden in April, replaced by former InVision CEO Michael Shenkman. Both Crandell and Morrison joined the company in 2019. Kyle Spearrin, who started Bitwarden as a fun hobby project in 2015, remains the company’s CTO.

What if you distributed the tool under the normal channels, and then used gumroad (or anything similar) to sell an optional key that adds a little visual indicator or removes a nag message. I’ve seen a few other open source projects do that. Grayjay for example

Amnesty International did put something out in both of these cases.

For the first one, the additional link goes into why that testimony was initially included in their report before the correction.

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

• https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v13/n03/alexander-cockburn/right-stuff

Nayirah’s story was initially corroborated by Amnesty International, which published a report about the supposed killings[3] and testimony from Kuwaiti evacuees. Following the liberation of Kuwait, international media crews were given access to the country. A report by ABC News found that “patients, including premature babies, did die, when many of Kuwait’s nurses and doctors … fled” but Iraqi troops “almost certainly had not stolen hospital incubators and left hundreds of Kuwaiti babies to die.”[4] Later, Amnesty International USA reacted by issuing a correction, with executive director John Healey subsequently accusing the George H. W. Bush administration of “opportunistic manipulation of the international human rights movement.”

The second one is more complex, but they’re mentioned there too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violence_in_the_October_7_attacks

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International stated that these alleged confessions were likely extracted under torture, violate international law and basic human rights, and should be considered inadmissible as credible evidence.[61] They also called on the Israeli government to cease publishing such taped “confessions”.[61] Physicians for Human Rights Israel denounced these alleged taped confessions, citing “severe concern that the interrogations included the use of torture.”[64] The UN and reports by human rights organizations such as B’Tselem and media outlets have confirmed Israeli systematic use of torture during the Gaza war, including rape, gang-rape, sexualized torture and mutilation of detained Palestinian men, women and children by Israeli guards, including during interrogations.

My point is that, biases definitely exist and there is often selective reporting with news organizations.

I just find it weird to lump amnesty international in with all that when they seem to be one of the few that are actually calling out atrocities regardless of “sides”

I cross posted this to !selfhosted@lemmy.world, I hope that was ok! I figured it would be good to spread the knowledge

I don’t think amnesty.org’s stance on this matter would have changed in the past few years. They have been consistent in their messaging for a while now.

Interestingly, this page on criticisms highlights how they don’t shy away from calling out abuses regardless of which “side” the offending party is on

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

Why don’t you just implement federation normally instead of taking this roundabout way of doing things? As long as your site contributes content back, and makes it clear where content is from, other projects like piefed and lemmy would be happy to have your project join the network.

Continuing like this will likely get you IP blocked from wherever you’re mirroring content from.

Also these platforms are open source. You are allowed to copy and modify things for your own projects, as long as you follow the basic rules in the license.

What kind of hardware are you using on the desktop?