this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
675 points (87.4% liked)
Technology
58485 readers
3969 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Can we take a step back for a second and think about the human condition that led someone to need a moral argument to get off X? What kind of pathetic, fucked up mind do you have where you can't just uninstall the app you have to appeal to morality.
Well there is a difference between disliking something and believing it is actively harmful. If you believe it is actively harmful for humans and society, it makes sense that you want to appeal to the society as a whole. Then you need to reason for why you feel the way you do. And there we go.
Facebook causes genocides in every 3ed world nation they push into.
social media is, as it is now, designed to push the worst. most racist, most murderous rhetoric because it garners more engagement.
I am not saying you are wrong, nor right, but I am wondering why you tell me/us that now, here.
because what makes Elon harmful for humanity is basically the same thing that makes Facebook harmful, massive uncontrolled influence on society
Well it depends on what you see as an acceptable cost of the benefits of social Media. You could easily find differences between platform, in their function and in their moderation. These differences might be valid reasons to give it a different evaluation.
But in case, you want to argue about whether or not Twitter is moral; and/or whether or not Facebook is as bad as Twitter, I am not interested in the discussion and my points weren't made in support of the position that Twitter is harmful but only in "defense" of people voicing their moral evaluation of social Media.
My assumption would be the purpose is to shame people.
I don't think someone publishes an article to try to convince themselves to not use it. Of course it's to convince other people why to not use it.
This 100%! I barely used Twitter to begin with, but as soon as he went off the deep end, I completely deleted my account.
This whole twitter thing is like some lib version of a moral panic. Who cares, just get off it if you don't like the experience. But no, they all need to tell everyone how this makes them so morally pure.
Moral panics are over things that don't have negative real world consequences.
We've repeatedly seen what happens when disinformation and violent, extremist speech is given a place to flourish on social media. The crazies get even more radicalized, organized, and emboldened. They start taking actual action.
Qanon, the proud boys, unite the right, patriot front, January 6th -- where do you think those ideas gestated and grew to critical mass?
4chan?