Permanently Deleted
Sex.
I'm 39.
☹️.
Baldurs gate 3 ruined it for the large AAA developers/publishers. People are now excepting good games like that.
Look. I don't care about the political content in a game as long as the game is good!
The issue is, these large game companies have been trying to change the mindset of gamers to accept games with less content because at the end of the day the only thing these companies want is to sell horse armour.
Looking at you five guys.
Story time. We t to five guys, go up to the country asked for a burger combo. Person behind counter says they don't have combos so I have to say out loud: lemme get a burger fries and a coke.
Like I get it but a combo is a burger fries and a coke.
Christ on a stick. What a bunch of inane self important dribble. I bet you like to fart in a wine glass and smell it.
I have stated my points clearly. The fact that media and correspondence is posted in a public or private fasion is irrelevant.
This platform and others like it are not used as classically considered social media like Facebook point blank period. The function of this platform compared to other social media platforms is not the same it is so drastically different that it should not be categorized as social media. If anything these kinds of platforms are media aggregators or as I like to call them news aggregators. Regardless of your opinions on it and anonymity does play a role here.
The definition of social media is too vague and encompasses too many kinds of websites to be considered useful.
I'm not stating my opinion I'm challenging the fact that platforms like this are considered social media and I'm stating facts as to why that is. So far the only thing you've managed to do is "I'm very smart this is what social media is defined as".
You haven't actually countered any of my points in any way shape or form.
But you are concerned about the two other people that are going to read this common thread before it gets deleted fantastic. Good on you for thinking of the Everyman.
All you're doing now is adding a modifier to suit your needs, shaping it into the definition of social media. By your logic, any website that hosts media and allows correspondence qualifies as social media. The fact that content is created by journalists (or who ever) rather than the public makes no difference under this definition.
Take ESPN.com, for example—it's not comparable to platforms like Facebook or Reddit. Yet, it hosts media and provides a slight ability to correspond. Does that make it social media? Similarly, people watching a news broadcast on cable television and then discussing it over the phone wouldn’t turn cable TV into social media, even though discussion occurs. It’s simply not defined that way.
My contention is this: a website having media and a comment section doesn’t automatically qualify it as social media. Whether it operates as a public or private forum is irrelevant.
As for my point about anonymity, it’s a critical distinction between this platform and others like Facebook and Instagram. That distinction is relevant because it highlights a key difference in how these platforms function.
More importantly, I am making a personal statement: I do not consider Lemmy or Reddit to be social media. I understand they are categorized as such, but I am stating my disagreement with that classification.
This was my response to the exact same argument you have presented, although the other person was considerate enough to not include any personal attacks in his commentary to me.
I haven't made up anything, I am simply using the definition of "social media" precisely.
In the same way, Reddit and Lemmy are categorized as social media because they share some elements traditionally associated with social media platforms. These elements are similar to features found on Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok, but are far more limited and only loosely resemble them.
The primary focus of platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok is to promote interaction and connection between users, often through real-world identities rather than anonymity. On the other hand, interactions on Reddit and Lemmy are almost exclusively anonymous and not necessarily encouraged as a central function of the platform.
By your definition, nearly anything could qualify as social media as long as it involves media and some capacity for correspondence. This broad and vague categorization dilutes the meaning of the term, making it less useful as a precise descriptor.
For this reason, I do not consider platforms like Reddit and Lemmy to be social media.
Ratio?
Look a car and a truck are basically the same thing. Visual appearance and application might be slightly different but ultimately they do the same thing one more than the other perhaps.
Lemmy and reddit don't do the same things as other social media like Facebook Instagram and tiktok.
I already had this argument with another person in his comments thread I'm not going to have it with you.
You can believe what you want you can agree disagree with what you want. Lemmy and reddit are not social media.
Cannabis is classified as a Schedule 1 narcotic because of certain properties that vaguely resemble the effects of much stronger drugs such as LSD or heroin (politics notwithstanding).
In the same way, Reddit and Lemmy are categorized as social media because they share some elements traditionally associated with social media platforms. These elements are similar to features found on Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok, but are far more limited and only loosely resemble them.
The primary focus of platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok is to promote interaction and connection between users, often through real-world identities rather than anonymity. On the other hand, interactions on Reddit and Lemmy are almost exclusively anonymous and not necessarily encouraged as a central function of the platform.
By your definition, nearly anything could qualify as social media as long as it involves media and some capacity for correspondence. This broad and vague categorization dilutes the meaning of the term, making it less useful as a precise descriptor.
For this reason, I do not consider platforms like Reddit and Lemmy to be social media.
I understand that they're categorized as such I understand they're considered social media and I absolutely disagree with that categorization.
Yes. I understand that lemmy and reddit are considered social media for classification or legal purposes or what not.
I, personally do not agree with the classification nor do I consider either platform to be social media.
I would go so far as to argue that they are not infact social media but, again, news aggregators.
I would even state firmly that their classification as social media is incorrect.
In the same sense that cannabis is categorized as a schedule one narcotic but we all know it actually isn't.
I wouldn't call this social interactions. Tress commentary between anonymous people in a comments sections hardly qualifies as social and even though it's technically an interaction it's only just.
If you compare this to say, Facebook the interaction levels massively different.
Yeah I knew there'd be one of you I don't consider lemmy or reddit social media.
I considered them to be more or less news aggregators than anything else.
Just because there's the ability to leave comments doesn't necessarily make it social media.
This is how I sleep knowing the only social media account I have is Facebook and I hardly use it.
Looks like we dodged a bullet with God of war live service.
Lots of people using libre office.
Where my open offices boys at!
I assume when you say stateless you are probably referring to the United States. Although there are other country's with states but nevertheless the same would still apply.
You gotta be from somewhere. If you're indigenous in the state of Ohio you're still a resident of Ohio in the country of America. All laws still apply.
If you're referring to something like a sovereign citizen all laws still apply regardless of what people like that may believe.
Yes
I think this person means masturbation. Which doesn't work, there is far, far better advice here than waxing the dolphin.
I can't believe we're still on this nonsense about AI stealing data for training.
I've had this argument so many times before y'all need to figure out which data you want free and which data do you want to pay for because you can't have it both ways.
Either the data is free or it's paid for. For everyone including individuals and corporations.
You can't have data be free for some people and be paid for for others it doesn't work that way we don't have the infrastructure to support this kind of thing.
For example Wikipedia can't make its data available for AI training for a price and free for everyone else. You can just go to wikipedia.com and read all the data that you want. It's available for free there's no paywall there's no subscriptions no account to make no password to put in no username to think of.
Either all data is free or it's all paid for.