In this case I am quite happy to be out of the loop, frankly. I can live in blissful ignorance of at least this stuff.

I feel completely out of the loop when stuff like this happens.

I went looking around and found an article that expanded a lot on this topic, https://maxread.substack.com/p/who-killed-jean-pormanove

What does ChatGPT have to do with this…? This is what FP themselves say https://support.fairphone.com/hc/en-us/articles/9836188988049-Audio-Jack-3-5mm

I have a FP3 with a jack, for reference. It doesn’t have an IP rating. FP4 has IP54, FP5/6 both have IP55. Also yes, phones have become bigger, but they have more stuff inside. More cameras, for example.

I mean, the jack is literally a hole in the chassis of the phone, while I cannot exclude the fact that someone managed to make a design with good IP rating, I can very easily see that it makes it much harder.

Exactly my thoughts too. Lots of theory about why it won’t work, but not looking at the fact that if people use it, maybe it does work, and when it won’t work, they will stop using it.

The cost is a tiny aspect. There is the space issue and the physical issue. Jacks are holes where dust and water come in, making it harder to make devices resistant and as durable as they can be.

Everyone is free to pick their poison, but I have to ask…why? What is the target audience here? This is a massively overkill architecture IMHO. Not to talk about the fact you now need 3 managed services (fargate, s3 and aurora at least) for a single self hosted tool, and that is being generous (not counting cloudwatch, ALBs, etc.).

• Why do you need security groups to allow egress anywhere (or, at all)?
• I would pin the image to a digest, rather than using latest.
• what is the average monthly cost for this infra for you?

Because it’s unnecessary in almost all cases. So far there is only one community which forbids people to comment based on who they are, but otherwise the rules boil down to standard acceptable behavior according to common sense. It’s also a nuisance for users: I am quite sure nobody wants to click several times and be derailed to check rules (on mobile) for every comment they want to write in every post they see on a feed. If this would be expected as standard behavior, I would guess even less interactions will happen.

Based on the comments here and in the previous similar post I have seen, the vast, vast majority of people (presumably men) highlight how this is a problem of visibility of posts in public feeds.

It’s a tradeoff between having the community public for discoverability and accepting that many people will not check the rules and violate them, some inadvertently.

The alternative is to make the community private, and accept that women will need to discover a women-relates community by searching for “women”, which doesn’t seem incredibly unlikely.

From the sentiments I read, most people wouldn’t care at all if the community was private and wouldn’t have a desire to “invade” it. I definitely feel part of this group.

Considering that it’s in the interest of the community (apparently) to have only women, I think it’s fair to expect the (minimal) effort from future members to look for it (plus advertising it in posts etc.) on them instead of expecting the vast majority of the users (the fediverse is mostly males) to add friction and having to check the rules of every single community of every post they open (now it might be a community, more might come). Yes, community rules are important, but being realistic, if you don’t behave like an asshole you don’t need to worry about them in 99% of the times.

However, if this tradeoff is not deemed acceptable, I think there is no point complaining about people “invading” women spaces because it’s guaranteed that many people will comment without reading the rules, as I am sure the almost totality of users does all the time. Even without counting the ones who intentionally violate the rule, there is always going to be an organic amount of people who will do so inadvertently.

At this point I think the tradeoff is so clear, that discussing the topic in such a confrontational way looks more like rage-bait than anything aimed at solving the problem.