The madness continues: the list of servers now shows calckey.social instead of firefish.social. When you click the button to chose it, you’re then invited to sign up to firefish.social. But as soon as you tap it there’s a message that signups are disabled.
You couldn’t make this up.
I agree, the instances marked General are not really. I think you might also be correct about waiting a week. The lead developer seems to be fighting some other battles on Mastodon at the moment.
Indeed, thought I’d try again after a couple of days. Now getting 502 Bad Gateway errors from the joinfirefish site.
Also, some very strange reposting by firefish on mastodon. (possibly meant to do it from a personal account?) Some sort of unseemly personal argument between two people connected with the project that seem to have mental health issues.
That doesn’t make much sense. If firefish want iOS users then they are going to have to make it work on Safari
If you don’t mind about the local timeline, or that the main language is different or that other users might get it defederated then your approach will work.
They are marked as general but when you click or tap through it’s obvious most of them aren’t
Edit: Also, I thought this was a domain change not migrating the users. If they really are migrating users then that would explain why it’s taking so long. But why show the server as verified and available during the process.
I think someone not used to these things would see ‘Coming Soon’ and just leave it as not launched yet.
I was using a different client and account 😊
I seem to be logged in but I can’t vote or comment and there doesn’t seem to be a way to search. I’m nervous to log out and in again because of the login bug.
Edit: changing avatar gives a JSON error
I understood that 0.18 was a release candidate and not production ready. There seem to be a few killer issues awaiting 0.18.1
Really appreciate the amazing hard work that’s being put into the app.
Copyright is odd, if I make a hammer then the person who buys it can hammer away making things they can sell for profit, modify the hammer, make another similar one or give it away or rent it out without any restriction. But I might have patent on the design and I might have copyright on the logo.
If I make a film of me making the hammer then copyright applies and even if they buy the film from me they can’t do with it what they want and probably have to pay me more to show it.
What I’m saying is that I think we need to rethink and simplify copyright. It’s simply not right that children couldnt (up to 2015) sing Happy Birthday at a party without paying the rights holder for the tune.
Very much agree, but Paramount+ has never been good at marketing outside of the US. It’s simple, if you make shows difficult to watch/find then people don’t watch and don’t subscribe.
I think you’re right, Amazon has seemingly done well with Picard and Lower Decks (outside of the US) so it’s possible that they will want to add another Star Trek.
Paramount’s big mistake is having poor availability (taking too long to roll out Paramount+ and then having staggered release dates for shows in different areas) and complicated distribution arrangements that means they make less money.
In essence they treated streaming like DVD/Blu-Ray distribution which negates the benefits of streaming to the consumer.
I thought Meta had said they weren’t intending to federate (at least at first)?
I thought it was superb and I think it’s invented (or at least shown it can be done) the gripping science fiction courtroom drama.
When I had Android, I regularly used phones past the point that they got security updates. Even a supposedly premium phone was hobbled by carriers/networks not releasing updates and cheaper phones didn’t have them for long.
Since moving to iPhone (where the 6S is still getting security updates ) I haven’t had a phone long enough for the updates to stop.