• 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle




  • Ugh, what a mess. Thought about this for a while today and three thoughts started circulating in my head:

    1. Hire an actual lawyer and get firm legal advice on this issue. I think this would fall to the admins, not the devs. Maybe an admin who wanted could volunteer to contact a lawyer? We could do a gofundme for one-time consultation legal fees.

    2. Stop using pictrs completely and instead use links to a third party such as Imgur or whatever. They’re in this business and I’m sure already have dealt with it and have a solution. Yes it sucks that Imgur (or whatever third party) could delete our legitimate images at any time, but IMHO it’s worth it to avoid this headache. At any rate it offloads the liability from an admin. Of course, IANAL and this is a question we would want to ask a lawyer about.

    3. Needing a GPU increases the expenses for an admin significantly. It will start to not be worth it for quite a few to keep their instance running.

    Thanks for bringing up this point. This is obviously a nuanced issue that is going to need a well-thought-out solution.









  • In fact, by the time the crash happens, it’s alerted the driver to pay more attention no less than 150 times over the course of about 45 minutes. Nevertheless, the system didn’t recognize a lack of engagement to the point that it shut down Autopilot

    I blame the driver, but if the above is true there was a problem with the Tesla as well. The Tesla is intended to disengage and disable autopilot for the remainder of the drive after a small number of ignored alerts. If the car didn’t do that, there’s a bug in the Tesla software.

    I think it’s more likely the driver used a trick to make the car think he was engaged when he was not. You can do things like put a water bottle wedged in the steering wheel to make the car think you have tugged on the steering wheel to prove you are engaged. (Don’t ask me how I know)






  • This is a fantastic point. The more the financial burden falls on one person, the more likely it is that at some point the expense will become too great for that individual admin to carry.

    So from a financial perspective it makes a lot of sense to have many small/medium sized instances rather than a few large ones.

    You suggest when an instance reaches a given size, stop recommending it. Totally agree. Based on known expenses for instances, it might not be a bad idea to have a recommended threshold (number of users) at which to stop or slow signups as well.

    There are several places that would need to be updated when it comes to recommending instances. One that comes to my mind right away is apps. Several apps only list the top 4-5 instances when signing up. And default to Lemmy.world. It’s not a great situation to be in, but I think we can make a change if this info gets circulated more broadly.


  • Yep, I agree. Consider the scenario of, for a number of months, donations don’t reach that 80 euro number. If the admin simply doesn’t have that 80 euros, they have much more motivation to terminate the instance immediately.

    I don’t think 80 euros per month is an unreasonable “last resort” for an admin to be able to float for at least a few months if absolutely necessary to give users a heads up the instance will be shutting down.

    I don’t think 80 euros per month is an unreasonable hosting bill, either. However, compare that number with the number Beehaw lists on their financials for August: https://beehaw.org/post/6921483. $523.79. (That’s a total cost number, not just hosting)

    With all this said, I do absolutely think sites should ideally run purely from donations. However, I don’t think a prospective admin should jump in and create an instance unless they are aware of the potential costs that may fall on them, and be able to handle those costs independently for 2-3 months to give users a chance to migrate.