FreedomAdvocate

Yeah I’ve just seen that, pretty dodgy on their part if you ask me. Going by their website it’s impossible to use it without paying, they even say that self hosting has a subscription cost.

GitHub is usually where you get linked to from official websites.

You might want to change your website then, because it doesn't say that anywhere. Like.....anywhere at all. Subscription costs are mentioned literally everywhere that you look for anything to do with installing/setting it up.

Not a single mention of being able to self-host it without a subscription on here your homepage, https://linkwarden.app/, but a mention of self-hosting with a subscription cost attached.

Edit: Oh I finally see one that doesn't mention a subscription! Under self hosting in that last screenshot, long after the "getting started" and "billing and subscription" sections lol. If this wasn't intentional (it most likely is), it's extremely bad UX.

Nothing stops you from making up a sentence the way I did. You’re shown a string of 12 random letters and you will get $1000 if you can repeat them from memory tomorrow. You can’t make up a weird memorable sentence in a few minutes with $1000 on offer? Idk about you, but most of us could use the extra $1000 and would jump at the chance.

I just addressed that.......

Again though - you made a real sentence out of a random string of letters. What OP is asking isn’t a real sentence, nor a string of letters that you can use to make your own real sentence.

That's not what OP is asking. OP is saying that every day you'll get a random word, not a letter. It's not the next word in a sentence/paragraph - just a random word. You cannot use the same trick of making a sentence using the letters you have to remember as the first letter of each word, because you are being given the words you have to remember.

To believe that most people could remember 50 random words, in the correct order, is absurd. There are plenty of sources saying that the average person can remember less than 10, even when talking about random numbers instead of words. It has been studied for decades, if not over a hundred years by now, and the closest you'll get to a consensus of the number of words or even numbers people can just remember in their short term memory is .......... drumroll...........7!

https://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/capsules/experience_jaune03.html

https://humanbenchmark.com/tests/number-memory

https://glossary.psywellpath.com/exploring-memory-span-how-much-can-we-remember#real-life-examples

https://www.englishclub.com/efl/podcasts/interesting-facts/working-memory/

https://yoursagetip.com/questions/how-many-words-can-the-human-brain-memorize/

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/brain-memory-magic-number/story?id=9189664

Countless psychological experiments have shown that, on average, the longest sequence a normal person can recall on the fly contains about seven items. This limit, which psychologists dubbed the "magical number seven" when they discovered it in the 1950s, is the typical capacity of what's called the brain's working memory.

As a sentence or a string of numbers gets longer, it becomes exponentially harder for the excited cluster to suppress the others from firing, resulting in pathways that are weak or barely there. Recalling seven items requires about 15 times the suppression needed to recall three. Ten items requires inhibitory powers that are 50 times stronger, and 20 or more items would require suppression hundreds of times stronger still. That, Rabinovich explained, is normally not biologically feasible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_span

I doubt there is even a single person here on Lemmy that would be able to get even remotely close to 100 words. Maybe 1 or 2 could hit 50......but highly unlikely.

I'm referring to the fact that they specifically exclude the biggest companies because they know they can state and show what they use AI for and how it benefits them.

Think of the 100s of lines of stupid Monty Python dialogue that every nerd of a certain age can recite without even having tried to remember it on purpose.

That works because they're real sentences, and sentences have structure and make sense. Reciting a 50 word paragraph from a book/movie word for word is infinitely easier than remembering 50 random words in the correct order.

So the 12 random letters are acobjomepaxr. A crusty old bastard jumped on my exquisitely pampered, ancient xenophobic rodent. That took a minute to concoct but it helped the words sink in.

Again though - you made a real sentence out of a random string of letters. What OP is asking isn't a real sentence, nor a string of letters that you can use to make your own real sentence.

I haven't even tried to fuck a sheep outside of a city, let alone in one!

If all you do in a major city is sit in your house and play on your computer

Sure, but that's not what most people who live in the city do. They live in the city because of what living in the city gives them the ability to do.

So the question still stands - What do you do outside of a city for free that you can’t do in a city for free?

Huge asterisk on this article - the study that they link to for the 17,000 figure is based heavily on data that has now been retracted, or where even the authors now admit it is not verifiable.

To put the real-world harm in perspective, public health studies estimate hydroxychloroquine use was linked to at least 17,000 deaths worldwide, though the true toll is likely higher.

The article that the 17,000 number links to references an article, "Deaths induced by compassionate use of hydroxychloroquine during the first COVID-19 wave: an estimate", which has now been retracted - https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?pmid=38171239

Another study titled "Mortality outcomes with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19 from an international collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials" that this article references, was ammended months ago to essentially say "Remember how we said it was responsible for those deaths in our initial study 4 years ago? Yeah sorry about that, the evidence doesn't actually support it. Whoopsies!"

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-60478-x

Finally, we conclude that there remains uncertainty regarding a potential adverse HCQ effect, in particular in light of the most recent meta-analysis.

So whoever wrote this article in the OP either didn't realize that the article that they based a huge part of their article on had some post-publishing ammendments on one basically discrediting it, and another that had been retracted in 2024, or actively chose to just ignore those ammendments.

Moving on from all that - the gigantic issue with "curbing misinformation", especially when the government is the one doing the curbing, is that we KNOW that they abuse it and use their powers to remove information that they don't like, not just information that is wrong. For example the government forced social media companies to censor "misinformation" about the COVID vaccine that was actually factually correct - how it didn't prevent you from catching or spreading COVID. That was labelled "misinformation" and if you dared to say it you were banned from social media......but it was 100% true.

Just an FYI that this seems to require a monthly subscription fee, even for self-hosting.

So if you self host this you still have to pay a monthly subscription fee to even use it?

The company acknowledged that Biden administration officials had pressured YouTube to remove content “that did not violate its policies,” which Alphabet called “unacceptable and wrong”

What is your take on this? Do you think that is authoritarian/fascist behaviour by the Biden administration?

they’ve been found? by who?

Did you somehow just randomly end up in this topic without even seeing what it was about?

Misinformation gets people hurt, YouTube at the time didn’t want their users getting hurt.

How are so many people in here missing the entire point of the article that this thread is about?

Youtube didn't think their users were getting hurt. Youtube deleted videos and banned accounts because the Biden administration forced them to.

The company acknowledged that Biden administration officials had pressured YouTube to remove content “that did not violate its policies,” which Alphabet called “unacceptable and wrong”