chicken @ chicken @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

0

Comments

1,235

Joined

2 yr. ago

IMO this is mainly only a problem because Lemmy is small enough that everyone is browsing all and there's no realistic natural separation of users. Going private is an extreme solution with high likelihood of it just dying as a result.

Also recently got banned from c/imageai for downvoting “too much”?

My guess is it's because there are a bunch of people who hate AI in general, and they want votes to instead reflect which images people like or don't like for what they are instead of every post having a negative score.

The detail that negative reviews warning of the danger kept getting removed or edited is really sinister

Nope definitely not why would I do that to myself

this will force us humans to go actually outside, make friends, form deep social relationship, and build lasting, resilient communities

There is no chance it goes that way, how is talking to people outside even an option for someone used to just being on the internet? Even if the content gets worse, the basic mechanisms to keep people scrolling still function, while the physical and social infrastructure necessary for in person community building is nonexistent.

This is the good kind of AI that’s actually useful instead of the BS AI like LLMs

lol, trying to hedge against downvotes from the anti-AI crowd?

A comprehensive surveillance state + a small number of people operating many combat drones seems like a solid counter to the ability of the people to revolt that history has not seen before, especially if their labor is also not needed

I doubt the school administrators who would be buying this thing or the people trying to make money off it have really thought that far ahead or care whether or not it does that, but it would definitely be one of its main effects.

idk I think Machiavellian speeches are fun, in particular if the topic is not about actually hurting anyone

I count 32 total shots, this seems like a potentially fatal game

why are you judging peoples countries based on your view that governments shouldn’t force people to do things?

Because that's what this thread is for, sharing thoughts on compulsory voting.

in fact you’re judging peoples’ lived experience and opinions based entirely on your own narrow views of government

Rather I'm saying that just because people approve of something doesn't mean it's good. If you think governments forcing people to do things is something to be embraced in general, and your lived experience with it is positive, that's your opinion, which is fine, but it doesn't mean that opinion is right.

yknow what else is good? taxes, fire services, disaster response, and dare i say - public healthcare and ambulances… all things im mandated to pay for along with everyone around me in case we ever need them

Agreed, but I think you're papering over some important nuance in the position I'm expressing here. I see this sort of compulsory taxation and what it buys as an example of something where the need outweighs the harm. It is ok because of how important these services are, and despite the lesser harm of making people slightly less free. If all taxes rather went to building golden statues of the president, they would be bad.

My argument against compulsory voting is premised on the idea that reduced freedom is a harm, and must be justified by some good that sufficiently outweighs it. I haven't made an argument supporting that premise, but I think it's a sufficiently intuitive and popular sentiment that I shouldn't have to. If you disagree with that premise, I think that just means we have very different values.

For visibility, here is a list of ways around youtube ads the video was supposedly banned for mentioning:

Desktop:

• https://freetubeapp.io/
• https://github.com/LibreTubeApp/LibreTube
• https://github.com/yattee/yattee
• https://invidious.io/
• Apparently searching for a youtube url in Bing.com and clicking on the thumbnail gives you the video with no ads

Android:

• https://grayjay.app/
• https://newpipe.net/

I personally use Freetube and think it's great

There are also countries with mandatory military service for all citizens where people there have a positive impression of the program and feel national pride about it, but I don't think that necessarily means it is a good practice. I think anything the government is forcing people to do should meet a high bar of not being able to accomplish the same thing any other way, because freedom is important, whether or not people know to value it.

There are less coercive ways to remove barriers to voting. Some US states send everyone ballots in the mail and you have a long time to fill them out, which removes the need to go to a specific place on a specific day; all you have to do is fill it out and put it back in the mailbox. I think that kind of thing is a better option. There are situations where there are strong reasons civic participation has to be mandatory, like jury duty, but if the only real problem mandatory voting is meant to solve is life circumstances leading people to not bother voting, there are a lot of other plausibly effective steps that can be taken instead and it isn't clearly necessary to do something that invasive.

I think it's less that they have found an "excuse" to raise prices (companies always want more money, that's what companies do), and more that they have acquired the leverage to do so. Fast food restaurants have accumulated brand recognition and customers that are psychologically attached to their products. People are less used to cooking their own food and have less time with which they might do it. We are poorer in relative wealth terms, companies are richer and more vertically integrated, we are in a worse negotiating position.

imo seems inappropriately formal

I don't have an issue with reasonable moderation, but I object to the idea that every pattern of moderation should just be accepted and that censorship isn't a problem worth worrying about.

Reddit doesn't have a modlog, so most of the removed comments are lost forever and there is no accountability for them, but a few of them can be seen through Reveddit, and the ones I see are not off topic or ideological rants. For instance the first one I see is

Are they going to shoot up the wrong car with innocent ladies in it again looking for this guy? Edit: Guess they managed to take him down without hitting any civilians, I guess good job for only killing the bad guy

Obviously referring to the Chris Dorner shootings which would be very relevant here, in a very reasonable way. I think it's fair to assume that r/news moderators simply don't want that guy mentioned at all.

It used to be a better place for arguments

I think it's actually a serious problem if the most prominent places for discussion are heavily censored

IMO for some people arguing is a form of intimacy