I have fully switched to kagi, it’s not perfect but for the average case it’s better than google.

Been writing an article about dating while being AuDHD. While I am not going to pretend I am some guru that is going to turn your dating experience upside down, I have a few things that have worked for me:

1. Be open about your neurodivergency. If a person is worth it, they will be interested to know more about it, try to understand and accommodate your needs, and be charmed by your quirks.
2. Respect your RSD. If you feel like you are receiving negative feedback don’t shutdown, instead ask for clarification. If you want to do something but are afraid how it will be perceived, ask them. Unsurprisingly, people tend to appreciate the check-ins, it is perceived as you being caring.
3. Try pebbling. It is the act of sharing things that you think the other person would appreciate. Feel free to info dump, feel free to share relevant experiences.
4. Be meta as fuck. Explain your thought process, why you are doing something, and that train of thought that led to you saying seemingly completely irrelevant. Allistic people don’t understand neurodivergence, but the right people will make the effort.
5. Be honest. Maybe you don’t feel safe to expose your date to your fully unmasked self, and that’s okay. BUT, honesty can go a long way. See something you like? Turn that into a compliment! Feeling insecure? Explain that and ask for validation! Something bothers you? Ask for the appropriate accommodations!
6. Don’t try to impress the other person. Instead give your date the chance to like the real you. It’s much more sustainable in the long term, you will feel more free and safe in your relationship, and it’s fucking good to be appreciated.
7. Routinize flirting. The consistency feels great for the other person, everyone needs a confidence boost and a few words of affirmation.

I show my hairdresser a picture of my previous haircut (or one I like).

TIL this is called cognitive shuffle, it seems there a few studies on its effect on late onset insomnia, but no conclusive evidence on its efficacy. I am wondering if a more targeted study would provide better results (aka only on monotropic people)?

What do you the new section about misinformatiom? Do you think reddthat needs one?

When considering misinformation clauses I like the Wikipedia example. Intentionally or not, a core strategy wikipedia followed from early on is “don’t give a platform to the trolls”. Some believe that constructive critism is not effective against an attention seeking troll, it’s much more efficient for everyone to ban them early.

That said, freedom of speech is equally important and it’s important to differentiate between hard to discuss topics and misinformation. Hard to discuss topics are important because they help us explore new ideas, and grow as people and society.

All in all, I don’t like LW’s misinformation section, but I do think one is necessary. While, I cannot make a complete suggestion, I would definitely consider updating the clauses about peer reviewed research. Publications can be a reliable source of information, but gatekeeping knowledge into academic institutions is an issue IMO (especially if you consider that being a researcher is an socioeconomic privilege).

What do you think about how the situation was handled by the LW admin team?

It was a roller coaster to watch the controversy unveil, but I think the situation was handled well by the LW team. An admin made a few mistakes, which is understandable, the mistakes were acknowledged and fixed.

Given that LW is the biggest lemmy instance, how do you think these changes will influence smaller instances like reddthat?

While, I am sure of the influence LW holds over other lemmy instances, I try to remember that in the scope of the fediverse LW is relatively small.

That’s compatible with information theory. You have a piece of information, the moment you encode it (turn your idea into words) that piece of information is transposed to a little different piece of information, then the channel of transportation adds a bit of noise (depends on the environment, most often literal background noise), and then the receiver decodes the to a different piece of information (turn your words into an idea of their own).

Understanding this concept is an important communication skill. Information theory gives a bunch of tools to minimize the difference between the idea in your head and the perception of the idea by your peer.

• You can add redundancy, aka say the same thing twice in a slightly different way.
• Use questions to validate your understanding.
• Have your peer use their own words.
• Use a different encoding, aka draw a picture, a diagram, or use gestures instead of using language to communicate

I am stealing that phrase, thanks 🙏

I find it helps navigate certain quirks and get the help I need to thrive. For example, after disclosing I have ADHD, people are much more open to move when I am affected by background noise.

IMO it’s not about what metric is used, but how it is used. The current approach, completely avoiding any karma like mechanism, solves the farming issue, but IMO does not cater to the needs of every user.

For example, I have ADHD and if accumulating karma gives me much needed motivation and feel good chemicals, I am going to take them.

