On Monday, Taylor Lorenz posted a telling story about how Meta has been suppressing access to LGBTQ content across its platforms, labeling it as “sensitive content” or “sexually explicit.” Posts wi…
…and they will immediately delete all your posts and ban you. It’s an authoritarian surveillance state, remember? It’s way easier to “disappear” your voice and opinion from their website than it is to remove you from reality. They have literally all the control in that space, the technology is built against you from the ground up. There’s nothing sneaky you can do that they don’t already immediately see and can shut down. They automated bots roving looking for shit like that to take down.
How is that helping again? To be immediately silenced and others never see a word you had to say? How is that helping?
In the real world they still have to black bag you and throw you into an unmarked van to disappear you, something other people will see. Facebook makes it so that the unmarked van and black bag are never seen by others.
It’s like fighting with a moderator. It ain’t a democracy and whatever choice they make is “law,” even if we are users disagree and think what they did silly. Too bad, thems the breaks. They have all the power in that situation and we don’t. Zuckerberg literally employs mountains of people just to shut up voices like yours before they get a foothold. In my view, it’s more than a waste of time, it’s literally handing an enemy resources (data) while cosplaying being helpful.
Doing dumb shit like altering your language to use words like “unalive” to get around arbitrary filters is fuck stupid too and hurts language for the sake of people like Zuckerberg. You’re not changing language to fight them, no your changing language for them instead of dumping their fucking services and using ones that don’t do stupid shit like ban the word “suicide.” Language evolves naturally, but this evolution is in direct response to censorship and it’s a bad deal.
I didn’t say you wouldn’t be at a massive disadvantage but they didn’t have functional moderation before and they’re not going to pay for it now. What’s being suggested as an alternative is flat out giving up.
What’s being suggested as an alternative is flat out giving up.
No it’s not, it’s simply not spending our time on a private companies property. Literally the Civil Rights era was bolstered by massive success of boycotts. It wasn’t giving up, it was hitting them in the pocketbook and it worked.
But you can make any excuses for yourself that you need to keep sucking down that corporate slop.
I don’t know how to reiterate that you can still talk to people in other places like Facebook, the fact that you treat it like it’s the only way to communicate with people says a lot about you and how you view the internet. It’s naive, imho.
What if people like you had convinced Martin Luther King Jr. that the Montgomery Bus Boycott was “giving up” because they “weren’t using the buses.”
On 5 December, 90 percent of Montgomery’s black citizens stayed off the buses. That afternoon, the city’s ministers and leaders met to discuss the possibility of extending the boycott into a long-term campaign. During this meeting the MIA was formed, and King was elected president. Parks recalled: “The advantage of having Dr. King as president was that he was so new to Montgomery and to civil rights work that he hadn’t been there long enough to make any strong friends or enemies”
Finally, and most importantly, you talk about breaking rules, but you haven’t even given one example of how you can do that effectively to help people. I might believe you if you were coming correct with examples, but you aren’t so I can only assume this is some foolhardy desire to do good but you have no fucking clue how. The how is the hard part, buddy, and it doesn’t come from giving in to corporate slop and giving them the money they need to keep fucking you over.
Okay. I’ll leave those patient support groups because you told me to cut contact with people using corpo media. You might not be interested in boring reasons people do what they do but that’s why common people don’t believe in honesty when you tell them you have their best interest at heart. This suggests that you only care about what’s good for people superficially and people can smell that a mile away, hence current popularity of liberal left.
Unlike yourself, I cultivated relationships with those kind of people outside Facebook, got their phone numbers, and am able to be part of a support network for them without needing to use Facebook.
Buddy I’m literally living with cancer. Check my post history, I’m not shy about mentioning it, it’s Chronic Myeloid Leukemia. The most stressful part of it is living in the US and running the risk of losing access to a medication that costs $18k a month. It may not be rare but that doesn’t make it any less of a bitch to live with.
There’s literally a good chance that if Trump is successful in repealing the ACA, that I won’t be able to come up with a way to afford it, and I will die a horrifically painful and totally preventable death within the next year of it being repealed.
I’m part of several support groups, none of which use Meta services to connect.
Not sure what’s your point really, disability olympics where we argue who has it worse? You’re advocating for people who are already disadvantaged to disadvantage themselves on purpose even more for your holy war. I’m fairly sure you have very little idea of regional context (like there’s a world outside of US) which makes this even more out of touch.
