I've been thinking about adding federation health monitoring to #Fedify—not as a separate data store or custom API, but by extending the existing #OpenTelemetry integration. The idea is to expose delivery outcomes, signature verification failures, and per-remote-host error rates as OpenTelemetry metrics alongside the spans Fedify already emits. If you already have a Prometheus or Grafana setup, you'd get federation observability basically for free. Circuit breaker behavior (temporarily skipping a remote server that's been consistently unreachable) could surface as OpenTelemetry events, keeping everything in the same trace context rather than scattered across separate logs.

Does this sound useful to you? I'm curious whether people building on Fedify—or running federated servers in general—would actually reach for this, and what kinds of things you'd most want to observe. Happy to hear any thoughts.

#fedidev #ActivityPub

Lords a-leaving: Britain is ejecting hereditary nobles from Parliament after 700 years https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/2026/03/11/lords-a-leaving-britain-is-ejecting-hereditary-nobles-from-parliament-after-700-years

🎉 Happpy VeldaTV day to those who celebrate it.

https://djangotv.com/videos/djangochat/2026/from-kenya-to-london-velda-kiara/

🎉@veldakiara

#Django #DjangoChat #DjangoTV #Python

뭔가 맘에 안드는 고양이 보여줄게 (아마 밥량인듯)

WBC 8강 불투명해진 미국...감독 "이미 진출한 줄" 황당 발언 등록 2026-03-11 14:48

WBC 8강 불투명해진 미국...감독 "이미 진출한 줄...

当時中継映像はまだ若かったワイの心を抉るには余りにも十分すぎた

そらもうこれですね​​
#唐突ですが貴方の自信作を見せてください

Profile editing: Fix bug with reordering (#38147) by ChaosExAnima has been merged! https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/commit/f971670c620db61da4dadff07efe86b51c145bfd

Trump wants billions more for his war with Iran, and he needs Democratic votes to get it.

While most Dems are openly opposed to giving this lawless regime more money to kill Iranians, some are being cagey and Hakeem Jeffries is currently declining to organize House Democrats against war funding. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/hakeem-jeffries-wont-commit-iran-war-funding-defense-department-rcna262271

Yann LeCun raises $1B to build AI that understands the physical world

Link: https://www.wired.com/story/yann-lecun-raises-dollar1-billion-to-build-ai-that-understands-the-physical-world/
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47320600

@reiver@mastodon.social is there a #FediCon account? Or shall we follow you for updates?

I have to make sure I'm there this year, so I want to make sure I can start scheduling things as early as possible. 😁

しゅいろままとMisskeyを宣伝してきた

そうか…まだ15年か…

再建画策、現在解放されているところは全部MAXになったのでやることがなくなってしまったかもしれない

바이브 코딩이 뭐고 에이전틱 코딩이 뭔데 씹덕아

Když teda teď zas jedeme stát jako firmu, nemohli bychom ho svěřit Orlenu? Horší než s Točvolanty na MZV a životku to asi nebude a stran bezpečnosti mají evidentně víc rozumu než Agrofert, pardon, totiž ANO, ale bohužel i ODS se zoufalci typu Benda, Hraba a spol.

大阪のドールバーに行きたいけど姫路まで車で行くから飲めない​​
まあソフトドリンク頼めばいい話だけど​​

酒、それ即ちにょは​​

​​

Lotus 1-2-3 on the PC w/DOS

https://stonetools.ghost.io/lotus123-dos/

VisiCalc started it, but 1-2-3 finished it. "It" being the discussion of what a spreadsheet can be, and also VisiCalc itself.

<- this is fun, but it is basically "a millennial discovers what you could do with 1-2-3 before they were born, and is blown away."

自信ある絵は何回擦ってもいいって
古事記にも書かれている
#唐突ですが貴方の自信作を見せてください

한쪽에서는 바이브 코딩 같은 걸로 AI에 유용함을 얘기하는데

다른쪽에서는 AI가 뭔가를 날려먹고 있는 희한한 풍경

💄 👋 👷 🌓 #emoji #poll

From back when I used to flip through a thick dictionary, taking a minute for each sentence, to now, when I use an LLM to write in English, people don't realize that I'm personally speaking to them in English for their sake. Honestly, I just want to speak in Korean. I hate English.

와 나 개인 Apple 개발자 계정으로 내 iPhone을 한번도 안물려봤구나 허....

