masterspace

Lol bruh, have some self reflection. People do it because it's easier. If you have the time to have all the hobbies that other people have and to roll your own home servers that's great, but that means you have an above average amount of free time. Otherwise, other people have hobbies that don't include server OS updates and choose to spend their time there and pay for someone else to manage their servers.

We're not talking about every possible aspect of life. We're talking about the choice we make in how we consume news. One way leads to more of a filter bubble, one way leads to less of one. Everything else you're saying is just besides the point justification for why you wanna choose the one that leads to more of a filter bubble.

No, OPs point was that they can block people they disagree, with the person above in this thread brought up Nazis when people pointed out how toxic that behaviour is in creating filter bubbles.

I.e. they brought up an extreme example at one end of the spectrum to make a point when we were discussing the spectrum more broadly

Then you are missing the point because there are tons of people who disagree with you who aren't Nazis. OP is talking about how it's great how you can only talk with people you agree with.

Even with newspapers and the like are filter bubbles possible. I am free to buy only the newspaper who writes the stories in the way I want to read them. There are left wing newspapers and right wing newspapers and stuff in between. And even with newspapers and broadcasts you are still free to only consume what you want to consume and block, by not buying or active ignoring, what you not want to see or hear. Things like cracker-barrel philosophy or Stammtischparolen where a thing long before the Internet.

Are you arguing that the filter bubble effect is the same for a newspaper and for a social media site?

Yes, the filter bubble effect is still possible to some extent with a traditional chronological news feed, but it's quite frankly absurd on it's face to claim that that is the same severity of filter bubble, when a site like Reddit / Lemmy operates by taking those chronological news feeds and filtering them further.

The Guardian might be a relatively true neutral newspaper (meaning it appears to lean left by mainstream standards), and yet articles it publishes that back up any remotely right wing / economically conservative points do not get posted here.

Echo chambers naturally arose in the past because information could not travel freely, that does not mean they are a good thing or something that we should be recreating and reinforcing on the internet now that it can.

Notice how all of those numbers are substantially larger or smaller, by many orders of magnitude, than a couple of hundred.

Are you intentionally trying to avoid understanding what I'm writing?

You are referring to literally everyone you disagree with as a Nazi. You are an example of someone who lives in a toxic filter bubble.

Then you should pick a reputable paper like The Guardian and read a chronological RSS feed. Articles that don't support Lemmys preexisting point of view don't even get posted here.

Fascist? Are you fucking kidding me? You're literally just describing newspapers, broadcast news, town criers, and literally all life pre-internet.

Filter bubbles occur because we have the ability to selectively choose to only hear news we like which is a new phenomena that is a result of the internet, because it is fundamentally a messaging system, not a broadcast system like virtually every news system throughout history.

You are just falling into the American trap that personal freedom is the ultimate good and should trump everything else, even if the systemic effects of it are bad.

Reddit / Lemmy are fundamentally not a good place to read the news and get informed because of the filter bubble effect. They're a good place to go have an in-depth discussion about an article, but if you actually want to be informed then you should use an RSS reader or something else that gives you a chronological feed, not one based on what's popular amongst people you already agree with.

Yes, it's this little thing called context, thresholds, and relative magnitude.

If your brain is only evolved to process numbers up to a hundred or two, then everything 10000+ is similarly processed through abstractions rather than your brain being able to directly comprehend and compare them.

If instead of asking a guffawing question, you actually tried to point out why my reasoning was flawed, you may have realized those basic aspects of how language and reasoning work on your own.

Being factually incorrect about literally everything you said changes nothing? Okay.

Yeah bruh, it's this little thing called being pedantic.

If I say wealth inequality is crazy, no one should have 250 billion dollars, and you say 'well actually Jeff Bezos only has 210 billion dollars', then I will be factually incorrect and my point will still be completely valid.