↩ Replying to @holistictransformation.se
Haha, excellent. I mention tools from time to time but haven’t really done a single collection before, and not one strictly from a security/ethics perspective which is what I had in mind this time.
Tagged: reply
↩ Replying to a post
Thanks! This looks really good from a first impression.
↩ Replying to @indom.bsky.social
Jag gillar den här formen av protest skarpt.
↩ Replying to @leeloowrites.bsky.social
He asked to be on the podcast. And we let him speak his mind, allowing him to give voice to his values.
Interestingly, Eyal didn't market that show on his own website.
↩ Replying to @cgruenloh.bsky.social
Thanks for sharing Christiane! That post certainly got Eyal’s attention back when I wrote it 😅
↩ Replying to @arn.is
Yeah, I use Raindrop and have a Bluesky category.
@fasterandworse Thank you :) All backups, and snapshot, taken – hope I won’t have to use them.
@mensrea I my mind he has already has with many of these posts. He openly calls people stupid, and he says that smart parents don’t have many kids, because the third and fourth kid have much lower IQ.
@mpt I’m glad you’re familiar :)
@smallcircles I like this. Thanks for pointing me to it.
↩ Replying to @massebasse.bsky.social
”I had an iPod nano with your name written on it” 🎶 😁
@mralancooper PFFTT is pretty bad, and funny because it’s accepted. But MAMMA may actually be worse.
@mralancooper I just solved today’s wordle in 3 using PFFTT as the starting word 😂
@fabienmarry
Exactly. Same for me. I often argue to that walks should not only be encouraged during lunch but actually be an expected part of the working day. In accordance with ability of course.
@wolverinuno In the 90% I believe the statistic includes about 6% of the time in cars. All this will of course vary from country to country, and the average of course means that some people will spend a lot more time in indoors and vice versa.
@gMoon I understand your points but have these rebuttals: 😊
* Posthaven are openly prioritising longevity over features - I admire this clarity and it puts them in a position to be more likely to succeed in their efforts.
* If something written today is relevant for the future should be decided by the people of the future, not by the writer’s financial capacity for keeping the content available after death.
* If my writing is appreciated and I pass away, content would more likely stay on Posthaven for long enough that people learn I’ve passed, and for them to save the content they want. So the idea of ”forever” is not actually the point for me, but rather ”long enough”.
If I died tomorrow, all my content - 28 years of blogging - would be offline within 6 months. That’s not because it is irrelevant in two years, it’s because only money keeps it available. Meanwhile, the hand-written diary of a young girl could be found and become of huge importance to helping the whole world find ways to talk about the horrors of World War II.
I’d argue there are reasons we decipher scrolls that are thousands of years old. They can still be relevant. In my mind the digitization of content has made it more vulnerable, not less, and that’s why I appreciate the intentions of Posthaven.
And I appreciate you spurring me to write down these thoughts. 🙏
↩ Replying to @benjaminjriley.bsky.social
Any time. This page actually has regularly updated data on languages on websites:
w3techs.com/technologies...
Usage Statistics and Market Share of Content Languages for Websites, February 2025