Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is probably the tech you’d want. It basically involves a knowledge library being built from the documents you upload, which is then indexed when you ask questions.
NotebookLM by Google is an off the shelf tool that is specialized in this, but you can upload documents to ChatGPT, Copilot, Claude, etc., and get the same benefit.
If you self hosted, Open WebUI with Ollama supports this, but far from the only one.
If you dislike decentralization, then that’s like being on an instance that’s banned every other instance.
Do you mean that you dislike defederation?
You said, and I quote “Find a better way.” I don’t agree with your premise - this is the better way - but I gave you a straightforward, reasonable way to achieve something important to you… and now you’re saying that “This is a discussion of principle.”
You’ve just proven that it doesn’t take a moderator to turn a conversation into a bad joke - you can do it on your own.
It’s a discussion of principle.
This is a foreign concept?
It appears to be a foreign concept for you.
I don’t believe that it’s a fundamentally bad thing to converse in moderated spaces; you do. You say “giving somebody the power to arbitrarily censor and modify our conversation is a fundamentally bad thing” like it’s a fact, indicating you believe this, but you’ve been given the tools to avoid giving others the power to moderate your conversation and you have chosen not to use them. This means that you are saying “I have chosen to do a thing that I believe is fundamentally bad.” Why would anyone trust such a person?
For that matter, is this even a discussion? People clearly don’t agree with you and you haven’t explained your reasoning. If a moderator’s actions are logged and visible to users, and users have the choice of engaging under the purview of a moderator or moving elsewhere, what’s the problem?
It is deeply bad that…
Why?
Yes, I know, trolls, etc…
In other words, “let me ignore valid arguments for why moderation is needed.”
But such action turns any conversation into a bad joke.
It doesn’t.
And anybody who trusts a moderator is a fool.
In places where moderator’s actions are unlogged and they’re not accountable to the community, sure - and that’s true on mainstream social media. Here, moderators are performing a service for the benefit of the community.
Have you never heard the phrase “Trust, but verify?”
Find a better way.
This is the better way.
Then why are you doing that, and why aren’t you at least hosting your own instance?
Yes, I know, trolls etc. But such action turns any conversation into a bad joke. And anybody who trusts a moderator is a fool.
Not just trolls - there’s much worse content out there, some of which can get you sent to jail in most (all?) jurisdictions.
And even ignoring that, many users like their communities to remain focused on a given topic. Moderation allows this to happen without requiring a vetting process prior to posting. Maybe you don’t want that, but most users do.
Find a better way.
Here’s an option: you can code a fork or client that automatically parses the modlog, finds comments and posts that have been removed, and makes them visible in your feed. You could even implement the ability to reply by hosting replies on a different instance or community.
For you and anyone who uses your fork, it’ll be as though they were never removed.
Do you have issues with the above approach?
As a user, you can:
If you host your own instance and communities within that instance, then at that point, you have full control, right? Other instances can de-federate from yours.
stuck with the GPL forever
If you accept a patch and don’t have the ability to relicense it, you can remove it and re-license the new codebase. You can even re-implement changes made by the patch in many cases, whether those changes are bug fixes or new features.
If you re-implement the change, you do need to ensure this is done in a way that doesn’t cause it to become a derivative work, but it’s much easier if you have copyright to 99% of a work already and only need to re-implement 1% or so. If you’ve received substantial community contributions and the community is opposed to relicensing, it will be much harder to do so.
A clean room implementation - where the person rewriting the code doesn’t look at the original code, and is only given a description of the functionality - which can include a detailed description of the algorithm - is the most defensible way to perform such a rewrite and relicense, but it’s not the only option.
You should generally consult an attorney when relicensing and shouldn’t just do it casually. But a single patch certainly doesn’t mean you’re locked in forever.
16 GB of RAM, though? Is it even optimized for the Ryzen 9950X3D?
And a 4 TB SSD - not even necessarily NVME?
