this post was submitted on 17 May 2024
347 points (95.1% liked)

Technology

58513 readers
3906 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MeekerThanBeaker 144 points 4 months ago (5 children)

On the one hand, I hope he loses.

On the other hand, I hope Meta also loses.

Something tells me we are the ones who lose.

[–] Snapz 26 points 4 months ago

And on the brain... Worms!

[–] breakingcups 17 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Regardless, the lawyers win.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SlopppyEngineer 6 points 4 months ago

"When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MushuChupacabra 71 points 4 months ago (3 children)

The brain worm is up to something...

[–] TropicalDingdong 27 points 4 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_ 52 points 4 months ago (2 children)

There is no freedom of speech guarantee in private or public enterprise. Only government.

Yet another tool that uses “freedom of speech” incorrectly to basically mean “I want to force people to listen to my bullshit.” How these people running for office don’t get the first amendment is amazing.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Yet another tool that uses “freedom of speech” incorrectly

Often freedom of speech is a moral ideal, a moral aspiration, and dismissing it on legal grounds is missing the point.

If I say "people should have a right to healthcare", and you respond "people do not have a legal right to healthcare", you are correct, but you have missed the point. If I say people should have freedom of speech and you respond that the first amendment doesn't apply to Facebook, you are right, but have again missed the point.

In general, when people advocate for any change, they can be countered with "well, the law doesn't require that". Yes, society currently works the way the law says it should. But what we're talking about is how society should work and how the law should change.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago

Okay, but you don't win lawsuits based on how the law ought to be

[–] Dkarma 7 points 4 months ago

The thing is people shouldnt have that level of "freedom of speech"

No one is above reproach.

[–] RememberTheApollo_ 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

That’s lovely, and I appreciate the sentiment. It doesn’t change the fact that someone abuses the term in order to force others to listen to BS. I’m not opposed to the ideal, I am opposed to the expectation that people have a right to make you listen to them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There is no freedom of speech guarantee in private or public enterprise.

And the consequence of this policy is a back-door path to censorship. A combination of surveillance, selective-admittance, and media saturation allow certain ideological beliefs to suffice the "marketplace of ideas" while others are silenced.

“I want to force people to listen to my bullshit.”

Its more that privatized media infrastructure allows for a monopolization of speech.

Big media companies still force people to listen to bullshit, by way of advertising and algorithmic promotion. Go on YouTube, click through their "recommended" list a few times, and you'll quickly find yourself watching some Mr. Beast episode or PraegerU video, simply because these folks have invested so heavily in self-promotion.

But there's a wide swath of content you won't see, either because YouTube's algorithm explicitly censors it for policy reasons, because the media isn't maxing out the SEO YouTube execs desire (the classic Soy Face thumbnail for instance), or because you're not spending enough money to boost visibility.

This has nothing to do with what the generic video watcher wants to see and everything to do with what YouTube administration wants that watcher to see.

RFK Jr is a nasty little freak with some very toxic beliefs. But that's not why he's struggling to get noticed on the platform, when plenty of other nasty freaks with toxic beliefs get mainstream circulation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BigTrout75 32 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Really don't need to hear anything coming from this guy. It's always batshit crazy and it's a waste of time.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I remember seeing be was a guest on Rogan and thinking, "Oh, wow. I guess I'll listen to Rogan again this one time to hear a Kennedy talking."

Turns out it was right on fucking brand for Rogan.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 4 months ago (5 children)

So what? How does he think Meta is liable for anything here?

[–] proper 14 points 4 months ago

it’s gotta be posturing for his base “lone hero stands up to big tech”

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago

He lets the worm do the thinking.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] _lilith 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Man talking to himself accuses company of action they are allowed to perform

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You can't get elected without big tech bribes, and he just bit the hand that feeds.

[–] jeffw 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It’s ok. He can’t get elected anyway

[–] ours 17 points 4 months ago (3 children)

He'll never recover after the death of his running mate: VP Brain Worm.

[–] FlyingSquid 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Don't worry, VP Brain Worm laid eggs.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Fedizen 19 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Let them fight. I want a discovery on this

[–] jeffw 7 points 4 months ago

I’m betting this gets dismissed before discovery

[–] drmoose 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Shadow banning is definitely too much imo. It's simply unethical no matter how you look at it.

First, it doesn't do anything to prevent bots. It takes less than a second for a bot to check whether they are shadow banned. It's simply a tool to bully and gaslight people - just block them. Why these abusive games?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (18 children)

IDK, I think it can be an effective tool against trolls because it wastes the time they'd otherwise spend harassing people.

But that's not what RFK is, he's a legitimate candidate for president and should be given the same consideration other candidates are, not shadowbanned because someone doesn't like his message.

[–] JustZ 10 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Nothing legit about him. He has no chance.

[–] dhork 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He's legit in that his campaign went through the process to get on the ballot in certain states. That has nothing to do with his chances.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] Sorgan71 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

bro he looks like the heavens gate guy

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

He could have been a great dude but he just HAD to go down the antivax rabbit hole. Fuckin’ shame.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago

Real life Connor Roy soldiers bravely on.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›