The domain for my email is gmail.com not Aussie zone. I also cannot log in to gmail on the hotmail (outlook? )site. Perhaps you are interpreting their request to not use username and site name and instead use email, to instead use a long form Lemmy username?
That could work, but I don't know that it adds any extra layer of simplicity, but maybe that's what they meant. My interpretation is that they are saying to link your account to your email address, as that's what most other services do. Without knowing which instance you register with, there would need to be a registry. Perhaps this could be hashed in some way, but it would still be effectively public facing as any instance would need access.
To do so, there would need to be a centralized or federated list of all accounts. If it was centralized it would be against federation principles. If it was federated, then anyone who sets up a server would potentially have access to all email addresses. Perhaps,more in the style of email, like @user but that would likely lead to more confusion as people would put their email and it is essentially the same information.
I do agree that log in as the opening page is not a great experience. Helping people to find an instance should be easier to filter. Rather than a list by popularity, let them know choosing by interest or location can help find relevant content and have easy to use clickable filters to do so.
Not if you look at the rate of change as well as the change. If it’s trending towards zero, it can be a curve rather than straight line. That can then trend negative.
Think of a car going fast, then applying the brakes. It slows down until it eventually stops.
Now think of a boat. It doesn’t have a brake. It has a reverse throttle. When you want to slow down, the motor goes backwards. When you hit zero, you start to then go backwards. That’s what they are extrapolating.
It goes both ways. The dictionary is perceived to be an arbiter of truth in defining words. Language is what we perceived or to be. If most people agree that the definition is correct, it is.
Selfish and greedy is just part of it. He is unfit on many levels.
Any incidence of memory loss is not automdisqualifying, but I’d want to know the medical reasons before electing someone to such a high office. Again, in the absence of accurate information, we only have speculation.
Discussion about these topics is not ableism. Some are suggesting an upper age limit. To me, that’s just using age as an allegory for health. We should just set minimum standards for health of these offices, if we have an aging population with increasing health needs.
Peak health 24/7 is unrealistic for anyone, but even with a chronic health problem of any kind, you need to be able to perform the functions of the job.
We don’t have a diagnosis for Trump, but there is clearly something deeply wrong with him. If he willfully provides misinformation about his health, all we have is conjecture.
Disability should not preclude you from work,but just like people without a disability, you seek roles you are suitable for. It’s not ableist to say someone with alzheimers and associated cognitive decline is not suitable for president.