fine_sandy_bottom

Yeah this.

I don't keep all my photos in sync though. Only the last few months.

I'm using photoprism to browse photos on my server but I've been meaning to look at other options because it's not that great IMO.

I have no idea whether this really is the answer but it seems like the most plausible answer.

It's obvious you know more or less all there is to know about this topic. So much so that I suspect you have trouble explaining it to laypersons like me because it's difficult for you to determine which parts of your knowledge are obvious common knowledge and which parts are specialist knowledge.

Again, it's not a great system but it's the best available.

I think the problem of "idiot jurors" is mitigated somewhat in that a unanimous verdict is required. A hung jury is a better outcome than an incorrect finding.

I disagree, subs are not born out of a need for a niche, they're created when someone wants to be a fief lord. Of every thousand or so created, only a few gather any following, and the community reflects the desires of it's users.

As I said it's fine to dislike a community, but insisting that it be run according to your view of how things ought to be run is nonsensical.

This perspective is very common in online communities about any sort of charity or non-profit.

"Don't donate money to whatever charity, they just waste the money on whatever thing"

Truthfully, it's just an excuse to assuage the guilt arising from refusing to support these organisations.

I pretty much agree with you on all points.

Anyone who works in law will tell you that justice is pretty thin to the ground.

I think you've misconstrued my position though. I'm not saying the current system is fine, merely that the role of jurors is to determine whether the defendant is guilty of the charges against them, and the role of the judge is to determine the appropriate punishment, and that this separation of duties is the best structure we have to mitigate corruption.

I'm not saying there's no corruption, merely that allowing a jury to determine whether a defendant should be punished despite their guilt is tantamount to corruption. If a jury can determine penalties then the whole court process is basically a popularity contest.

A few months ago, I would've told you that I'm holding to the belief that might doesn't make right and that no one is above the law. However, recent events have demonstrated that more than half the voting public prefer a system where the law does not apply to wealthy nor powerful people. I'm astonished, but apparently my views are not represented amongst the population generally. It seems that in the current era there is no denying that there is a class of people to whom the law does not apply.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at.

Lemmy is not reddit. It has its own history and culture. It's totally fine if you don't like it, but if you're expecting it to be like reddit then you'll just be disappointed and frustrated every time.

The history around "why does this community have the same name as a reddit sub" is obvious. At some point it was expected to be the next incarnation of whatever sub, but that's just not how things turned out for a number of reasons

You're absolutely correct, but I don't think really anything can be done about this community nor others with similar problems.

There just aren't enough users who actually care about this type of nuance.

There's no point trying to uphold an ideal that just isn't relevant to most users.

Drug cartels.

Most countries just regulate the content of baby formula.

There's loads of ways you can monetise being the window through which billions of hours of attention are spent every day.

It's not working for Firefox because they just don't have many users any more. I haven't checked recently but it's less than 5% market share or something.