I was using Vanced for around a year, and immediately switched to Revanced when it became available. No issues so far

You could always try Asahi Linux if you’re on a newer MacBook

This is a known bug in 0.18.3, a fix will be in the next release:

https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/issues/1999

Is the subjective experience the thing that defines what is the most palatable form of this?

If that’s the case then as someone else suggested they could simply remove the memory of the experience up until right before you walk out the other end. For all you knew it was incredibly excruciating but you’re none the wiser. Would the lack of that memory negate the experience?

Exactly, if you are not annihilated then that means two identical versions of an entity that thinks it’s you exist simultaneously, and now one of them has to be killed to maintain the illusion of this being transport rather than cloning.

Now I want to see a dystopian fiction where the original instances of a person are taken away and used as slave labor while the clones come out the other side thinking they’re the only copy.

Let’s assume the machine works one of two ways. It either destroys the original as it’s read into the machine and reconstructing on the other end, or it’s not destroying the original and simply reading and copying simultaneously.

In the first case there are zero complete copies of you in existence as you’re undergoing a phase of removing information from place and reconstructing it in another, I’d call that death and cloning.

In the second case there are two identical copies of you in existence until they destroy the original, I’d call that a clone.

Quantum entanglement would mean that while it reads your initial state and encodes the new state there are two copies of you in existence, that is cloning, then the initial state dies. Unless the process of reading that state is destructive, then you just die and are cloned.

The method between the two you suggested also means you die momentarily and then are recreated. For the period of time it takes to encode your atoms into a method of transport and then reassemble them at your destination, you no longer exist in complete form.

This question all comes down to your opinion of what makes a person a person, whether that means we have something greater than the collection of our atoms, or whether we are simply the emergent outcome of the complex arrangement of atoms. If you subscribe to the former then you also need to believe that this machine is somehow capable of either transporting/transplanting that “soul” for lack of a better expression. Where if you subscribe to the latter than this is most certainly a suicide cloning machine.

I personally subscribe to the idea that consciousness is an emergent property of complexity. Given a sufficiently large enough series of inputs you can observe new and unexpected outputs that appear to be on higher orders of complexity than their inputs. This response is an example of that, from electrons flowing through transistors we end up with operating systems, hardware IO, web browsers, networking protocols, ASCII standards, font rendering, etc. All of that complexity emerges from a massive amount of on/off switches arranged in patterns over time.

Following this chain of reasoning I believe that making an exact duplicate of me down to the state of each atom is no different than that entity being me, however as a conscious being with human ethics and morals I put value in the singularity of my existence, and so a plurality of Zetaphor is something I find undesirable as it fundamentally challenges my perception of what it means to be myself.

So assuming the entity leaving the transporter is me, there’s two ways to approach the way a machine like this could operate:

• It reads my state in its entirety and then destroys (or encodes for transport) that state
• Or it’s creating the new instance of me bit by bit as it reads my current state

That means one of two things, either there is a brief moment of time where two identical copies of me are in the universe, or there is a period of time where zero complete copies of me exist in the universe. So either I stopped existing momentarily and then was recreated from scratch (death and clone birth), or I existed in two places at once and then died in one (cloning and suicide).

If all I experience is being one place one moment and another place the next, then it’s me

If I make an exact molecular copy of you and set that copy free into the world thinking it had just successfully transported, but then I take the original you that entered the transporter and lock them up in a basement somewhere, how is that any different? From the perspective of the conscious being that came out the other end their continuity is uninterrupted. They will think they are the only version of themselves to have ever existed and that they simply moved from one place to another, as opposed to being a duplicate of the original entity, and that the original entity may be dead or in this case locked in a basement.

Username checks out

The only time I’ve had to touch my setup is upgrading to new versions. It’s pretty hands off.

Additionally it’s going to cause you headaches if your server is low spec. The federation queue is not well optimized for GIGANTIC subscription counts like this. There is an active draft PR working on it, but using that script is still a bad idea.

Then that means the cost of the devices has already been factored into the base price of your contract. Nothing is free, companies don’t make money by giving away phones that they paid for. You’re just paying a higher base fee regardless of whether or not you get the hardware from them. By not taking the phone from them you’re increasing the profit margin they make on your monthly contract.

It’s not free, the cost is built into your monthly payment. This is how all carrier supplied phones are funded. If they allowed you to bring your own unlocked device they could charge you less. They wouldn’t, but they could because they wouldn’t need to recoup the hardware expense.

Lemmy is a platform managed by a disparate group of operators all with different levels of experience and commitment.

Verifying identity online is both a hard problem and a legal/security nightmare. It involves validating and possibly storing things like government identification or other sensitive personally identifiable information.

There is no way this will ever be implemented in the core platform. All existing solutions today are outsourced to third party companies with the expertise in validating different forms of identification as well as the legal insurance required to warehouse it.

And all of this is setting aside the obvious fact that you should not be required to doxx yourself in order to view pornographic content online. Minors will just go somewhere else outside of the jurisdiction of these rules and still get access. Hell, just turn off safe search on Bing and you can find porn.

Measures like this don’t actually stop minors from accessing pornography. They only put law abiding citizens at risk by forcing them to trust private companies with their identification and hope their government doesn’t decide to further police their morality, or use their revealed sexual preference against them.