Dude, you’re the one who talked about breaking rules like a fucking hero (“Break rules and fight back.”) and then was like “oh poor me I need to support people with a rare disease,” as if breaking the rules to get a point across won’t get your account banned. Pick a lane, either you want to stand up for people on there and spread messages about the LGBT+ community being vilified (which will get you banned) or you want to be there to be a support network for people with a rare disease (which means you can’t fuck around and get banned). You started and ended with two entirely contradictory positions. One is behavior that will get you banned, the other is stuff that you really don’t want to get banned to stay involved with, you don’t get to have both on Meta. Breaking rules and fighting back will literally get you banned and then oh boo hoo hoo you won’t be able to help your support groups.
Finally, you switched gears and you brought up the disability olympics to someone who is literally suffering and still manages to support others witout using Meta. (“Unlike you people I have to connect with people with a rare disease and I don’t have a choice.”) I responded because it’s a pathetic excuse to keep sucking down Meta’ s slop and the assumptive position of “unlike you” shows you are able and willing to assume things about others without knowledge of their actual situation, just because what they said upset you somehow. Shocker that when your assumption is flat out wrong that someone will take the time to respond. Take a look in the mirror.
You’re only back because your bid to end the conversation and make yourself look superior because you’re “helping people” when you’re actually just lining Zuck’s pockets is a joke. You don’t look like you’re helping people when I’m doing the same shit without Meta, and so you needed to come back and “prove” you’re right… again. (Which you failed because you’re actually offering two entirely contradictory positions: break rules and fight back versus stay to help those in need.)
Like why do you have such a hardon for being a Facebook hero? Let it go, man. You even describe in sensationalist terms that what I’m doing is a “holy war.” All I’m doing is saying we’re never going to make headway by thinking we have a voice in an authoritarian state, which is what Meta’s servers are. Sounds to me like you’re waging a “holy war” to make sure Zuck doesn’t lose a penny of his precious billions. Next you’ll tell me it’s really important to watch FOX News, too, for the same reasons somehow.
PS I know Europe uses the hell out of WhatsApp. People are fucking idiots who like to use things that are easy to use but also easy to exploit them with. WhatsApp should have never been trusted once it was bought by Meta. It’s not my fault people keep making bad decisions because its “easier.”
…and they will immediately delete all your posts and ban you. It’s an authoritarian surveillance state, remember? It’s way easier to “disappear” your voice and opinion from their website than it is to remove you from reality. They have literally all the control in that space, the technology is built against you from the ground up. There’s nothing sneaky you can do that they don’t already immediately see and can shut down. They automated bots roving looking for shit like that to take down.
How is that helping again? To be immediately silenced and others never see a word you had to say? How is that helping?
In the real world they still have to black bag you and throw you into an unmarked van to disappear you, something other people will see. Facebook makes it so that the unmarked van and black bag are never seen by others.
It’s like fighting with a moderator. It ain’t a democracy and whatever choice they make is “law,” even if we are users disagree and think what they did silly. Too bad, thems the breaks. They have all the power in that situation and we don’t. Zuckerberg literally employs mountains of people just to shut up voices like yours before they get a foothold. In my view, it’s more than a waste of time, it’s literally handing an enemy resources (data) while cosplaying being helpful.
Doing dumb shit like altering your language to use words like “unalive” to get around arbitrary filters is fuck stupid too and hurts language for the sake of people like Zuckerberg. You’re not changing language to fight them, no your changing language for them instead of dumping their fucking services and using ones that don’t do stupid shit like ban the word “suicide.” Language evolves naturally, but this evolution is in direct response to censorship and it’s a bad deal.
I didn’t say you wouldn’t be at a massive disadvantage but they didn’t have functional moderation before and they’re not going to pay for it now. What’s being suggested as an alternative is flat out giving up.
No it’s not, it’s simply not spending our time on a private companies property. Literally the Civil Rights era was bolstered by massive success of boycotts. It wasn’t giving up, it was hitting them in the pocketbook and it worked.
But you can make any excuses for yourself that you need to keep sucking down that corporate slop.
I don’t know how to reiterate that you can still talk to people in other places like Facebook, the fact that you treat it like it’s the only way to communicate with people says a lot about you and how you view the internet. It’s naive, imho.
