You don’t have to go back 20 years. They also committed a fairly big oopsie, not that long ago.
The Guardian: I don’t think this one article about renters from 2020 proves its case very well. Personally, I’m not convinced. MIXED
New York Times: You really think someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies? I don’t think so.
I’ll send them a link and an example of how to use it tomorrow.
We’re not roasting the volunteer mods because we can’t ignore the bot. We’re roasting the volunteer mods because the experience of having someone in a position of power over your environment, and having them show callous indifference to how everyone in the community sees it, and what we want them to be doing with their position of power, leads people to start roasting. Sometimes out of all possible proportion to how big a deal the thing being complained about actually is.
It’s part of the healthy interplay of human society that keeps the social contract well-maintained. Take it as a sign of love, that we value this community and want it to function well.
I’m really curious what the response to this is going to be.
How much are you paying for the MBFC API? The page says it isn’t free. I’ll give you an API endpoint which will check sources against https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources, if you pay me half of whatever you were paying MBFC previously. That list is quite a lot better than relying on MBFC.
I already scraped the list. It’ll take around an hour for my script to finish going down the sources and assigning web sites to each one, but I can have a working API endpoint for you tomorrow morning. I can do the bot part also, if you prefer. That’s probably easier than making a new endpoint and hooking it to a bot and debugging the connection and all.
Like I said, I think the idea that readers won’t be able to determine that Breitbart is unreliable is missing a pretty big elephant in the misinformational room. If the issue that’s causing you to keep MBFC is finding a better source that’s programmatic, though, then solving that is almost trivially easy and at least seems like some kind of step forward.
Next, you’ll be telling me that UniversalMonk violates rule 7 pretty much every day.
In what way does having the MediaBiasFactCheck bot help with misinformation? It’s not very accurate, probably less than the average Lemmy reader’s preexisting knowledge level. People elsewhere in these comments are posting specific examples, in a coherent, respectful fashion.
Most misinformation clearly comes in the form of accounts that post a steady stream of “reliable” articles which don’t technically break the rules, and/or in bad-faith comments. You may well be doing plenty of work on that also, I’m not saying you’re not, but it doesn’t seem from the outside like a priority in the way that the bot is. What is the use case where the bot ever helped prevent some misinformation? Do you have an example when it happened?
I’m not trying to be hostile in the way that I’m asking these questions. It’s just very strange to me that there is an overwhelming consensus by the users of this community in one direction, and that the people who are moderating it are pursuing this weird non-answer way of reacting to the overwhelming consensus. What bad thing would happen if you followed the example of the !news moderators, and just said, “You know what? We like the bot, but the community hates it, so out it goes.” It doesn’t seem like that should be a complex situation or a difficult decision, and I’m struggling to see why the moderation team is so attached to this bot and their explanations are so bizarre when they’re questioned on it.
The bot is instituted by the Admins
When did this happen? The admins instituted it for !politics, and the admins changed their minds about having it for !news and friends, but wanted to keep it in !politics?
with good reason
What’s the reason?
Lemmy claims to be able to support any Bootstrap 5 theme as a drop-in Lemmy theme, and it’s surprisingly close to being true. If you go to ponder.cat right now, you’ll see one, based on Sandstone, that I’ve been fooling around with, because the provided Lemmy themes are mostly awful to me.
You could run one backend instance, have a main frontend to it on lemmy.whatever.com, and have a second frontend on whatever.com, with the theme set to a minimally modified version of Clean Blog or something, stripping out all the UI stuff and leaving only a blog. That would give you an RSS feed, a blog, a community that Lemmy people could follow, and a Fediverse actor that Mastodon people could follow, all in one place with all the comments unified. If you want to set the theme up that way, I can give you pointers, since I’ve just now been working on this for my instance.
I think you would need more RAM than that. Between Rust and Node, I probably wouldn’t try to make do with less than 2 GB at a bare minimum, and 4 might be better.
Huh?
Manifest v3 is not the rendering engine. The issue with manifest v3 is that the extension format is changing, so it’ll be more difficult to make ad blocker extensions work on Chrome. But a Chromium fork that is focused on privacy, of which there are several, and an ad blocker of which there are several, want to work together to make sure that their ad blocker is still working on the Chromium fork in question, it’s hard for me to see it being insurmountably difficult for them to collaborate on an API that will let it happen.
It’s not automatic, it can be difficult since they’re diverging from Chromium. But it is not on the same scale as trying to maintain a divergent browser engine.
It’s very cheap. Hostinger’s cheapest tier ($17/mo) can easily handle a single-user Lemmy instance. You’ll have to once in a blue moon worry about the image storage growing without limit, but it’s a solvable problem.
Nothing questionable that Mozilla does can affect the forks, as long as the forks have enough manpower to sustain themselves. There are, in fact, a few examples of projects with questionable leadership getting abandoned by their userbase, as everyone migrates to the fork.
I think what you need to worry about is whether the fork you’re using has enough momentum and developer time that it’s going to stay alive. That’s a concern whether or not you have a concern that the central leadership is going to do something obscene.
I am fetching the RSS feeds for particular channels, for which I need the channel ID.
Google gives out not only the RSS feed, but also the channel ID, if you click the menu under “share”, as someone else pointed out to me a couple days ago. You are very confused about things. This thing about it being against the TOS is pure fantasy.
*fifth, with SO’s default sorting, after several screens full of wrong answers
It’s a wonderful answer and I appreciate knowing about it now, because that process definitely wasn’t the first idea that came to my mind. If only Google and SO had given that answer to me before I did the whole adventure I pasted into my post and comment.
