this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
566 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

59446 readers
3572 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/4853884

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/4853256

To whom it may concern.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] schwim@lemm.ee 13 points 6 hours ago

Ah, a change.org petition . I eagerly await the sweeping improvements to life abroad.

[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

I don't like the idea of governments banning access to a website, unless its like CSAM.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

fuck CSAM, but where do we draw the line?

let laws regulate society and don't let government regulate directly.

for example, instead of banning access to X, outlaw the use of Social media in direct advertising. Make the EU market so hostile towards their business practices they can't legally operate.

then, it's "X" that refuses to operate within the laws we as a people have required, not just an over-reaching autocrat.

[–] rustydrd@sh.itjust.works 26 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

See it more like "preventing a website whose owner refuses to comply withEuropean law from operating in the EU".

[–] maplebar@lemmy.world 26 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Corporate nationalist social media like "X" (American oligarchy) and TikTok (Chinese oligarchy) are a danger to the sovereignty and stability of the Western world.

[–] KreekyBonez@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

and the reddit Russian psy-op? certainly not helping

[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 68 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Ah change.org the platform best known for not changing anything ever.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 13 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Yeah, but they're great at discharging the righteous indignation of people who might otherwise do something extreme like going on demonstrations or start campaigning for non-"moderate" political parties.

This way people just put their personal data next to a meaningless and powerless piece of text on a website alongside that of other people, get the feeling of release after having done something about what pisses them of, and won't do anything further about it.

Petitions are the single greatest invention of the Internet Age to keep the masses dormant (Social Media would've been it if, it wasn't that, as the far-right has shown, it can be used to turn some people into activists).

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 27 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Op, if you want to submit a petition to the EU, you should use their portal https://www.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/en/home not change.org

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 31 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Let's at least block the government agencies from using it in favor of open platforms and protocols to communicate with its citizens.

At least give me some good ole RSS in the backend, and they could host their own Mastodon instances that people can subscribe to from other public instances.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 15 points 14 hours ago

Let's at least block the government agencies from using it in favor of open platforms and protocols to communicate with its citizens.

Yeah. When public services solely use Xitter or Facebook pisses me off. We can and should make that shit illegal.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 5 points 13 hours ago

Germany did this years ago. Their government hosts a mastodon instance for various agencies

[–] Bruncvik@lemmy.world 71 points 18 hours ago (6 children)

Everyone who signed the petition should close their Twitter accounts. And write their newspapers that they would cancel their subscriptions if the articles quoted or embedded tweets. I didn't sign any petition, and I'm already doing it. Well, sort of. I didn't have any Twitter account ro close.

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe not quote, but embed. They should still quote noteworthy things on there, but don't force us to interact with the site

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

but that's what exactly embeds do. forcing you to interact with the site

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Maybe I wasn't clear in my comment. I think it's fine if they quote what somebody tweeted. I don't think it's fine to have Twitter embeds in articles.

Come to think of it, I should write a uBlock origin custom rule

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago

I see. wouldn't the default disabled social blocking lists block that too?

another way is to have libredirect redirect the embeds to nitter. some instances still work

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

I see. wouldn't the default disabled social blocking lists block that too?

another way is to have libredirect redirect the embeds to nitter. some instances still work

[–] militaryintelligence@lemmy.world 10 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Closed it. Viva la France!

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Agree with the first part, but news ought to still quote tweets while it exists, otherwise they cannot denounce many of the wrong things going on in there. I quote the Guardian's email I received this week (even if I prefer quoting to embedding, as tweets get deleted, and embeds brings traffic to the site):

Dear reader, Yesterday we announced that we will no longer post on any official Guardian editorial accounts on the social media site X (formerly Twitter). We think that the benefits of being on X are now outweighed by the negatives and that resources could be better used promoting our content elsewhere. This is something we have been considering for a while given the often disturbing content promoted or found on the platform. The US presidential election campaign served only to underline what we have considered for a long time: that X is a toxic media platform and that its owner, Elon Musk, has been able to use its influence to shape political discourse. X users will still be able to share our articles, and the nature of live news reporting means we will still occasionally embed content from X within our article pages. Our reporters will also be able to carry on using the site for newsgathering purposes, just as they use other social networks in which we don’t officially engage. Social media can be an important tool for news organisations and help us to reach new audiences but, at this point, X now plays a diminished role in promoting our work. Our journalism is available and open to all on our website and we would prefer people to come to theguardian.com and support our work there. You can also enjoy our journalism on the Guardian app and discover new pieces via our brilliant set of regular newsletters. Thankfully, we can do this because our business model doesn’t rely on viral content tailored to the whims of the social media giants’ algorithms – instead we’re funded directly by our readers.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] rob100@thelemmy.club 0 points 5 hours ago

They didn't ban it already? DOn't they have a filter list and they tell isps to block certain sites?

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 38 points 18 hours ago (5 children)

As much as I dislike Musk, expansion of the great firewall of Europe seems like a bad idea.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 13 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

+1

They should discourage institutions from using it (and use government Mastadon instances of course). This is honestly long overdue.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago

Yep they should keep fining him exponentially till he leaves (he obviously will never fall in line with EU rules)

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

They only need to expand it a little bit. Add a rule against Nazi websites, and enforce it. That's not restrictive very much at all. Drag has gone drag's entire life without relying on Nazi sites

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Lol. That's true. I suspect that Xitter doesn't have the staff or engineering talent left to pivot to enforce any new rules internally. It should be possible to catch them in a constant automated ban without hitting anything worthwhile.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

To operate there they would have to hire the staff back then, or not do so. That said, usually intent is all that matters, so if something gets through, so long as you showed efforts to prevent it and remove it in a reasonable manner, they would be fine.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 1 points 1 hour ago

Sure but an automated ban and manual review and removal could easily leave them blocked for more hours than not, each day.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

Eh, BlueSky seems to be actually gaining some traction now, enough so that celebs and brands are jumping ship, so maybe just give it a few months and let it rot.

[–] regdog@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago

Don't let the garbage sit until it rots. It will attract flies and possible more garbage.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 15 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Block? No.

Ask public law institutions to not use it. Maybe.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

This is all they have to do

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 15 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I'm glad they at least name mastodon and not bluesky as an alternative.

[–] justhach@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Whats wrong with bluesky? Ive been using it fornthe past week and its definitely more intuitive and accessible for the average joe than Mastodon.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 9 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Blue sky has an owner and investors, right?

Publicly funded organizations should be required to use open solutions.

If they want to also replicate what they post somewhere open to BlueSky and Xitter, and Facebook, so be it.

That said, I could see carving out an exception for BlueSky if it provides the full open stack (public unauthenticated HTML, RSS, federation, etc ), and only while it does so.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 13 hours ago

I can't run my own bluesky instance. Its literaly the same problem as X

[–] tahoe@lemmy.world 12 points 19 hours ago

Petition calls to ban world hunger

[–] index@sh.itjust.works -3 points 9 hours ago

European politicians use X and its an assets for their governments. I doubt they are going to do much about it.

load more comments
view more: next ›