Americans are, apparently, tired of having every last shred of personal data over-collected, hyper monetized, then improperly secured by a rotating crop of ethics-optional corporations and lazy exe…
Relax bidey-bro, this thread is about data privacy laws, not general stuff. The only relevant one I’m aware of is DMCA, which was in fact signed into law by Bill Clinton.
It’s unbelievable how any time somebody starts complaining about “echo chambers“ it’s basically an argument for how they are entitled to somebody else’s attention.
When you go out for drinks or dinner or some other social activity, do you always make sure to invite people with beliefs and practices that are diametrically opposed to your own? Do you not mostly keep friends in your orbit who largely agree with you and your values?
I have family I don’t agree with. I have colleagues I don’t agree with. Yes, I also have friends I don’t agree with. But these echo chamber arguments are almost exclusively used by the right to say “you have to listen to me because it’s a moral imperative” then whenever someone like me tries to show them the door, they scream about echo chambers as if they aren’t the problem.
No, we don’t have to keep these people around. I don’t have to listen to every opinion or argument that I disagree with every single time. Sometimes I’m just going to tell people to fuck off and hang out with people who aren’t actively trying to upset me.
Great analogy but how does that even remotely apply to this scenario where you replied to someone else’s comment and then didn’t like the response followed by someone telling you to just block people when they aren’t part of your in-group of folks who think exactly like you?
This is social media not a dinner party and this is exactly how people wind up in social media echo chambers.
I can decide to block someone after they reveal more of themselves or otherwise turn nasty. You’re still reinforcing a false moral imperative. I am allowed to have communities and spaces that are primarily people I agree with. I don’t need everything to be challenging me all the time.
Seems pretty sleazy if you’re the one instigating the challenge and then running away by blocking someone if they respond to you. Furthermore, you created an entire strawman argument with your initial reply as if the Democratic party is filled with a bunch of saints that are above reproach. This is exactly what MAGA supporters do when people criticize Trump which is why I bring up sycophants and echo chambers because that’s exactly how those people wound up in the state they’re in.
I’m with Shepard on this one, even if he’s being a jerk about it.
Lemmy is a filter bubble, an echo chamber. You miss information that would be personally important to you, but is excluded because it doesn’t fit with the US Democrat party line, and the very specific part of it Lemmy’s politically active base likes.
Like, I’m a raging Trump hater, but I’m kind of aghast at how many knee jerk reactions (like, to me, your original reply) I get when I imply something vaguely critical about the Democrats.
If you spend your entire time and get all your information on lemmy then you have a bigger issue beyond some echo chamber internet communities. Really and truly.
Demonizing spaces for like minded people to congregate doesn’t solve that.
Demonizing spaces for like minded people to congregate doesn’t solve that.
If this is a polite way of saying “go somewhere else to lightly criticize democrats,” I don’t accept that. I can at least hope Lemmy can do better, and try to change it.
Of course having a good information diet is critical. But that’s besides the point? I don’t think this thread would be a thing if all our information diets were great.
Relax bidey-bro, this thread is about data privacy laws, not general stuff. The only relevant one I’m aware of is DMCA, which was in fact signed into law by Bill Clinton.
You’re trying too hard
@SteveFromMySpace @crusa187@lemmy.ml
I just immediately block people who use terms like bidey-bro.
Life it too short and my feed is too long.
As if surrounding yourself in an echo chamber of sycophants is the better solution. It sure works well for MAGA folks.
It’s unbelievable how any time somebody starts complaining about “echo chambers“ it’s basically an argument for how they are entitled to somebody else’s attention.
When you go out for drinks or dinner or some other social activity, do you always make sure to invite people with beliefs and practices that are diametrically opposed to your own? Do you not mostly keep friends in your orbit who largely agree with you and your values?
I have family I don’t agree with. I have colleagues I don’t agree with. Yes, I also have friends I don’t agree with. But these echo chamber arguments are almost exclusively used by the right to say “you have to listen to me because it’s a moral imperative” then whenever someone like me tries to show them the door, they scream about echo chambers as if they aren’t the problem.
No, we don’t have to keep these people around. I don’t have to listen to every opinion or argument that I disagree with every single time. Sometimes I’m just going to tell people to fuck off and hang out with people who aren’t actively trying to upset me.
Great analogy but how does that even remotely apply to this scenario where you replied to someone else’s comment and then didn’t like the response followed by someone telling you to just block people when they aren’t part of your in-group of folks who think exactly like you?
This is social media not a dinner party and this is exactly how people wind up in social media echo chambers.
I can decide to block someone after they reveal more of themselves or otherwise turn nasty. You’re still reinforcing a false moral imperative. I am allowed to have communities and spaces that are primarily people I agree with. I don’t need everything to be challenging me all the time.
Seems pretty sleazy if you’re the one instigating the challenge and then running away by blocking someone if they respond to you. Furthermore, you created an entire strawman argument with your initial reply as if the Democratic party is filled with a bunch of saints that are above reproach. This is exactly what MAGA supporters do when people criticize Trump which is why I bring up sycophants and echo chambers because that’s exactly how those people wound up in the state they’re in.
You’re mischaracterizing this pretty flagrantly.
I’m with Shepard on this one, even if he’s being a jerk about it.
Lemmy is a filter bubble, an echo chamber. You miss information that would be personally important to you, but is excluded because it doesn’t fit with the US Democrat party line, and the very specific part of it Lemmy’s politically active base likes.
Like, I’m a raging Trump hater, but I’m kind of aghast at how many knee jerk reactions (like, to me, your original reply) I get when I imply something vaguely critical about the Democrats.
If you spend your entire time and get all your information on lemmy then you have a bigger issue beyond some echo chamber internet communities. Really and truly.
Demonizing spaces for like minded people to congregate doesn’t solve that.
If this is a polite way of saying “go somewhere else to lightly criticize democrats,” I don’t accept that. I can at least hope Lemmy can do better, and try to change it.
Of course having a good information diet is critical. But that’s besides the point? I don’t think this thread would be a thing if all our information diets were great.
That’s an absurd interpretation of what I said. There is no way you actually think that’s what said.