I thought the same. Now plataforms have a target audience to focus. The accounts move, the artists have to follow, the rest has a reason to move as well.
I agree there’s abuse, but there are laws:
Article explaining the laws used as support / Article with historical precedent.
Both in Portuguese.
I was talking about how we always have this type of discussion frequently with my therapist earlier today. It’s always nice to pause and remind ourselves and those outside of our philosophy. One thing that I’d like to add is we might not be(e) nice sometimes because of personal circumstances. We are having a bad day and a comment will trigger a reaction that would be uncommon or we might be aggressive without provocation.
In cases we feel the need to hit back, I’d advise postponing the response by at least one hour. Give yourself time to clear your mind and think things over. And if you are the target of users having a bad day, reminding them that they are not be(e)ing nice is the alternative. Asking questions is the best. “Did I offend you?”, “Did I say something wrong?”, “I don’t understand what the issue is.” Even if they keep the aggression, they will point to the specific issue that needs to be worked on, or prove they don’t want to discuss genuinely.
Does it really work like that? I would say that they are not trying to fool any test, just getting harder to be detected. The goal being looking completely realistic.
The obvious solution on X’s side is to ID everyone that wants to post anything. And remember that the obvious solution doesn’t have to be the best solution, a good solution or, even, a real solution at all.
I’m from Brazil and a little confused. What I found is that people in the US pay for a software that simplify the process of filing taxes. Free options would be more difficult or inconvenient. But I also read it is already possible to file taxes for free, as people are eligible, which I can’t wrap my head around.
Here, as fast as I can remember, the only software comes from the government, from the time of floppy disks (provided free of charge) and Java. You can always pay a company to do that for you, but it’s so simple for the majority that we are basically consenting with the use or validating the information they already had.
He was, uh, totally asking for it.
I’ll admit that I got confused. If you visit the site, the article is a response to the research that says women also hit men. I’d argue they simply chose stories of men beating women, flipped the gender and wanted people to be outraged.
Telegram is the same. It’s the app people will migrate to because it’s the app people learned to use when WhatsApp can’t operate for some reason. Not many people there. People here are overly attached.
For the people who suggest users just change apps. Imagine I just ban all your current forms of text communication (you can still have e-mail), but only you, your family and friends will keep their ecosystems. Do you care you won’t talk to them anymore? Can you convince them to use a new app? Does it affect your life beyond social interactions? Is it worth making your life harder?
The article didn’t go in the direction I expected. Theoretically, open source software can be fixed by experts outside of the main company, but it would be very niche. The expert would need to be familiar with the specific hardware at least, have varying degrees of medical knowledge and have access to the individual in need in some cases.
Forced updates and treating medical software as no more special than a game is the problem when dealing with apps. Tag medicals apps and make it so that system updates have to be manual or go through warnings before being deployed. Offer the option to go back to a version that previously worked. Create regulations to make companies liable for malfunctions.
The problem that I see is that power comes in great part from the responsibility to educate yourself. In a community, you don’t have to know everything to contribute to its workings, but someone has, enough people do you escape the clutches of external players. Everything is quite individualist right now though. Things must just work without the help of anyone.
They can block access to the site if they don’t comply. Then people use VPN.
I don’t think it’s the same concern. It’s not that people will become pedophiles or act on it more because of the normalization and exposure. It’s people will see less of a problem with the sexualization of children. The parallel being the amount of violence we are OK being depicted. The difference being we can only emulate in a personal level the sexual side.
Maybe there’s the argument that violence is escapist, sexual desire is ever present and porn is addictive.
I think submitting the whole article will put the instance in danger of copyright strikes.
I think that’s exactly the point. The current situation is already bad, tools that reinforce the bad part of the system shouldn’t be accepted.
I think there’s something missing in this article. It sounded familiar and I remembered the old news when they mentioned Google and Australia. The issue with Google was that the news would show in the search results, which meant there’s no need to visit the source.
The reason behind the rules might help with that. Don’t be a dick and be nice are more about being respectful and understanding than following etiquette. From my point of view at least. The specific way you act is not a problem until it’s related to another person.
What I mean is that the way people perceive you is the important part. If someone accuses you of being a dick and you disagree, don’t defend your words, explain your attitude. At the same time, don’t go around accusing people of beings dicks and try to see if it’s not just miscommunication.
The letter of the law entitle people to not care for any harm they cause if it’s in their rights. Then there are the people that realize pain is what the law tries to avoid and act to correct themselves without the need of being guilty.
Twenty years ago, before I questioned anything about myself, I fell in a pattern of looking for queer friendly spaces when looking for nice clans inside games I played. It’s a shorthand for receptive spaces that I use even today.
I think of money as one form of contribution. People should contribute more instead of simply asking from a place of entitlement.
A little more seriously, we in fact start as non-binary instead of as female as it’s usually said. How nobody said that before?