BamBub

I'm going to take a longer break from Bluesky, waiting to see if it becomes more interesting at some point in the future.

It's obvious they're plastic ducks on a string, but I'm curious as to what they're used for. I'm not sure about the hunting decoy theory, as I believe ducks would spot the unnatural formation. Geese and crows certainly would.

Curious, what's that used for? Does it divide the pond for some reason?

It's fewer than you'd think.

I thought the beak looked larger than what I expected from a crow.

In real life the size difference is noticeable, but on a picture it's quite hard.

I might totally be wrong about this.

Looks more like a raven.

This would be so simple to solve, though.

James Acaster would probably approve if he hadn't quit social media. 😅

I can do both eyebrows individually, even without lowering the other one.

There are a couple of books, albeit not necessarily about strategy:
www.amazon.com/Tic-Tac-Auto...

It sounds like you want to believe this wasn't random. It probably wasn't. However, I'm sure you could've worn any kind of scarf big enough to hide things underneath and they would've done the same.

You seem to be so focused on finding something to be offended about that you missed the point he made.

Looking at the comments, it's that quite some people thought it was a quote. Impact > intention.

I don't like defending Jack, but I dislike spreading misinformation more than tech bros.
He's talking about strategic decisions, about whether Bluesky should focus on being part of a larger infrastructure as an open source protocol, instead of being just yet another app or company with a brand.

I know, that's why this is so believable. But really he's on about something different.
Even that screenshot above is (most likely deliberately) misleading.

Of course it's not a quote. Not even close.

The quotes make it appear as if he actually said that, while in reality he talks about strategic decisions which would lead Bluesky down the same road as Twitter / X, becoming a brand, instead of focusing on open protocols and decentralization.

True. They could've clicked that link. I still appreciate folks who leave such comments for others who stumble across the post later.

People sometimes forget that on a public platform many comments aren't directed at the original author, but instead at other readers stumbling across the same post.

bsky.app/profile/donb...

Thing is, the original post includes a picture, not a link. I can't click and see the result (and I'm not interested enough to Google it).
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.

It's not even about trying to avoid paying for journalism, but rather about the lack of context for some of those very short statements people post on micro blogging platforms.

How should they know it's the author posting the link?
If there's a random person linking out to some article, it's absolutely fine to point out if something's paywalled, because they might not realize that most of their audience can't read the context of what they're referring to on social media.

It's clearly 5️⃣3️⃣1️⃣8️⃣0️⃣0️⃣8️⃣.

How anyone can care about this kind of stuff is beyond me.

A three broody problem?

Yes.