It is not entitled to expect a published project to comply with basic privacy legislation and not be illegal to use.
If your bar for this project is that much below basic consumer expectations, then this project was always going to fail.
masterspace
joined 1 year ago
Have you learned how to program to fix the problem?
It doesn't seem worth my time to learn Rust just to submit a PR to devs who behave like that, they'll just reject it and be pithy, like they are when a user asks them to comply with EU privacy law.
The entire point of the “fediverse” is to combat the network effect.
No, it's not.
The purpose of the fediverse is to decentralize control of the network, it does not eliminate network effects in any way shape or form. At the end of the day a social network is only as valuable as the users using it and contributing content to it. If they don't find lemmy pleasant to use, they're not going to say "let me jump to mastodon" they're going to go to Reddit.
Build one or wait for someone to build one you like.
You really don't understand network effects if you think you can just sit around and wait for basic functionality and expect your network not to die.
You don't know how social networks work. They only survive based on network effects, if they don't have the most basic functionality that users expect (like complying with privacy legislation), then they will fail to reach critical mass and be outcompeted and die.
If the devs don't want to provide the most basic functions that any user of a social network would expect, they're welcome to be downvoted to hell and have their project go back to being one of the millions of forgotten and unviewed personal github projects.
Open source projects die because it takes both technical talent and attention to your users to make a project successful, and for-profit companies often pay different people to do those.
We're not talking about a user demanding you release a flatpak build targeting their personal linux distribution running in a VM'd WSL, we're talking about a consumer facing social app that doesn't include the functionality for a user to delete something they added.
You know what the acronym used for describing the most basic functional web app api is?
CRUD - Create, Read, Update, Delete
A feature added late to iOS, and one they have hidden behind the pile of homescreens you have since every app you install is just dumped on them. On Android you swipe up from anywhere on the homescreen and you immediately search or browse.
Lol no one is responding to posts about how much you like a feature with hate, unless you're trolling the wrong community or youre the person in OPs post, saying that in response to someone making a criticism of a corporation's monopolistic behaviour?
It's been my experience and evidently it's been OPs and everyone who upvoted this.
It's really not.
Even just how Apple handles apps. If I asked you which company would present their apps in a neat organized alphabetized list that you can quickly scroll or search through, and which company would just dump them all in a mass of garbage on your homescreen and make you search for them, you'd assume it would be Google that forces you to search, but nope, that's Apple's terrible UX for managing the most basic aspect of a smartphone.
OPs point is also that they're exhausting. If you try and make a legitimate criticism of Apple's monopolistic behaviour as a trillion dollar corporation, then you just get flamed by Apple fanboys.
Yes, there are, and that obligation is to not publish something as production ready if it is illegal to use because of how it's built.
I'm a software developer, I understand exactly how frustrating user demands are, that was still a completely and utterly unacceptable way to respond to a very politely worded request for software that literally just doesn't break privacy laws to run.
As the commenter pointed out, if you don't want to fix it, fine, but then you absolutely have a moral, ethical, and professional obligation to document that clearly in your README.md.