Good to see Khoshekh on this site!

You might be thinking of the 1997 book Foundations of Geopolitics by the Russian ultranationalist and neofascist Aleksandr Dugin.

There have been many reports over the years that it's popular amongst those close to Putin - and there are definitely comparisons to be drawn between the book and actually occurring events.

Not particularly surprised.

By most accounts they're very capable pieces of hardware, but the prices are way too high for current conditions.

Think there's also a case of incremental performance improvements in the form factor becoming less perceptible, and also more people favouring phones and tablets over laptops for everyday use.

It's not configurable through the UI, but if you're the admin of an instance you can change the character limit with some fairly simple source code tweaks.

Ah, of course - that's unfortunate, but thanks for the pointer.

In short, it's another hormone.

It's still debated whether and when it's useful for trans women to take, and it can therefore be difficult to find a doctor who'll prescribe it - but some people who do take it report increased breast fullness / roundness, and increased libido.

There's little risk associated with taking it, so a fair amount of transfemmes try it out just to see whether it produces desirable effects for them.

Prog is progesterone.

I'm currently in a five-person strong team of full-stack web developers supporting an in-house service, and it works reasonably well in my opinion.

Some positives include that:

• As everybody in the team is aware of and competent to work on all aspects of the system, we can avoid any individual of our number becoming the single-point of failure in their specialty field. Understand that this could be mitigated by maintaining multiple people of each specialty, but our current context doesn't permit that.
• Members being generally aware of how business concepts are implemented across domains can result in reduced friction and misunderstanding in communications.
• Features which involve components from multiple domains interacting with one another don't necessitate a multi-member project by default, and thus can avoid the additional organisational burden which would come along with such a project.
• Should anything go wrong, anybody available is able to tackle it in most cases.

However, there are disadvantages such as that:

• Being a full-stack developer doesn't mean that you're equally competent in all domains, and members can sometimes produce naive or subpar implementations in the domains that they're less familiar with and necessitate a rework or cause problems down the road.
• The intellectual burden for members of the team can be greater because they're needing to maintain a working level of competency in a greater number of technologies.
• There are additional management challenges which derive from people's main competencies being less explicit; members of self-organised teams need to be cognisant of that and volunteer for tickets where they'll be more effective, and managers in more hierarchical teams must make a point of understanding which members are best suited to certain tickets and domains. Inversely, members (or managers) must know when to cede (or assign) tasks to members which are less effective in that domain to ensure that they stay in the loop without causing too much delay in time-sensitive matters. This can be a difficult balance to maintain.

To summarise, I would say that my overall experience with being in a team of full-stack web developers has been positive. I would say that it benefits project and team cohesion, but that it can sometimes mean falling slightly short of the implementation quality you'd expect from a team where each member has specialised in their domain. The lack of clear-cut roles can also introduce (self-)management challenges where members need to balance relative specialisation against making sure that knowledge is well-dispersed amongst the team.

I would say that for an action to be considered censorship in the strictest sense, it would need to be the suppression of information as imposed and enforced by a monopolistic authority.

If the State were to declare a book banned, that would be censorship because the State establishes itself as the single totalising authority over the people in the territory it governs. Should you contravene that ruling and possess the material in question, you're opening yourself up to the threat of violence until you start respecting it. You're not able to opt-out, the single authority imposes itself and its ruling on you.

Meanwhile, on federated social media there are many concurrently operating instances with different rulesets and federations. If the instance you're part of decides to defederate with another, then you can move to another instance which continues to federate with the defederated instance in question if you're unhappy with the decision. You're able to opt-out of that ruling without consequence.

Plus, even if you decide not to move instance, the content hosted by the defederated instance will still be available through the instance itself.

Defederation doesn't meaningfully suppress information, whereas censorship does.

This is amazing! It's just as slick for Lemmy as it was for Reddit, a significant step-up for the experience here.