Well… Our points of view are so far apart, I don’t even know where to begin to reconcile them.

Sourcing, information hygiene, proof, and science are irrefutably central to the way I wish to interact with the world. It should be the bedrock of any healthy online community structure, IMO.

Places where that’s not enforced are place people just echo what they want to hear, in my experience. Whether its true or not is secondary, as apparently information hygiene is too “heirarchal” and constricting.

I don’t want that. I don’t want anything to do with the Fediverse if that’s what it becomes, and it sure feels like many users want that.

I mean, you shouldn’t. “XiJinpingStanAccount” is a glorious handle. I salute you, comrade.

Eh. I still (respectfully) disagree.

I think that’s newsworthy; but it should have linked the dev announcement, or GitHub thread, or wherever the information was sourced from.

If /c/technology won’t allow direct posts from developers, that is indeed a problem for /c/technology, as that’s a first party source for topical news.

But to make my position clear:

• If that poster was intended to post without a source, that should be against the rules. It’s how I would moderate /c/technology.

• There are other communities to post that to.

• Hence, I don’t agree that this issue should be generalized. Communities need to straighten out sourcing rules to be more practical, especially to allow topical first party sources, but I don’t think they should loosen sourcing rules.

If Lemmy/Piefed has discoverability issues for small communities or an under moderation issues, I think those are structural, and we should change how the site works to address them.

I respectfully disagree.

If you want a place to discuss opinions, that’s what comments sections are for. Or communities dedicated to discussion.

But news communities are generally rooted in facts. For current news, that means sourced, methodological journalism. Discussion stems from facts

I can make a website right now and call it “The Daily Pragmatist” or some shit and people won’t bat an eye.

This is one of the worst issues plaguing Lemmy, IMO. People post stuff from outright tabloids, random Tweet screenshots, and those kind of websites Wikipedia will outright reject as a source. This is a huge problem, but it means that communities should be more rigorous about information hygiene, TBH. They need to be stricter about what is allowed as source.

Reality also is that many reach conclusions based on titles alone anyhow.

I hate this too. But to fight it, I think Lemmy needs to steal the “community correction” thing Twitter does, so people would see community consensus right below the headline.

And I am very serious about this. I will die on this hill.

I’m not saying more discussion spaces shouldn’t exist, that’s great; but news communities should be for news.

Honestly… I have gotten close to deleting my Lemmy account and leaving, because the information hygiene is getting as bad as Reddit here. I did not come to Lemmy to engage in conspiracies and misinformation.

And the community feeling the opposite is not making me feel any better. I’ve seen other Reddit clones do down like this.

It’s good to have this documented, thanks. It’s one thing for everyone to “know” they’re Tankies, it’s another to have compiled evidence and A/B examples like this to point to.

Reddit seems to be highly algorithmic now, so I think it has more of the “doomscrolling effect” that does accrue a lot of engagement.

Admittedly, no, but this is slowly improving. Stepfun published their SFT dataset, smaller labs are publishing their datasets for task specific tunes. I believe there was another Chinese lab that published bulk pretraining data, but I can’t find it in my history at the moment.

And, notably, these comparatively tiny labs generally aren’t scraping the internet so abusively like OpenAI/Meta. They don’t need as much. Going by statements in their papers, they tend to use existing archives of web data, buy commercial data, or (more recently) generate a lot synthetic data.

If you run Nemotron, from open datasets.

See the dataset table here. There are sections for pretraining and for specific tasks/topics, like STEM, code and such: https://huggingface.co/nvidia

Chinese models are starting to open their pretraining datasets too, albeit slowly.

this new model, couldn’t universities rebuild it with different contexts and study it in ways you can’t reproduce in other models? like, is k2 horizons a good scientific foundation on which to study machine learning?

Not on a university budget, I don’t think.

But there is all sorts of interesting stuff that can be done with a truly open model other than replicating it.

On top of what others said, Nvidia Nemotron is truly open, with an open dataset.

There have been others (like Olmo), but Nemotron was unique in that it was reasonably useful/cutting edge, while other open models before were basically research artifacts.

Well I was thinking the opposite.

Take the existing community fragments, and unify them into a structure so they don’t wither.

The problem I see on Lemmy is that niche communities aren’t very discoverable, hence never cultivate much interaction, but “percolating” posts up would address this.

Lemmy and Piefed need a “subcommunity” structure to get that ball rolling IMO.

EG you may have an overarching “sports” community, and in layers:

sports -> basketball -> NBA -> team

• So if your team sub was kinda dead, you could browse /c/NBA or /c/basketball and get a wider feed of other teams.

• Similarly, you could mark non-spammy posts to “filter up” to the higher communities that accept it. So you make a post in your team community, and folks browsing basketball might see it, depending on their settings.

Permissions would be granular to set this up, consensual for both the “upper” and “lower” communities.

I’ve written this up as a more general proposal ti help niche communities, but have yet to put it on the development gits as a feature request.

I think the main benefit, theoretically, would be engagement with other parts of the Fediverse. It might be an introduction to many if they see an update scroll by in the feed.

Less friction is better though. And not everyone knows where else to go for E2E.

The problem to me would be development burden, but its alreast implemented so…

Thats the secret sauce of the Fediverse.

It doesnt have to compete/steal attention across apps. It can cooperate and combine it.

I have been putting off focusing on some niches too long, mostly because of IRL executive dysfunction.

Yeah.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to touch projects vibe coded to this level, going solely on past experience with them.

But I am scientifically curious about its functionality.

Yeah, in that case it’s sus. I’d be scared to look at the codebase.

Does it actually work, though?

Oh yeah… yeah, it doesn’t seem like it’s client/server or anything. It’s just a CAD program?

Doesn’t fit this at all.

I dunno if it fits the “vibe coded” label though, as it appears to work well. I tend to apply that to quick hacks, or to projects where the devs clearly have no idea what they’re doing (and end up with something really bloated and janky, yet hyped a ton).

Why is a post about a CAD program being downvoted so much?