Was strict the default? I’d assume the standard would be the default.
I’d imagine if you were using strict you want the sites to break because you absolutely do not want fingerprinting. That kindof restriction usually comes with the breaking being expected.
Uhhh…that’s not a meme, as the other guy said it’s virtue signalling. I don’t even know why you would fallback on it being a meme since people generally agreed with what you said.
If anything I think that makes you sound like an ass but that’s just me.
I mean yeah, but Spez we know for a fact actually did something.
Okay
But in this entire discussion we haven’t even tied him or his homophobia to the feature change this article is discussing.
I mean, it’s more like I wanted to see more discussion about brave. It’s not even like it’s talking about things the CEO specifically did to the browser, it’s just talking about the CEO.
And yeah I’m complaining about different threads in a post, when 3 comments are about the browser and like 15 are about the CEO.
If you have something to say negative about brave from this feature, that’s cool, but I’m not seeing it.
I’m…honestly surprised you can be on lemmy when you damn products over singular people. Just cause I know there’s people who have tried to dissuade others from lemmy over the developers. And in that case the people involved are even closer to the code than a CEO would be.
I mean it’s derailed the entire thread so pretty much nobody is talking about the removed feature anymore.
Wait why are you on the privacy community when you don’t care about the parts that are specifically related to privacy?
I mean, you can grandstand all you want while you have no platforms to safely do it on. Pretty sure having working products for privacy is more important to activism than one guy being an asshole.
I mean…if you want unmodded entirely, don’t you just go to 4chan?
You need some moderation and they can’t all be exploitive self entitled if that can be argeed on. it has be working somehow
If it could just be a sentence, then it should be whatever site I saw that shows why instances were de-federated
I really wish I could remember what site it was though.
I think eventually there may be too many to explain them all.
But if I recall isn’t is possible to provide a comment for every de-federated instance that can be looked up? i swear I’ve seen it before.
Is this the same report that was brought up where it was found out Twitter has the exact same issue?
Based on all the comments though, the reason seems to be baked into Mastodon’s design
It seems to be a clash of what two groups of users want since a few seem to be happy with how Mastodon does it.
This seemed obvious the moment they said 10m accounts on launch. People aren’t that proactive
But what do you do when a known Dictator walks in?
Meta is going to establish itself, and go back to old habits once it’s on top in the fediverse.
Everyone gets excited over new things. While I won’t say that’s all that’s been going on, a lot of Lemmy/Kbin has been people hyping over something different.
That’s just how people are. And keep in mind for the most part, people who are against the idea weren’t going to check it out to begin with, especially with the required privacy release attached.
To be fair, only a handful of publishers were able to take their cards and go elsewhere. The media companies were a lot more on top of dragging their products off of Netflix.
Nobody would be on steam just for Valve games, after all, and indie has a much lower barrier of entry.
While they could certainly distribute their current products better, a lot of the issues they have now (see: belated frogs comment) aren’t things they really had control over.