What if people like you had convinced Martin Luther King Jr. that the Montgomery Bus Boycott was “giving up” because they “weren’t using the buses.”
https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/montgomery-bus-boycott
Finally, and most importantly, you talk about breaking rules, but you haven’t even given one example of how you can do that effectively to help people. I might believe you if you were coming correct with examples, but you aren’t so I can only assume this is some foolhardy desire to do good but you have no fucking clue how. The how is the hard part, buddy, and it doesn’t come from giving in to corporate slop and giving them the money they need to keep fucking you over.
Okay. I’ll leave those patient support groups because you told me to cut contact with people using corpo media. You might not be interested in boring reasons people do what they do but that’s why common people don’t believe in honesty when you tell them you have their best interest at heart. This suggests that you only care about what’s good for people superficially and people can smell that a mile away, hence current popularity of liberal left.
Unlike yourself, I cultivated relationships with those kind of people outside Facebook, got their phone numbers, and am able to be part of a support network for them without needing to use Facebook.
but keep making excuses for yourself.
Unlike you people I have to connect with people with a rare disease and I don’t have a choice. Ride that high horse cowboy, it feels good for a time.
Buddy I’m literally living with cancer. Check my post history, I’m not shy about mentioning it, it’s Chronic Myeloid Leukemia. The most stressful part of it is living in the US and running the risk of losing access to a medication that costs $18k a month. It may not be rare but that doesn’t make it any less of a bitch to live with.
There’s literally a good chance that if Trump is successful in repealing the ACA, that I won’t be able to come up with a way to afford it, and I will die a horrifically painful and totally preventable death within the next year of it being repealed.
I’m part of several support groups, none of which use Meta services to connect.
Keep on making excuses for yourself man.
Not sure what’s your point really, disability olympics where we argue who has it worse? You’re advocating for people who are already disadvantaged to disadvantage themselves on purpose even more for your holy war. I’m fairly sure you have very little idea of regional context (like there’s a world outside of US) which makes this even more out of touch.
Dude, you’re the one who talked about breaking rules like a fucking hero (“Break rules and fight back.”) and then was like “oh poor me I need to support people with a rare disease,” as if breaking the rules to get a point across won’t get your account banned. Pick a lane, either you want to stand up for people on there and spread messages about the LGBT+ community being vilified (which will get you banned) or you want to be there to be a support network for people with a rare disease (which means you can’t fuck around and get banned). You started and ended with two entirely contradictory positions. One is behavior that will get you banned, the other is stuff that you really don’t want to get banned to stay involved with, you don’t get to have both on Meta. Breaking rules and fighting back will literally get you banned and then oh boo hoo hoo you won’t be able to help your support groups.
Finally, you switched gears and you brought up the disability olympics to someone who is literally suffering and still manages to support others witout using Meta. (“Unlike you people I have to connect with people with a rare disease and I don’t have a choice.”) I responded because it’s a pathetic excuse to keep sucking down Meta’ s slop and the assumptive position of “unlike you” shows you are able and willing to assume things about others without knowledge of their actual situation, just because what they said upset you somehow. Shocker that when your assumption is flat out wrong that someone will take the time to respond. Take a look in the mirror.
You’re only back because your bid to end the conversation and make yourself look superior because you’re “helping people” when you’re actually just lining Zuck’s pockets is a joke. You don’t look like you’re helping people when I’m doing the same shit without Meta, and so you needed to come back and “prove” you’re right… again. (Which you failed because you’re actually offering two entirely contradictory positions: break rules and fight back versus stay to help those in need.)
Like why do you have such a hardon for being a Facebook hero? Let it go, man. You even describe in sensationalist terms that what I’m doing is a “holy war.” All I’m doing is saying we’re never going to make headway by thinking we have a voice in an authoritarian state, which is what Meta’s servers are. Sounds to me like you’re waging a “holy war” to make sure Zuck doesn’t lose a penny of his precious billions. Next you’ll tell me it’s really important to watch FOX News, too, for the same reasons somehow.
PS I know Europe uses the hell out of WhatsApp. People are fucking idiots who like to use things that are easy to use but also easy to exploit them with. WhatsApp should have never been trusted once it was bought by Meta. It’s not my fault people keep making bad decisions because its “easier.”