sparr

Android prompts me to "Block and Report Spam" for spam phone calls, in both the Phone app for regular phone calls and the Voice app for calls through Google Voice.

There is no way to report spam in either app without blocking the number.

Spammers and scammers change their phone numbers frequently. Daily or more, in the case of sophisticated large operations. Those numbers get reassigned to innocent users, who will forever be blocked from calling me.

"Dumb" phone number blocks should only last for maybe a month or a year, not forever. And we should have "smart" blocks, that sync to phone number registration databases and expire when the number changes hands.

This is going to become an increasingly impactful problem if we keep using phone numbers as identifiers while most phone number users don't keep the same number for decades.

People often ask why I contribute to open source projects or otherwise work on building automated tooling. They see me spending hours to automate a task or fix a bug that take seconds to do or avoid manually, in a way that the original XKCD comic says won't pay off. The disconnect seems to be that the comic and those people only consider time it saves me, not time it saves the tens to thousands to millions of other people who will use the script or patch or whatever when I publish it. So, here's a version of xkcd.com/1205 updated for making decisions that benefit a thousand people instead of just one.

https://github.com/ocelot-inc/ocelotgui/blob/19349c7334347eb37ef61b9694390581ea5db238/ocelotgui.cpp#L16896C5-L16896C29

I need to find this line of code based on the keywords "tnt_select" and "2^32", without specifying the repository because I'm looking for instances of the same bug in other projects. This repo is public, the file isn't obfuscated, the code is in the head of the default branch. I've tried Google, Github Code Search, Sourcegraph, and BigQuery on the Github data set. I've found a few ways to locate the .rst and .po documentation files that the bug was copied from, but none that find even this single example of it in actual source code files.

"When you fill out your complaint, provide as much information as you can."

"You cannot attach documents to your complaint."

"0/250 characters"

:/

I tried a couple of times to make https://www.reddit.com/r/cuttingedgegaming/ happen, but never reached many people. This community seems to mostly folks playing 1-2 year old games, I wonder if there are more of us who are playing older (but not "retro") games, particularly PC games?

https://lemmy.world/c/[email protected] stopped receiving new posts about two weeks ago when they defederated us.

Except today we got this new one, and some folks on this instance have been commenting. We can't see their comments, and they can't see ours. How did the first lemmy.world user see this post in order to make a comment on it here?

PS: Do we have a better term for the situation where another instance has defederated you, distinct from when you've defederated them?

TL;DR: I want to see posts and comments from https://beehaw.org/c/technology and https://lemmy.ml/c/technology and https://lemmy.world/c/technology and https://midwest.social/c/technology etc in a single interface.

I like federation, but I hate balkanization. One IRC channel dissolving into fifty different Slacks/Discords all discussing the same topic is a story I've seen repeat many times over the last decade. That's what it feels like to come to Lemmy and see a community named "Technology" or "Gaming" or "Politics" on each of a dozen different instances.

I know I can subscribe to all of them, but that's not really the same. It's harder to manage, and still doesn't give me a way to see all the Technology communities without seeing the Politics communities at the same time.

Are there any features built into Lemmy on the server or web client, or in any other fediverse clients that work well with Lemmy, that will make interacting with these communities less jarring and more seamless? Or are there any development discussions about improving this part of the ux?