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

Zajímavá #tldr úvaha k situaci v #iran

Zdroj: údajně Lucie Sulovská na Facebooku, ale ten nemám a nemůžu se doklikat na veřejný odkaz, tak sdílím bez souhlasu autorky. Nejspíš teda jde o překlad (?), původní zdroj prý Xitter (?).

„V roce 2003 sledoval generálmajor Mohammad Alí Džafarí, jak Spojené státy během tří týdnů rozdrtily centralizovanou velitelskou strukturu Saddáma Husajna. Následující čtyři roky strávil v Centru strategických studií Revolučních gard (IRGC) navrhováním vojenské architektury, kterou by nebylo možné „dekapitovat“.

V září 2007 byl jmenován velitelem IRGC a okamžitě přestavěl celý íránský vojenský systém: rozdělil ho na 31 autonomních provinčních velitelství – jedno pro každou provincii. Každé z nich má vlastní velitelství, vlastní systém velení a řízení, vlastní arzenál raket a dronů, flotily rychlých útočných člunů, integrované milice Basídž, předem delegované pravomoci k odpalu, zásoby munice i zapečetěné krizové rozkazy.

Tato doktrína byla vytvořena pro jediný scénář: smrt nejvyššího vůdce. Tento scénář nastal 28. února 2026. Doktrína se aktivovala během několika hodin. A běží dodnes. Otázka, kterou si téměř nikdo nepoložil, zní: může ji vůbec někdo uvnitř Islámské republiky vypnout?

Článek 110 íránské ústavy z roku 1979 svěřuje veškeré velení nad ozbrojenými silami výhradně nejvyššímu vůdci. Pouze on je vrchním velitelem. Pouze on jmenuje a odvolává vojenské vedení. Žádná jiná instituce – ani prezident, ani parlament, ani Rada dohlížitelů, ani soudy – nemá ústavní pravomoc vydávat vojenské rozkazy nebo rušit rozhodnutí nejvyššího vůdce.

Rozkazy o předem delegovaném velení vydal Alí Chameneí.

Alí Chameneí je mrtvý.

1/3

Wenn ihr euch für die Landtagswahlergebnisse in Baden-Württemberg interessiert oder sehen möchtet, was mit UX alles möglich ist, dann schaut euch diese Webseite an: https://visquill.com/gallery/?example=bw-elections.

Ihr könnt auf einer Karte einen runden Kreis ziehen und seht dann die Ergebnisse bzw. die Veränderung zum letzten Ergebnis.
Ich glaube, die Person, die diese Webseite erstellt hat, ist nicht auf Mastodon. Den Beitrag habe ich auf LinkedIn gefunden.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/benjamin-niedermann_badenwaesrttemberg-landtagswahl2026-election-activity-7436667120576520192-H-iU?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAABmJFwYBdc3CPuHvLB-vrvWCY1wYHD8hIp0

#badenWurttemberg #ltw26bw #ux

📢 Viñetas publicadas hoy.

‼️ El Roto. "Bombardeos humanitarios"
‼️ Eneko "Petala epici furoris"

#NOaLaGuerra
#NOaLasGuerras

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

@reiver@mastodon.socialis there a #FediCon account? Or shall we follow you for updates?

I have to make sure I'm there this year, so I want to make sure I can start scheduling things as early as possible. 😁

🎉 Happpy VeldaTV day to those who celebrate it.

https://djangotv.com/videos/djangochat/2026/from-kenya-to-london-velda-kiara/

🎉@veldakiara

#Django #DjangoChat #DjangoTV #Python

RE: https://social.jpoesen.com/@jpoesen/116209737497689150

Anyone have experience with this platform? Would be curious to hear your take!

見てね​​

RE: https://mstdn.jp/users/k_taka/statuses/116202267936174352

確かに呑まなきゃ車でっていうのもいけるやんねー！！(近隣駐車場情報​​けど​​)
なでぃさんご都合いけそうならぜひぜひねー！！​​​​

RE: https://misskey.io/notes/ajpk7f9w1iew0deg

どこかにビューン
やきそばバゴォーン

호시만쥬우가니가 우리말로 뭘까 하고 찾아봤더니 만두게래ㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠ

いや飲まないし​​

RE: https://misskey.io/notes/ajpkigmk0v6o0by7

스토리텔링 하나 만큼은 진짜 기가 맥히네 ㄹㅇ...

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:4sujqnbd47ey26qcvajqoxa2/post/3mgqt56ijv72f