My point is that it's very different from moving from WhatsApp to Signal, or from reddit to Lemmy.
Let's imagine on an instance, a community mod started flooding their /c/technology with ads and deleting any posts criticising them. And suppose the admins decide not to step in, saying it's their community and their right to do that.
How painful would it be for users to go from /c/technology over to /c/tech or /c/technology@other.site ? There is a far smaller barrier - it's basically two clicks on their side to change their comm subscriptions, they don't risk losing communication with friends or miss out on a larger site's content feeds, or have to deal with 'one more app', they don't have to learn a new tool, they just use a different community.
absolutely nothing in the Lemmy model protects communities from the admin of the instance where it was created to go full Elon
I'd say the low cost of migration does, especially if user awareness remains high (and since most users are here over complaints of the APIs being restricted, I'd say there's an above-average awareness). It's pretty easy to clone a community onto another instance, and it would be trivial for users to migrate too.
I'm curious that you said if people were really smart, they would stop giving money to Amazon, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Google, etc., and then suggest that taking their stock without giving them money is bad. This seems contradictory to me. If stealing wouldn't hurt the company, then why would not giving money be a smart thing? If not giving them money is good, stealing would just increase those loses further and also be smart.
They all claim that they’re doing it to hurt corporations.
Personally, I think hurting dominant anti-social corporations like Walmart is a smart thing for society to do, but that's besides the point. There are plenty of far more accepted reasons to steal, such as preventing starvation (like stealing basic food from supermarkets). I assert that stealing essentials is more socially beneficial than allowing oneself and dependents to starve or die, and it's far more ethical to steal from multi-billion dollar income megacorporations than other households or smaller businesses (the alternatives). I would go as far as to say they are socially obliged to steal, because they are more useful to society alive than dead and the cost to achieve that is trivial to the theft victim.
They steal enough, the store is closed, many jobs lost.
Honestly, if we're talking about companies like Walmart, then I say good that the store is closed, those workers are now forced to enter (or even recreate!) jobs which benefit society rather than destroy other local businesses. This is clearly unfortunate to those who are temporarily unemployed as a result, that's real pain and it's valid, and it's unfortunate, but the store closure is still an overall positive.
How the fuck is that hurting the corporation?
Losing sales isn't profitable. Closing a store certainly isn't profitable. If theft didn't hurt the corporation, they wouldn't spend significant money stopping it.
Furthermore, for a publicly traded company, reputation damage is real financial damage. Reporting high theft and closing stores has a real reputational impact to investors.
I conditionally disagree. In fact, there are many real situations where stealing is the right option. There are valid reasons why folk lore glorifies figures like Robin Hood. And when it comes to international conglomerates like Walmart, which hoard astronomical wealth while others who can't afford bread starve nearby, theft of the hoard is justice in its most appropriate form (if one values human survival more than legal property rights).
If we dismiss dismissals, this will go on looping forever. The person they replied to did not elaborate on some very dubious claims, and as is, are just worth dismissing.
They would understand that socialism is not communism.
Socialism has so many definitions that this can be subjectively true or false. This isn't even some trivial gotcha, the terms were used interchangeably even by significant writers of the 1800s. For another example, a socialist mode of production and a capitalist mode of production are contradictory.
If one wants to make these kind of broad claims without starting pointless arguments, they'll need to use a more specific term than 'socialism'.
In some parts of the US, people are very sensitive about 'goddamn'. It can be a cultural shock to first come across this, but it's serious religious stuff to them.
Joining an existing community is usually easier than starting a new one.
There's also the problem of management. Lots of Lemmy comms are abandoned and, while there are some I would like to exist, I just do not visit regularly enough to be responsible for moderating more and more and more communities across the fedi. So I don't create new comms.
In a way, it is. It's also much further uphill if you consider it a solo task. These are absolutely valid things to vent about, even if they are solvable.
(I felt a lot more like this before the reddit API exodus)
Few people want to cook the climate, they just can’t quite fathom something that abstract and slow-moving, so they do it anyway.
I don't think the problem is that people are unaware. Even people who believe they are against cooking the environment have other rationalisations, like "the economy isn't able to shut down all the coal plants yet, it'll collapse". Propaganda is a hell of a drug.
It's important to consider, most of the communist states which fell were couped by or at war (cold or otherwise) with the USA. So it doesn't make sense to transplant the trend of communist states falling into a scenario where their single biggest threat is gone.
“If people were smart they would stop buying the most cost-efficient option” is really not feasible.
In fact, more and more people don't have the luxury of buying more expensive options.
Of course, stealing is an option, and I think 'If people were smart' they would accept that stealing from Walmart is not an ethical or pragmatic problem, but it's a risky behavior so I wouldn't criticize people for not stealing. [edit: see Fubarberry's reply]
the fediverse is the nickname given to [instances using] the pubg protocol
Haha I'm guessing that was meant to say ActivityPub
the original instances of lemmy all have a strong leftist bent
[Bonus info]
Reddit has a history of big events when a clump of subreddits get banned all at once when a newspaper reports on them. A lot of right-wing ones went to Voat and later *.win, and some socialist ones (notably /r/GenZedong) went to Lemmygrad, which became the largest federated instance at the time. /r/chapotraphouse also made their own fork, Hexbear, although while it was the largest, it wasn't federated with the rest for years. Most instances were either hard-left (e.g. Lemmygrad, Lemmy.ml, SLRPNK) or a slight left, but tge third most populous for a while was Wolfballs, a 'free speech' instance, de facto alt-right (US right-Libertarian style instance), which ended up defederated from almost all the others due to constant bigotry and rule breaking when posting on other instances. Wolfballs admin eventually shut it down before the Reddit API exodus because, among other reasons, they realized the neo-Nazis among their users were serious and not just trolling.
Overall, the few right-leaning instances are alienated from the bulk of federation and become islands or vaporize, but most just dismiss Lemmy or even the Fediverse at large as a left wing commie thing.
On top of that, I would also be concerned about personal/private information potentially being published if they're careless about what's in the background of their footage.
comfy @ comfy @lemmy.ml Posts 29Comments 974Joined 3 yr. ago
My point is that it's very different from moving from WhatsApp to Signal, or from reddit to Lemmy.
Let's imagine on an instance, a community mod started flooding their /c/technology with ads and deleting any posts criticising them. And suppose the admins decide not to step in, saying it's their community and their right to do that.
How painful would it be for users to go from /c/technology over to /c/tech or /c/technology@other.site ? There is a far smaller barrier - it's basically two clicks on their side to change their comm subscriptions, they don't risk losing communication with friends or miss out on a larger site's content feeds, or have to deal with 'one more app', they don't have to learn a new tool, they just use a different community.