1013
Internet Archive is in danger (www.battleforlibraries.com)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Moorshou@lemmy.zip to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

It looks like the internet archive is needed assistance, I just heard about this today and figured lemmy could help spread this message around

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 33 points 5 months ago

Lol, a petition won't stop this unless it's a petition to bribe the judge. The US is owned by corporations.

[-] cybersin@lemm.ee 31 points 5 months ago

Sure, but it is still better than doing nothing.

[-] Steve@communick.news 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It feels better than doing nothing.
If you can convince yourself you're not doing nothing.
I've never been that good a liar.

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 5 months ago

Large petitions also serve as a way of getting the word out.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

Yep. Petition gets large enough for media attention, word is spread, MAYBE people get active.

But Then police beat on them, Trump supporters defend the corporate interests of their supreme lord, it all goes down the shitter anyway.

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 5 months ago

So don’t ever get active or protest or do anything?

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Dude I'm in Portland. That's all we do

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Ok…so I don’t get your point then. Your previous comment heavily implied it’s all pointless.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

I'll get back to you after the next election

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago

You’re still dodging responding directly here but ok.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Reply to the "so don't do anything?" jump straight to nihilism in response to suggestion that one route hasn't been successful lately in the near military state? Like we've never heard of Occupy Wall Street, million women march, Antifa?

No I didn't take it as a serious enough question. It was a judgement question, not a curiosity one. A curious question would have been "if you don't think that works, what could be done instead?"

"But ok."

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You said protests lead to a brick wall dude. I don’t know what to tell you. What’s the point of that comment if not to discourage public protests?

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

But you jumped from "protests haven't been effective" to "so don't do anything?"

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

No, you naysayed protests and then just left it at that. You never said they’re still worth doing, you never provided an alternative, you just said functionally said “it’s pointless“ by rattling off how they hit a wall and then expected me to not take it that way. Bizarre.

We are just going in circles. If you meant something else you’ve had plenty of opportunity to explain yourself. But you continue not to. So until you clarify your stance, I’m going to take the thing you originally said as written. I’m not getting bogged down in “that’s not what I said but I’m not going to say what I meant and keep it as opaque as possible.” Say what you mean or just drop it.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

You really need to check your ego. You keep thinking that I'm avoiding some discussion or debate with you or something. But you're not even reading what I'm saying. I don't care about your disingenuous question.

THE SECOND you put "so do nothing?" you weren't interested in my thought. You just want to judge. That's it. You want to be right and argue why you're right. So I didn't respond to your "so do nothing?" Because it isn't genuine. I tried to explain that to you, but you still think I'm just avoiding "the question".

What I mean is if you want to discuss with someone, don't take a cynical comment and immediately apply nihilism if your intent is to learn and discuss. My intent wasn't to learn and discuss. Neither was yours. Because you demand a response doesn't mean you are entitled to anything. And if someone doesn't want to stumble along your thinking path doesn't mean they're avoiding your judgemental question. It may, however, mean they've dismissed your question

[-] cybersin@lemm.ee 15 points 5 months ago

I don't know.

I still think there's at least some value, even if the only thing it accomplishes is getting people to talk about it. Many people have never even heard of The Internet Archive.

Either way, there isn't really a reason not to.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Only things that are effective are better than doing nothing. Doing ineffective things only gives a false sense of accomplishment and thus reduces the incentive to try harder to be effective, which means they're actually worse than doing nothing.

Online petitions, "free speech zones," and other easily-ignorable things are like honeypots for activism, designed to neuter it.

[-] cybersin@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

Sure, but "effectiveness" is usually not a binary and is often difficult to measure. Small, but persistent changes should still add up. Eventually.

So long as people recognize that these things are in fact quite toothless, I'm not sure they are entirely detrimental. There's no reason this couldn't be used as a starting point for more effective action, now that signatories are in greater contact with the campaign.

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 10 points 5 months ago

It's not even a question of being "owned by corporations". Judges don't care about petitions. They're not politicians, their job is to adjudicate the law.

[-] EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

In theory. In the US, at least (I don't know about other countries), some judge positions are voted in, In that sense, they most certainly are politicians.

On top of that, HAVE YOU SEEN OUR SUPREME COURT. THAT SHIT'S THE HALLMARK CHANNEL OF "OWNED BY OTHER ENTITIES", be it actual politicians (Trump) or CEOs (also Trump), many of whom ARE both executives and politicans (again, not only Trump, but also a number of other reps & senators).

[-] Moorshou@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 months ago

C'mon it's at least worth a shot. To me at least.

[-] Animoscity@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

With the current judges we could probably buy one fairly cheap. Crowd source lobbying I guess

this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
1013 points (98.9% liked)

Privacy

32159 readers
343 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS