7 ms·

This obviously isn’t the answer. But this is the year that decentralized social media will become mainstream, as a direct consequence of the actions of Faceboo

This obviously isn’t the answer. But this is the year that decentralized social media will become mainstream, as a direct consequence of the actions of Facebook, Twitter, and all of the big tech providers that are currently trying to destroy Parler. Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election is a really, really bad idea that has no possible good ending for those doing it.

the_drunkard 6y ago
> Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election is a really, really bad idea that has no possible good ending for those doing it. i do think you mean 74M? anyways i agree with you, it's a recipe for disaster. (and i'm not sure why you're being down-voted here.) it'd be much more healthy to actively engage this cohort of people; allow them to present "facts" as they see fit and offer evidence to either support or refute their views.
mrlala 6y ago
>Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election is a really, really bad idea How deep are you into things? foxnews crazy, oann crazy, thedonald crazy, or all the way to Q crazy? It's not too far to go back. Your above statement has no basis in reality. If you really want me to take the time to describe why, I'll be glad to.
orthecreedence 6y ago
> this is the year that decentralized social media will become mainstream I really hope you're right, but I am also very skeptical. For every centralized platform that a community is cut off from, another centralized platform opens to accept them. And then you have decentralized platforms that specifically build in censorship in the stupidest places [0] in an effort to stave off "rightoids." It seems most of the people building the decentralized platforms aren't actually interested in the merits of open communication or free thought, but rather pushing their inconsistent, amorphous identity politics bullshit down everyone's throats (and I'm saying this as a communist). They bring their ruling-class-approved "us vs them" mentality into the platforms they are building and try to force participants to "bend the knee" or be banished. Sure, you can run your own instance, but why would you on a platform where you're not sure where you stand? Decentralized social media platforms will need to exercise a bit more tolerance before they see mass adoption. I'm excited for things like Holochain though, which might help to turn everything on its head. [0]: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/816 https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/816
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election What country have we shifted to talking about, because no US party has 150 million people, and the one that recently lost a national election—if you apply the percentages from Party ID surveys to the whole US adult population–has about half that many who identify with it.
- throwaway2021_2 6y ago
  As a long-time observer of HN, I have noticed that many people resort to pedantry when attempting to respond to comments that they have no real way to argue with, but want to argue with them anyway. Whether the number is 150 or 75 million, it's slightly less than 1/2 of the voting public. Do you think it's a good idea to attempt to silence 40-45% of the voting public in a country as large as the United States?
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > Whether the number is 150 or 75 million, it’s slightly less than 1/2 of the voting public. No, its not. Its not even the 21% of voters who actively support the storming of the Capitol [0]. Its just the even smaller group actively advocating new and further political violence. https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/01/06/US-capitol-trump-poll https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/20...
    - throwaway2021_2 6y ago
      Really? More pedantry? We aren't talking about silencing those that "support storming of the capital". We are talking about silencing an entire party of people. Donald Trump received approximately 46.8% of the popular vote. Is that not slightly less than half of the voting public? 46.8% of the people who care about this stuff are being told that they no longer have the right to speak on platforms where it would matter. That's a very serious problem.
      - 6y ago
nawgz 6y ago
"Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election" is probably the most disingenuous representation of events I've ever seen

the_drunkard 6y ago

> Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election is a really, really bad idea that has no possible good ending for those doing it. i do think you mean 74M? anyways i agree with you, it's a recipe for disaster. (and i'm not sure why you're being down-voted here.) it'd be much more healthy to actively engage this cohort of people; allow them to present "facts" as they see fit and offer evidence to either support or refute their views.

mrlala 6y ago

>Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election is a really, really bad idea How deep are you into things? foxnews crazy, oann crazy, thedonald crazy, or all the way to Q crazy? It's not too far to go back. Your above statement has no basis in reality. If you really want me to take the time to describe why, I'll be glad to.

orthecreedence 6y ago

> this is the year that decentralized social media will become mainstream I really hope you're right, but I am also very skeptical. For every centralized platform that a community is cut off from, another centralized platform opens to accept them. And then you have decentralized platforms that specifically build in censorship in the stupidest places [0] in an effort to stave off "rightoids." It seems most of the people building the decentralized platforms aren't actually interested in the merits of open communication or free thought, but rather pushing their inconsistent, amorphous identity politics bullshit down everyone's throats (and I'm saying this as a communist). They bring their ruling-class-approved "us vs them" mentality into the platforms they are building and try to force participants to "bend the knee" or be banished. Sure, you can run your own instance, but why would you on a platform where you're not sure where you stand? Decentralized social media platforms will need to exercise a bit more tolerance before they see mass adoption. I'm excited for things like Holochain though, which might help to turn everything on its head. [0]: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/816 https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/816

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election What country have we shifted to talking about, because no US party has 150 million people, and the one that recently lost a national election—if you apply the percentages from Party ID surveys to the whole US adult population–has about half that many who identify with it.

throwaway2021_2 6y ago
As a long-time observer of HN, I have noticed that many people resort to pedantry when attempting to respond to comments that they have no real way to argue with, but want to argue with them anyway. Whether the number is 150 or 75 million, it's slightly less than 1/2 of the voting public. Do you think it's a good idea to attempt to silence 40-45% of the voting public in a country as large as the United States?
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Whether the number is 150 or 75 million, it’s slightly less than 1/2 of the voting public. No, its not. Its not even the 21% of voters who actively support the storming of the Capitol [0]. Its just the even smaller group actively advocating new and further political violence. https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/01/06/US-capitol-trump-poll https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/20...
  - throwaway2021_2 6y ago
    Really? More pedantry? We aren't talking about silencing those that "support storming of the capital". We are talking about silencing an entire party of people. Donald Trump received approximately 46.8% of the popular vote. Is that not slightly less than half of the voting public? 46.8% of the people who care about this stuff are being told that they no longer have the right to speak on platforms where it would matter. That's a very serious problem.
    - 6y ago

nawgz 6y ago

"Telling 150 million people to sit down and shut up because their party happened to lose an election" is probably the most disingenuous representation of events I've ever seen