Doesn’t seem high powered to me.
It’s more likely that this is being done to either:
Apparently there’s a vulnerability with sending messages with images in them and “she” might be logging people’s IP addresses through that.
If the images are hosted on your instance, this wouldn’t be relevant. If they’re links to an image hosted somewhere, this is possible, but there’d be a lot of noise and not much value. To link accounts to IPs the URLs would themselves need to be different
I checked the urls to the images in my PMs and they’re all hosted on Lemmy.
Further, “Whether another user actually downloaded the content that Meta made available” through torrenting “is irrelevant,” the authors alleged. “Meta ‘reproduced’ the works as soon as it made them available to other peers.”
Is there existing case law for what making something “available” means? If I say “Alright, I’ll send you this book if you want, just ask,” have I made it available? What if, when someone asks, I don’t actually send them anything?
I’m thinking outside of contexts of piracy and torrenting, to be clear - like if a software license requires you to make any changed versions available to anyone who uses the software. Can you say it’s available if your distribution platform is configured to prevent downloads?
If not, then why would it be any different when torrenting?
Meta ‘reproduced’ the works as soon as it made them available to other peers.
The argument that a copyrighted work has been reproduced when “made available,” when “made available” has such a low bar is also perplexing. If I post an ad on Craigslist for the sale of the Mona Lisa, have I reproduced it?
What if it was for a car?
I’m selling a brand new 2026 Alfa Romeo 4E, DM me your offers. I’ve now “reproduced” a car - come at me, MPAA.
Where did I contest your point?
The president won [the] popular vote
Only if you ignore the huge amounts of voter suppression. If you don’t, then he lost the popular vote and the electoral vote - netting 45.8% of the popular vote to Kamala’s 52.7%, and he earned at most (and probably less than) 252 electoral votes to Kamala’s 286.
If you’re in the US, automatic is fine. Manuals make up like 1 percent of new cars and maybe 4% of used cars here. It doesn’t hurt to know how to drive one, but it doesn’t benefit you much, either. I drove a manual once, but it was a rental in another country. I’ve never been faced with needing to - or even having the opportunity to - drive a manual in the US.
However, learning on a manual does make it easier to understand certain ways of how cars work, even on automatics (less so on CVTs), so if you like understanding things more, I recommend manual even in the US. You can still get that understanding driving automatics, though - just a bit more effort.
Outside the US, most places I know of manual is the default. If manuals make up even 30 percent or so of cars where you live, I strongly suggest learning to drive one.
I can’t guess where your interests lie
OP does say they have a boyfriend
Even with an HOA, you can still end up needing to pay tens of thousands for surprise repairs in the forms of special assessments, especially if the HOA is poorly managed.
Why specifically do you want to be a trans man online?
I attended a 1-on-1 meeting that a billionaire scheduled with me but that they themselves did not attend.
The argument was not that it didn’t matter if a user didn’t download the entirety of a work from Meta, but that it didn’t matter whether a user downloaded anything from Meta, regardless of whether Meta was a peer or seed at the time.
Theoretically, Meta could have disabled uploading but not blocked their client from signaling that they could upload. This would, according to that argument, still counts as reproducing the works, under the logic that signaling that it was available is the same as “making it available.”
That’s irrelevant to the plaintiff’s argument. And beyond that, it would need to be proven on its own merits. This argument about torrenting wouldn’t be relevant if LLAMA were obviously a derivative creation that wasn’t subject to fair use protections.
It’s also irrelevant if Gemini can reproduce a work, as Meta did not create Gemini.
Does any Llama model reproduce the entirety of The Bedwetter by Sarah Silverman if you provide the first paragraph? Does it even get the first chapter? I highly doubt it.
There have been lawsuits against both ISPs and VPNs in recent years for being complicit in copyright infringement, but that’s a bit different. Generally speaking, there are laws, like the DMCA, that specifically limit the liability of network providers and network services, so long as they respect things like takedown notices.