Done.

Feel like this belongs in !fuck_ai@lemmy.world

Think I should cross-post?

Some Lemmy clients offer the option to auto-hide posts and comments which contain certain keywords of the choice of the user. Are there any plans to implement this feature into the stock Lemmy experience?

I know it is possible to do some hacky stuff with UblockOrigin to do the same, but that is not something most know about and are willing to do.

They have - voluntarily - decided to buy a device that is known to be anti-consumer.

Many Apple users bought their devices before they were aware of Apple’s user look in tactics, let alone how they could be problematic. Most people are not into tech, so they wouldn’t know. Data on tech illiteracy.

You say that until Google realises that there is no other viable alternative and so they can do the same thing since it’s not like there is another option.

I know you ca try and install other OSes, but that isn’t an option for many, as many manufacturers make acquiring root access impossible.

You answer is basically a big “go fuck yourself” to everyone who bought an iphone before they knew about the things Apple did to keep users looked in. Same goes for the acquiring root access on an android phone.

People are not born with knowledge.

See… It’s not that hard to make something if you actually try.

hmm… And why would you say supporting Russia and Palestine count has “understanding geopolitics”? I say this as someone who does not know too much about it.

Reminds me of this:

For those who downvoted without reading the link… This whole thing is satire.

The aim of this satirical campaign is to use humour to connect your personal needs for Earth’s resources with the evidence of just how much of these resources are now being claimed for the data centres running generative AI. And to make you smile.

https://savethe.ai/about/

I’m just gonna link this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq8zFLIftGk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMtopY3pcZs

And how did you contaminate someone else’s feed? Genuinely curious.

True… I suppose. Fortunately there are instances that have downvotes disabled. In the settings of your account you can also hide downvotes.

I prefer Slashdot style mod points to upvotes/downvotes as there is an opportunity cost to voting. I find it fosters more interesting and less echo-chambery discussions.

I got no clue what “Slashdot” is. Wikipedia says:

Slashdot (sometimes abbreviated as /.) is a social news website that originally billed itself as “News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters”. It features news stories on science, technology, and politics that are submitted and evaluated by site users and editors. Each story has a comments section where users can add online comments.

It doesn’t really explain how the voting system works there. Mind to explain it?

No that’s a horrible idea. It should be up to the Admins and Mods to decide what speech is allowed in their instances and communities. Making downvotes have a negative effect would only encourage bad actors to create accounts solely to downvote people, which will in turn create a black market of buying downvotes, to censor post you don’t like, and upvotes, to up censor votes you like.

This agricultural industry around farming accounts to downvote would overwhelm the Admins with account applications. People could also create instances for se sole purpose of making downvoting bot accounts. You might say those instances could be blocked. True, they would. But this could go from bad to worse considering that this could open the door to instance Admins themselves doing downvote based censorship, since they can create has many accounts as they want.

Also, I fell like this is relevant:

The whole point of the Fediverse is since we all want different things from our social media and people will always disagree on something, it is better to have different independent instances, which federate and defederate to create a nice environment for all. People who disagree on something (like whether nsfw content or curse words should be allowed) so much to the point of ruining their experience, they can just go to instances where that content is blocked, instead of spending an eternity arguing over it. This allows for diversity of thought and opinion over the whole system.

I had no idea u/UniversalMonk@lemm.ee even existed lol. Congratulations u/SelfProgrammed@lemmy.today, you just advertised this guy’s account to who knows how many people.

Well, it was only a matter of time till the bot got to me!

Funny you put quotes on the word liberal. You know words have meanings and definitions right? I know many people don’t bother to check a term’s meaning and end up miss using it, but that does not detract from the fact that the word still has meaning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property and equality before the law. Liberals espouse various and often mutually warring views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.

Note that liberalism defends the right to private property (AKA Capitalism). (Also, private property and personal property are two different things.)

Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?

On authority, by Frederick Engels 1872

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm

Why don’t you asked them yourself? !askchapo@hexbear.net

Probably a bad idea to ask about a Marxist instance on a .world community, since .world is known to be quite biased against Marxism.

I could spend an hour writing a long winded explanation of why capitalists “earn” their wealth through wage theft… but Comrade Hakim already made a video that explains this concept pretty well so here.

Yup… right what I suspected! The Slippery Slope Fallacy!

Whats gonna happens when politicians realize kids are just gonna click “I’m at least [Age]”?

Many pornography work like that and can, as such, be easily bypassed. But does that mean we should drop the age restriction for access to pornography? Of course not!

Here is another example:

Murder. Murder shouldn’t be legal and it is not. However, despite this restriction, some find ways to get away with murder. Does that mean that laws against murder are useless since we cannot stop murder 100% of the time? I highly doubt it.

It is impossible for any law enforcement to prevent 100% of all crimes, but that is not justification for those law to not exist.

Either you have a toothless law, or you live in a country with Great Firewall of China.

False dilemma fallacy.

Again, I’ll refer to pornography. Many pornography work on the trust system. By your logic, that means we should drop all laws restricting access to it. However, that is absurd.

The point isn’t to stop 100% of all usage. It is simply there to reduce the usage. You are forgetting that we are talking about human beings. Beings which have a natural tendency to conform to social norms as to not be cast out of their tribe (since humans cannot survive in the wild without each other, such would be a death sentence).

This law would set the societal precedent that people need to be of a certain age to access these social media apps (as shown by scientific data, which revealed that social media usage can have many negative effects on a developing mind). This societal precedent will, hopefully, make it taboo for people bellow 16 to access social media, which will, in turn, reduce, but not outright 100% stop, underage social media usage.