opsec tho

I haven’t checked in some years but iirc the dynamic is a little different since consensus is maintained with verbal abuse and soyjak memes moreso than moderation, and it’s common to false flag an opposition perspective to bait angry engagement.

Fractals kinda suck tbh, just the same shape lazily repeated infinitely

Yes, much too difficult

I would totally use xe/xer if doing so wouldn’t be hugely distracting from whatever topic I’m actually talking about, those words have a nice scifi vibe to them.

Yeah, I mean, she’s a cop

Ah I see, makes sense. With one of those full led strips I think it would be tough to cram everything in there if you’re leaving the outlet in tbh, I installed a wifi controller for an outlet a while ago and even just that seemed like kind of a tight fit. Idk how to realistically do it smaller though.

If you have to plug it in though it’s gonna be kind of obvious, might want something powered by a coin battery so you could put it behind the outlet plate without the risk of actually messing with wiring anything up

From what I can tell a lot of this is just Twitter culture. It is totally possible to have a debate where the point is exploring the ways your ideas do and don’t make sense rather than purely trying to “win” by addressing a crowd with propaganda and rhetoric, it’s just that the internet has trended strongly towards the latter over the years.

I agree with OP in that I wouldn’t try to debate people on Twitter either. That doesn’t mean debate has no value though, you just need to figure out where your line is for when it isn’t going to be worth responding, and then do the hard part of actually committing to that.

So what would happen if you fell

The allegation in regard to TikTok isn’t ‘dangerous speech’

…On the very surface level, sort of.

Romney replied, “Some wonder why there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down potentially TikTok or other entities of that nature. If you look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians, relative to other social media sites — it’s overwhelmingly so among TikTok broadcasts.”

The allegation in regard to TikTok isn’t ‘dangerous speech’, it’s the platform’s collection of user data and the manipulation of available content via an algorithm that they claim is a tool of a hostile foreign entity.

If the US government really cared about collection of user data and manipulation of content, they could demand things like increased transparency and open protocols for social media. Instead, they are here requiring that the issue be redressed with TikTok being shut down or handed over to a company subject to direct US influence and control.

This is indistinguishable from an act of censorship. If the government is intimately connected with the people and companies running the oligopoly of services which control moderation of virtually all public discourse in the US, when it uses force to defend that oligopoly and eliminate competition that is not in the club it is abridging the freedom of speech, even if it is doing so through one layer of proxy.

Oh, the way I read it it seemed like they were saying perceptual hashes used to be easier to calculate

Why “no longer”?

Awful

They go into this in the filing:

Under both the Prepetition TOS and the Current TOS, all right, title, and interest in and to X Corp.’s services, including X Corp.’s various websites, SMS, APIs, email notifications, applications, buttons, widgets, ads, commerce services, and other covered services (collectively, the “Services”) are X Corp.’s “exclusive property.” See Prepetition TOS § 4; Current TOS § 4. X Corp., as the owner of the Services, grants each user “a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non- exclusive license to use the software provided” to use the Services. See Prepetition TOS § 4 (emphasis added); Current TOS § 4 (same). In contrast to the Services, the account holders own the Content (as defined in the TOS) they submit, post, or display on or through the Services; however, the Content is distinct and separate from the Services.

So I guess the account itself is something they’re saying is part of the Services X provides and is their property, while the stuff you post on the account is yours.

This problem can be seen clearly on Reddit where blocking works this way, frequently abused by spammers and powerusers.

Sometimes I have one more thing worth saying, but think the right choice would be to let the other party to the conversation have the last word, but also know that if I get notified later with a response I’ll be tempted to keep responding even though there’s not going to be anything that hasn’t already been said.

Almost anything else or nonexistent. Maybe a way of filtering lazy, unhelpful, or uncivil comments. Downvotes being a disagree button just seems blatantly toxic. Expressing disagreements calls for using actual words.

Reddiquette was the worst thing that ever happened to internet culture

I can agree that they end up being a disagree button in practice, but you’re saying they should be a disagree button?

changing how its “block” button works. That option previously allowed users to hide their profile from certain accounts – but will no longer do so.

So I guess all that stuff they did to lock down the ability to see things on Xitter without an account was strictly for evil then