661
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 21 Aug 2024
661 points (99.1% liked)
Privacy
31912 readers
556 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
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah those tens of millions of people utilizing the ACA sure don’t count. I guess the infrastructure bill didn’t happen, I’ll go tell my city to return the funding it’s using right now to repair roads and sewerage issues that have long been neglected until that money came.
I mean seriously? Nothing meaningful? Let’s just skip the part where you give me some dross about how the ACA was Republican due to compromise blah blah blah we all know but it wouldn’t exist at all without Obama and the democrats expending an enormous amount of political capital. Like it or not, to not call it meaningful is ridiculous.
What does that have to do with internet privacy legislation?
Relax bidey-bro, this thread is about data privacy laws, not general stuff. The only relevant one I’m aware of is DMCA, which was in fact signed into law by Bill Clinton.
You’re trying too hard
@SteveFromMySpace @crusa187@lemmy.ml
I just immediately block people who use terms like bidey-bro.
Life it too short and my feed is too long.
As if surrounding yourself in an echo chamber of sycophants is the better solution. It sure works well for MAGA folks.
It’s unbelievable how any time somebody starts complaining about “echo chambers“ it’s basically an argument for how they are entitled to somebody else’s attention.
When you go out for drinks or dinner or some other social activity, do you always make sure to invite people with beliefs and practices that are diametrically opposed to your own? Do you not mostly keep friends in your orbit who largely agree with you and your values?
I have family I don’t agree with. I have colleagues I don’t agree with. Yes, I also have friends I don’t agree with. But these echo chamber arguments are almost exclusively used by the right to say “you have to listen to me because it’s a moral imperative” then whenever someone like me tries to show them the door, they scream about echo chambers as if they aren’t the problem.
No, we don’t have to keep these people around. I don’t have to listen to every opinion or argument that I disagree with every single time. Sometimes I’m just going to tell people to fuck off and hang out with people who aren’t actively trying to upset me.
Great analogy but how does that even remotely apply to this scenario where you replied to someone else's comment and then didn't like the response followed by someone telling you to just block people when they aren't part of your in-group of folks who think exactly like you?
This is social media not a dinner party and this is exactly how people wind up in social media echo chambers.
I can decide to block someone after they reveal more of themselves or otherwise turn nasty. You’re still reinforcing a false moral imperative. I am allowed to have communities and spaces that are primarily people I agree with. I don’t need everything to be challenging me all the time.
Seems pretty sleazy if you're the one instigating the challenge and then running away by blocking someone if they respond to you. Furthermore, you created an entire strawman argument with your initial reply as if the Democratic party is filled with a bunch of saints that are above reproach. This is exactly what MAGA supporters do when people criticize Trump which is why I bring up sycophants and echo chambers because that's exactly how those people wound up in the state they're in.
You’re mischaracterizing this pretty flagrantly.
I'm with Shepard on this one, even if he's being a jerk about it.
Lemmy is a filter bubble, an echo chamber. You miss information that would be personally important to you, but is excluded because it doesn't fit with the US Democrat party line, and the very specific part of it Lemmy's politically active base likes.
Like, I'm a raging Trump hater, but I'm kind of aghast at how many knee jerk reactions (like, to me, your original reply) I get when I imply something vaguely critical about the Democrats.
If you spend your entire time and get all your information on lemmy then you have a bigger issue beyond some echo chamber internet communities. Really and truly.
Demonizing spaces for like minded people to congregate doesn’t solve that.
If this is a polite way of saying "go somewhere else to lightly criticize democrats," I don't accept that. I can at least hope Lemmy can do better, and try to change it.
Of course having a good information diet is critical. But that's besides the point? I don't think this thread would be a thing if all our information diets were great.
That’s an absurd interpretation of what I said. There is no way you actually think that’s what said.