It’s search. I’m copy-pasting the content going down from the top of the page, adding my own commentary.
The mystery is solved. People are trying to provide good answers to strangers for free because they are good and helpful. Google’s senseless reorganization of things is causing them not to function anymore. And then, Stack Overflow’s bad configuration is defeating those good people’s efforts to provide them to me.
I think we’ve learned that SO has succumbed to the same organizational syphilis that Google contracted a few years earlier.
I’ll click on the link you sent me, and start reading carefully, trying to find the answer. Here’s how it went. I am not faking or deliberately trying any wrong things here. I’m just grabbing the most central solution it’s presenting me on any given page, and trying it.
Here’s the progress:
or those who come across this after the latest Data API revision (31st January, 2024), they provided the forHandle query parameter to get data of a handle/username. You can refer to this answer for details here: stackoverflow.com/a/78074066/2665606 – Saqib Ahmed Commented Feb 29 at 10:01
Cool. I click on that question.
YouTube released a revision on 31st January 2024 to add a forHandle parameter in the channel list API that does exactly what OP asks.
You can call the channel list API with forHandle to get the channel ID and the upload playlist for that user/handle that you can subsequently use to fetch the videos.
GET https://www.googleapis.com/youtube/v3/channels
Query parameters:
forHandle=FolkartTr OR @FolkartTr OR %40FolkartTr (this allows the ‘@’ sign as well as URL encoding of it) key=<your API key> part=contentDetails
Cool.
$ wget -O - https://www.googleapis.com/youtube/v3/channels\?forHandle=Lindybeige
--2024-10-01 01:19:52-- https://www.googleapis.com/youtube/v3/channels?forHandle=Lindybeige
Resolving www.googleapis.com (www.googleapis.com)... 2a00:1450:4009:822::200a, 2a00:1450:4009:826::200a, 2a00:1450:4009:823::200a, ...
Connecting to www.googleapis.com (www.googleapis.com)|2a00:1450:4009:822::200a|:443... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden
2024-10-01 01:19:52 ERROR 403: Forbidden.
Oh. I need an API key. Okay, that one’s useless.
I read another answer.
If I understood correctly, your problem is that you can’t do anything from such a c/ channel id with the Channels: list of the YouTube Data API v3. If you’re just looking for the channel id linked to this id then because as YouTube Data API v3 doesn’t work for this, I would recommend you to use my open-source YouTube operational API, indeed by requesting https://yt.lemnoslife.com/channels?cId=FolkartTr you’ll receive a JSON with id equals to the channel id linked to the provided cId value.
That means nothing to me.
I hit back. We’re back at the original page you linked me to:
To obtain the channel id you can view the source code of the channel page and find either data-channel-external-id=“UCjXfkj5iapKHJrhYfAF9ZGg” or “externalId”:“UCjXfkj5iapKHJrhYfAF9ZGg”.
UCjXfkj5iapKHJrhYfAF9ZGg will be the channel ID you are looking for.
Already covered. It doesn’t work.
An easy answer is, your YouTube Channel ID is UC + {YOUR_ACCOUNT_ID}. To be sure of your YouTube Channel ID or your YouTube account ID, access the advanced settings at your settings page
And if you want to know the YouTube Channel ID for any channel, you could use the solution @mjlescano gave.
https://www.googleapis.com/youtube/v3/channels?key={YOUR_API_KEY}&forUsername={USER_NAME}&part=id If this could be of any help, some user marked it was solved in another topic right here.
Are you getting sick of reading these? So am I! I want to remind that DDG gave me the answer at the top of the page, as a tool that would solve the problem for me.
At any channel page with “user” url for example http://www.youtube.com/user/klauskkpm, without API call, from YouTube UI, click a video of the channel (in its “VIDEOS” tab) and click the channel name on the video. Then you can get to the page with its “channel” url for example https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfjTOrCPnAblTngWAzpnlMA.
Edit:
Above is not working any more. But we can open Developer Tools (cmd + option + I) and try to find the URL there. Search by channel_id for some channels, it will show you, but NOT for all the channels.
By the way, if this is your own channel – you can go here https://developers.google.com/youtube/v3/docs/channels/list and make request with part snippet and mine true.
Oh, I found this answer. Thank you, just works!
Edit:
Just in case you need UC channel id of any channel by the “YouTube handle”, you can also use ‘API Explorer’ on the right of this page https://developers.google.com/youtube/v3/docs/channels/list and enter forHandle with your ‘API key’ (let me share screenshots below)
Sure, let’s try the Cmd+Option+I solution.
Hey! Look at that. www.youtube.com wants to use my microphone. I can:
I think we’re done here. For all I know I would have been able to find it in the network tab of developer tools while searching for the channel, but I think the point is made. I didn’t say that the answer didn’t exist anywhere on SO, I said that the things I was trying because either Google or SO were telling me they were the answer were not working.
Edit: I reread your comment and got confused. For me, the screenshot you’re showing has 26 points, and shows up below all of the answers that I showed above, which have 259, 79, 32, and 30 points respectively. How many points does it have on your page, to show as the second highest answer? I didn’t deliberately stop reading right before the answer. I absolutely made a sincere effort to find the answer on that page, documenting my progress as I went.
Ed Zitron diagnosed the causes and timing of the rot:
Why is it admin level? Are there admins that tell you what you can and can’t do with the politics community, in this case? Or does the politics moderation team have the ability to ditch the bot if they decide to?
This is such a strange situation. If you’re stuck in that former position, though, it would make a lot of your responses in this comments section make a whole lot more sense.