this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
1209 points (90.0% liked)
Technology
58795 readers
4269 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, because if you don't like it you are free to leave. The Reddit migration to Lemmy is a perfect example of that. Reddit doesn't want third party apps and can do as they please. Object, protest, whatever, but as long as you keep logging in they don't care and will keep moving forward.
Saying someone is abusing the power they hold as the service host, when participation is 100% voluntary, with nothing to personally gain, is rather moronic. They have no real power, only the perception of it.
That doesn't make it ethical or absolve the abuse of power by the host.
Owning a thing doesn't mean anything you do with it is ethical or void of any abuse. If I own something and have the community help me develop it, there are unspoken values and expectations that violating would make me a shit head and the more people I rug pull the greater the violation I put out there in the world. The more you rely on the community the more these violations matter.
And yet, it means jack all since you have 0 control over it. You can cry foul all you want, but the only thing that matters is whether or not you leave. Their power, and ability to abuse it, stems solely from that. Having a discussion of ethics when Musk is involved... Just go yell at a wall.
People have said the same thing about 'whites only' businesses in the past.
If you think Twitter is anywhere near close to being as important as civil rights you need to put the phone down and be with your family for a while.
I didn't suggest any such thing.
Then why mention whites only business as if that has any place in a discussion about social media websites? Lol
I don't know that it's worth holding your hand through an explanation of why a shitty excuse is always a shitty excuse.
You're supposed to say that line while looking in the mirror.
If you're going to make weak personal attacks, I can just block you and be done with it.
This @FlyingSquid guy is the epitome of everything that is horrible and bad about reddit.
Karma farming through automated bots : check
Making stupid horrible comments to fuel reply outrage : check
Randomly generated username adjective+noun : check
Creates "content" which is just randomly generated usernames posting stolen previously watermarked memes to places like /shitposting : check
No awareness of this egregious behavior : check
Fucking ban this clown and remove him from the gene pool
Lol right. Because we all know 'whites only' businesses appear everywhere all the time.
I also did not suggest that. Why do you keep putting words in my mouth?
What exactly was your analogy supposed to say?
Do you even understand what whites only businesses represented?
Again, I don't think it's worth holding your hand through an explanation of why a shitty excuse is a shitty excuse, especially when you make personal attacks.
Again? What? What is "again"? What personal attacks?
I'm asking you what you meant when you brought up and compared Twitter to segregation. Because you seem to have some different meaning of whites only businesses.
Double post deleted
I think arguing that massive websites can do whatever they want and no one should ever complain is pretty moronic.
You can complain, but that doesn't make it news worthy. People feel entitled to demand things of a free service. Now if you paid for it, you'd be on to something.
I mean, "they are not legally obligated to [anything]" is always a stupid argument.
This isn't a court of law, it's a public discussion
When talking about paying for a handle they give out, that's where this discussion goes. No legal obligation to pay for what they already own and can repurpose. A public discussion means nothing if you're going to just steer clear if the fact some idiots thought he'd be paid for a twit handle.
"I get to dictate arbitrary terms which define the value of any discussion which includes opinions I disagree with"
yeah... arguing what is news is usually dumb. This is a great example of that.
This is a blazingly hot take but you are entirely correct, and people need to hear it. People will scream "FUCK SPEZ" while logging in to 400 different reddit tabs daily and continuing to feed a corrupt (and soon to be) corporate entity.
I'd be more upset if this was something actually important like a government website or something people's lives depend on, but yeah, it's not. It's just entertainment. Folks need to move on.