- 18 Posts
- 54 Comments
2·13 days agoThat’s a good approach.
I myself don’t see progress as a technical thing, but rather technology as something that could help us overcome our animalistic traits in order to enable us to live together in a good, forward-looking way. I mean, of all the mammals in the world, we are the best at building tools, but I wonder if we are making the most of this or if, despite all our tools, we are ultimately incapable of overcoming our instincts.
I don’t know the answer any more than anyone else. However, your answer, which I share, suggests that despite all our technological achievements, we are not evolving significantly, but remain trapped in our animal nature.
14·22 days agoDo I have to provide this information to Palantir myself, or will the authorities do that for me?
I really don’t understand how you can hold that opinion. Your president is clearly a criminal, and he is exploiting your legal system to enrich himself and his partners.
That’s perfectly obvious.
It’s equally obvious that your legal system not only allows this, but also enables this level of massive organized crime in the first place.
Here’s an example: Clarence Thomas, a Supreme Court justice, has been blatantly corrupt for decades (and he’s not the only one in that small circle). The Supreme Court has ruled - in clear violation of the US Constitution - that the law does not apply to the president. So Trump is shamelessly enriching himself.
How can anyone live in such a system and even approve of it?
Do you have any thoughts on what purposes laws should serve?
7·1 month ago{Placeholder for a particularly witty comment next time}
What I mean by this is that every topic is treated like breaking news on social media. However, news reports are characterized by the fact that they are usually outdated by the next day because they are only relevant for a limited period of time. This is not true for many topics discussed on social media. In fact, it is even possible to repeat something after a certain period of time (e.g., reposting memes), which is impossible with actual news reports.
That’s true, of course. But these responses are hardly visible to most people. Of course, the thread is still online years later, but since people today generally only use social media apps, they no longer see these responses, no matter how valuable they may be. If anything, they only perceive these delayed responses as part of the data sets of LLMs – but then mostly without reference to the original content.
I mean, the quality of content hardly matters if you’re late. If you waited just one day to respond to this post, no one would notice your comment.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I will consider the matter further.
It is exactly as you say: Lemmy is, of course, excellent and absolutely worthy of support. I am just not entirely sure whether my contribution will actually end up in development. However, I will have to live with this uncertainty. I just find it problematic that .ml stands for pretty much the opposite of why I want to support Lemmy — namely, free discourse free from political influence by the platform itself. That’s simply not the case with .ml, because their moderators only allow their own narrow-minded views — and I fear that this approach is supported by the developers.
Nevertheless, the software itself remains worthy of support, you’re absolutely right about that.
Thanks for the reminder, I think I’ll take a look around.
I didn’t realize that I was banned from .ml. Am I? Anyway, that’s not the point. My point is to support technology that allows free expression, especially since that’s not the case with mainstream platforms. And by free expression of opinion, I mean what is commonly understood by that term – not baseless insults, accusations, conspiracy theories, or anything else that lacks any factual basis. I mean the free expression of legitimate, debatable opinions. That should be the most natural thing in the world.
I just don’t want my opinion to be censored for political reasons. That’s what I had hoped for from Lemmy – not some propaganda bullshit. Do you really see this platform as a counterpart to Truth Social? If so, then I’m in the wrong place, because I’m interested in exchanging opinions and arguments, not in having my opinion confirmed.
I already do that. So stop supporting Lemmy developers and only support the instance?
Is it my fault if a comment I posted is removed by .ml-Mods simply because it states that there can be no justification for terrorism?
Honestly, I can’t support that. Do you see it differently?
10·2 months agoUsually, it’s just another term for the same thing, I would say.
There was indeed an explosion in this true story, but…
I mean everything that falls under the term social media as of now, which includes Lemmy as well as reddit.
And this is precisely the problem I see: The internet is a medium that implies mutual exchange - it is a social medium - this was already the case before the advent of so-called social media in the mid 2000s, a term that was coined to distinguish between classical mass media and “user generated content”, meaning posts and comments by people who are not directly involved with the “Host” of the content.
Now, however, we have the problem that the term, at least in the broad sense, describes services that, in my opinion, do not stand for free exchange between equals, but instead function more like traditional mass media, such as television stations or magazines and newspapers - they are centrally controlled and do not allow open discourse just as publishing media of old did.
The Fediverse is structured differently -more like the old internet, but for applications that people would call social media today. I don’t think the difference can be made clear by insisting that Fediverse apps are in fact much more in line with social media than what the term really describes for most people (meta, tiktok, LinkedIn and the like).
So I think the term is burned and we need a new one that is understandable to the general public and clearly distinguishes the Fediverse from todays’s so-called social media.
The thing is, however, that it will be difficult to find a term that describes social media without using this very term, which is likely to cause confusion with services that today are actually more akin to traditional mass media, which did have letters to the editor but were not in the least “social” in a sense of exchange between equals.