Measured voltage is completely dependent on what is used as a reference. If you were to measure the voltage of a power supply set to +30V with a voltmeter whose leads were backwards (ie positive on the voltmeter connected to negative on the power supply, and negative connected to positive), then you would measure -30V. All this is to say that if you connect your 30V supply “backwards”, you will have -30V. Now, there may be some circuitry in the power supply that only allows current in one direction, and it could be that it’s able to source a different amount of current than it’s able to sink, so be sure to check its manual.

I’ve tried -12V from psu i’ve got lying around but it didn’t work.

I’d advise caution against arbitrary decisions with electronics — both for your own safety and the safety of the equipment.

Tea (PG Tips Original) with milk and sugar.

Yeah, it definitely rehashed the trope, but I still think that movie is underrated.

That’s an interesting idea, but I feel that it overcomplicates things without much benefit.

I apologize if I’ve offended you, as that wasn’t my intention — I’m only trying to understand your opinion. I’m aware that we have different opinions, I’m just curious what your rationale is for yours.

Am I correct in understanding that you are inferring that the security guards would be likely to do what the police did?

replying in individual comments is stupid and more confusing.

For clarity, would you mind explicitly stating why you believe that atomic comments are intrinsically more confusing?

Regarding that, I found this:

The school district also has its own police force with four officers and partners with local law enforcement, according to the document. Secondary campuses have staff who patrol door entrances, parking lots and perimeters of campuses. [source]

If that’s what you are referring to, it isn’t exactly what I meant. I was more referring to a dedicated static armed security force that watches entrances to the school.

What if the security is competent?

Even if the police were functioning well enough to act to stop a school shooter, there is still the issue of time — it takes time to arrive to the scene to respond to the threat. A competent on-site security presence would be a good first line of defense. Think of a time sensitive scenario like a home invasion — would you rather have the means to immediately protect your home, or would you rather wait for the police to arrive? What if someone attacks you on the street? Would you rather have the means to immediately protect yourself, or would you rather wait for police to arrive? In some cases, no matter how competent the law enforcement is, it’s simply impossible for them to respond fast enough.

Oh. I completely missed that. Thanks for clarifying! I’m still at a loss for what it means, though.

Goodbye.

N

you should look at a website called Kialo. I haven’t used it in years and I don’t know if it’s active but it’s an interesting concept based very much on that idea

Ah yeah, I’ve heard of that site. It definitely seems interesting, but I’m not too keen on getting invested in another centralized/non-fediverse service.

New comments have to be approved

Hrm, this feels like it has immense potential for administrative abuse.

I can definitely see the service’s potential, but I would like to see something like it that can connect with the Fediverse.

They are each beneficiaries of the capitalist system

How do police and the military specifically benefit from a capitalist system?

with the military / police serving duel roles as employed and enforcers / protectors of the system.

Are you saying that only a capitalist system benefits from the police and military?

All that being said, I’m not entirely sure what your point has to do with the thesis of the poster.

What do you mean by “it’s standard”? As in that is the intended functionality? It shouldn’t be — the whole point of blocking instances is for the user to be able to, well, block an instance, ie content originating from it no longer shows up.

It’s likely both. The ratio, however, I’m not sure of.

How about supporting users who want to improve their community instead of finding a new one?

I support that as well. My initial point was from the perspective of users not originating from lemmy.ml being annoyed with how lemmy.ml is administrating itself. If the users of lemmy.ml wish to stay to try and improve it, then I fully stand behind them, but, at the same time, I still support lemmy.ml’s autonomy.

It’s breaking the stated aim of open federation by tampering with comments, posts and mod records, which in turn get propagated or de-propagated to connected instances, right?

I’m not convinced that this is in conflict with the aim of federation. The whole point is to give people the power to create their own instances with their own rules instead of having to rely on a single central authority. The network isn’t necessarily distributed — it’s decentralized. An instance can administrate their content as they see fit. An instance cannot alter the content produced by any other instance. An instance can only manage the content originating from itself.

but 1) one instance (particular a significant one like ML) affects other instances

Would you mind being more specific?

they’re breaking the spirit of their own software by shamelessly abusing admin powers, in turn helping to normalize that behavior to the Lemmy side of the FV.

Hm, well, it depends on your perspective. The whole point of the Fediverse is to give people the freedom and power to control how they interact with the service. A server has the freedom to associate with the users that they wish in the same way that you have the freedom to consume what you wish. The spirit of the software is to enable people to have this freedom that otherwise wouldn’t exist with a large central service. The way I like to look at the Fediverse is where each instance is like a country, and each community is like a regional/state/provincial government within the country, and federation between instances is like cross-border policies between nations.

a supposedly transparent […] social network?

I’m not sure what you mean by “transparent”.

a supposedly […] user-run […] social network?

It is user-run, in that any user can create an instance.

a supposedly […] P2P social network?

It’s not P2P. A P2P network would be distributed. The Fediverse is decentralized.

I agree with both statements.