Spyke

Replies

Comment on

Twitter evicted over unpaid rent

Reply in thread

Sometimes being at a company in the end times can be fun and chaotic. You have a sense of comeraderie with everyone who's going through the same thing. With the amount of overwork Musk mandates to keep his ego going, I could see everyone pretending to work hard while he's around, then fucking around, looking for new jobs, etc the rest of the time.

main

Comment on

*Permanently Deleted*

As Lemmy matures, I bet we'll get a lot more granular controls of nsfw content that shows up in your feeds. In my case, I'd like these controls:

  • hot/top/new feeds: only want to see nsfw from my instance, maybe a couple of others. Ideally there'd be tag separation between porn and general nsfw, but having too granular of tags can quickly get out of hand.
  • viewing community pages: I'd want to see everything posted, nsfw or not, if I navigate to a community itself.

I've just been blocking the communities I don't want to see as they pop up on the main feed, which has been working alright.

piracy

Comment on

Mates, today without warning, the reddit royal navy attacked. I've been demoded by the admins.

Reply in thread

Section 230 (often called the 26 words that created the internet) reads:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Wikipedia also says:

Section 230(c)(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the good faith removal or moderation of third-party material they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected."

I'm also not a lawyer so I have no clue what the ramifications for this are, but I'm guessing that Reddit isn't liable for stuff people upload as long as the illegal stuff gets removed.

If Reddit undeletes a post, could they be treated as the publisher? At the very least it sounds not very good-samaritan-y of them to do that, so maybe they wouldn't be protected in that case.

BTW, the supreme court heard a few cases centered around section 230 a few months ago! And Biden called for it to be reformed! So depending on how that goes, the internet could get shaken up soon. We're in some interesting times.

chat

Comment on

Puritanism took over online fandom — and then came for the rest of the internet

I think that the nature of modern social media platforms make this kind of moral panic It has some properties that make this kind of constant moral panic seem inevitable.

  • Huge centralized platforms: they push groups of people together that have core ideological differences. Don't get me wrong, it's healthy and beneficial for all to be exposed to beliefs, have their current set of beliefs challenged, so everyone can grow and learn from each other. But a constant barrage of critiques, callouts, challenges, etc hurts more than it helps. There need to be safe harbors so folks can just chill.

  • Engagement at all costs: Social media companies participate in the attention economy, where they make money proportional to the time people spend on the platform. Companies have to fight for your attention in order to survive. And the best way to do that happens to be through fear and anger. Bird app is incentivized to push callouts to the top of the feed.

I'm hopeful that federated communities won't have as much moral puritanism as the big platforms of today.