At the same time, holding a user to a higher regard because of their karma is stupid, it’s better to build real connections with usernames you recognise through continuous communication.

Personally, karma was an easily digestable piece of information about how my outreach into the social media is performing. Accumulating karma helps me feel connected with the community, feel accepted.

Weed can be addictive for people with ADHD, it’s one of most common of forms of self medicarion but in the long run it probably going to make things worse.

Source: I was addicted for 3 years, at first it did wonders for my sleep issues and increased my productivity. At some point, I had to smoke daily or I would get headaches and huge cravings, my tolerance would constantly increase, and then it didn’t help with my sleep issues anymore.

Now, I am only using it recreationally once every few months. It’s fun but I have to be careful otherwise I know things can turn sour really fast.

I think you are spending too much effort to engage with a person that is not engaging back with you. Regardless if your behavior was creepy or not, you are worth more than that. That person wasn’t matching your effort in maintaining a relationship (friendship in this scenario). Remember it takes two to tango, no matter how much you want it, you won’t be able to carry a relationship on your own…

For context, I am the top donor at my instance, I recognize that there is a need for funds. BUT, I believe it’s important for the fediverse to be accessible to everyone regardless if they have the funds for that.

Dopamine received, initiating hyperfocus protocol!

As a rule of thumb, we’ve observed that a team of 5 trained moderators appears to provide ample coverage and redundancy for servers of about 1,000 active users

That’s a fascinating bit of information. I would expect 5 moderators to provide coverage for more users. I am wondering how they came up with that statistic (will update the comment if I find an answer).

Remember that offliine/IRL community management experience can be just as important as online experience

Interesting idea, wondering what’s the IRL presence of the fediverse…

If you’re building toward participatory or democratic governance, consider establishing a proposal and voting system (some teams we spoke with use Loomio, but multiple options exist) for major policy decisions.

That’s soooo important, I love when communities create polls to decide on policy changes.

Avoid promoting brand-new members unless you already have a pre-existing relationship with them

I have followed some discussion on multi-level hierarchies on the fediverse, wondering if there are any instance implementing that…

Consider charging for accounts or offering paid memberships.

Hell no!

We hope there will be more resources available in the future, particularly tooling around legal compliance. This is one of the big infrastructural gaps we point out in our main report

That’s a big issue, I would be interested in hosting an instance available to other people, but I don’t want to end up in jail and I lack the resources to make sure that won’t happen…

That was an interesting read, it seems there is an in-depth analysis of the report here.

Can someone ELI5 so I can get enough dopamine to go read the whole thing?

Not sure if you are being sarcastic or not but I found this review.

https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/14/5/858

I had done some research about a year ago, but I don’t have the papers saved.

While the consumption for AI train can be large, there are arguments to be made for its net effect in the long run.

The article’s last section gives a few examples that are interesting to me from an environmental perspective. Using smaller problem-specific models can have a large effect in reducing AI emissions, since their relation to model size is not linear. AI assistance can indeed increase worker productivity, which does not necessarily decrease emissions but we have to keep in mind that our bodies are pretty inefficient meat bags. Last but not least, AI literacy can lead to better legislation and regulation.

If you are worried about duplicates, aka a single bot spamming multiple votes, then that’s feasible to mitigate.

If you are worried about multiple bots spamming one vote each, that’s harder to mitigate and it comes down to how the instances handles bot accounts in general. IMO it’s best to ignore the bot problem and instead focus on designing a vote weighting system that favors similar instances.

While the question is hilarious, the lack of references to in depth guides is a bit alarming…

For anyone interested, there are a few papers on cryptographically secure voting, where both voter anonymity and election integrity are preserved.

Most designs consider three separate entities, where if you accumulate the information between those entities you would be able to identify a voter and his vote, but each entity on itself does not hold enough information.

Pretty interesting study!! They found that introverts that used texting to express themselves demonstrated higher levels of self-confidence than those that used texting to escape. However, for extroverts it was the opposite, those that used texting to escape demonstrated higher levels of self-confidence.

As an AuDHD person, aka someone that has made a skipping rope out of the extrovert/introvert line, I have observed that on good days my extroverted side is on outreach mode while my introverted side is on deep connection mode.