They’re welcome, but the platform in the fediverse that covers the Tiktok-kind of content specifically is Loops.

I’ve been using a height adjustable standing desk for 2-3 years now. The option to switch between sitting and standing was a major improvement. It’s obviously not a replacement to active movement and I’m looking forward to get a walking pad soon. But I’m glad I even went this direction.

Once again it seems like I don’t even have an IQ ¯\(ツ)/¯

Yes, but there are quite a few communities that cover this already, e.g. !shortstories@literature.cafe.

You have already assumed way too much without knowing what exactly they have asked.

I believe for simple, common tasks and small projects, it’s at least manageable. Even good, if you are not forced to use AI and can simply choose to what extent you use the tools and its results.

But with enterprise-level coding agents that are supposed to handle issues in long-term projects, the work is shifted to every other phase really, before and after the coding. Initially I thought that proper documentation at least benefits everybody, but prompts and instructions optimized for AI are not necessarily good documentation for humans to read.

I agree to an extent. The problem is that an interest in a specific topic does not translate into an interest in the broader topic. Personally, if we only had broad communities on the level you suggested, I’d likely not use Lemmy at all, because then I’d have to spend too much time scrolling past the majority of posts or adding filters.

I can see the issue with spam-bots, regardless of the self-nuking, and how especially this community is targeted. But I wouldn’t consider the accounts marked in this post as spam-bots at all.

If this community or instance considers a couple of posts a day, perhaps specifically from new users, spamming, then as a user I’d expect that rule to be written before actions are taken.

In general, I’m not disputing the actions of the mods and I hate to be the guy who expects something from people who contribute to this platform in their free-time, but for these kind of bans based on suspicions and patterns, I just wish there would at least be more transparent communication.

In that case I have a few doubts:

1. Why is the given ban reason for these accounts “bot”, when that doesn’t describe the actual issue here, and why isn’t there a clear transparent explanation how these accounts were identified as part of this self-destruction scheme?
2. What exactly is the issue with self-destructing accounts other than losing the comments, discussions, etc. associated with the posts? Because if that’s the only thing, I don’t see the severity.