353
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
353 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
59598 readers
1824 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sorry to interrupt, but CEOs may have data retention laws to follow, depending on the industry. It's easier for many companies just to save everything, usually. Do they exploit that data? Yeah, unfortunately. CEOs can be blamed for a lot, but not for rules they may have to follow. You can blame them for shitty security over that data they have to retain. That's a thing! (AI companies are the ones you need to look at now as they are the ones that want everything.)
To tweak your point a little, you have no voting power over people who are put in charge of government regulatory bodies who create those data retention rules, for example. (Policy and guidelines are distinct things.)
On second thought, you can vote for the people who control policy or support increased restrictions on police and other feds. You don't have to vote for people who cheer for the abuse of power. You can look at life any way you choose, I suppose.
Your points are not generally wrong and your individual vote rarely changes your country or the world. Addressing complaints of an individual isn't really what voting is for. However, you can vote in different elections for people who have specific areas of control based on your opinion. That is why I got nuanced with my first bit about data, actually.
The people telling you to vote "harder" are simply telling you to actually vote. That is the point.
From the article we're commenting on:
And I have voted, I voted for Biden to "not be Trump" and he's doing okay at that. I'm personally still waiting on protections for queer people, major laws against police brutality, higher minimum wages, healthcare reform, decriminalizing cannabis, codifying Roe v. Wade, or anything else that was planned to win over voters but still don't have the time to do anything about.
But i guess we have the political capital to:
Violate 26 federal laws to continue building the wall that Trump wanted
Have bipartisan support to enstate a formal dress code because a Senator wore a hoodie
And I don't recall ever voting to support Israel's bombing of Palestine, not in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, or any other election year. There isn't some referendum of "Hey maybe don't play geopolitical chess that gets hundreds killed" that I can vote on. Joe "Nothing WIll Fundamentally Change" Biden said to Congress in the State of the Union, to a nation filled with people protesting police brutality We need to Fund the Police to a roaring clap from both parties.
Please tell me more to vote harder to stop the genocide of Ukrainians, Palestinians, Yemenis, and everyone other oppressed people. Please tell me to vote harder for milquetoast candidates who pay lip service while they allow fascism to grow openly and easily, because "they need to reach across the isles and compromise".
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
We need to Fund the Police
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.