This might be relevant but I do not know how:

https://permacomputing.net/

That doesn’t really change my position since I’ve seen many unironically and seriously advocate for being the aggressors. And like I said elsewhere, current progressive agenda doesn’t make a lot of sense because its whole identity is being the opposite of MAGA with a whiff of the ideals that once were core to it.

WTF I looked for something like this for a while and this never popped up. Awesome.

It doesn’t matter what MAGA does or what MAGA is, progressives need to define themselves independently of that. But a popular workers movement it is not. That crown for right or wrong belongs to MAGA.

That’s not the managerial class.

The managerial class are the office employees, very generally “knowledge workers”.

This is proof that the current progressive agenda causes the same kind of brain rot MAGA does.

The first thing is that progressives need to stop being intellectually dishonest. The movement needs to admit that the world view is a technocratic one in which the best course of action given the evidence available is the one that will guide the decisions of the movement, not popular sentiment.

As of right now the progressive agenda looks like a mass of contradictions whose only identity is opposition to MAGA and the right with such intensity that the right has in fact co-opted many of the stances that traditionally belonged on the left, losing the support of the working class.

Seen through a Marxist lens, it is not surprising, the progressive movement in the US is not a worker’s movement but rather a managerial class movement.

This “study” is biased by design. But also even if it weren’t , one study does not prove anything. You’d need a lot more evidence than that.

Oh for fucks sake, you keep using the same trite examples of shithole websites instead of looking at the place you’re at. I already told you, lemmy has a pretty good balance and this is where it should be as far as I’m concerned.

I don’t know what people want to be told, but I can tell you the double standards very much apply to both sides of the aisle. Like this very conversation is proof of that because the modern day American “leftist”simply defines itself in opposition to MAGA.

But even then I don’t even know why you bring that up because I’m not making an argument in favor of a side. You seem to imply that I do simply because the view I’m advocating for is often shared by the right, and because so much of the left is defined by being in opposition to MAGA then I must be defending MAGA or Trump; I guess the logic is that surely someone who disagrees with them will take every opposing viewpoint at any moment.

The fact is that heavy centralized moderation simply lends itself so that corporations can enforce whatever are the views of the current government. Which is fine they are in their right to do so, it is a private network after all. But I’m not gonna defend it no matter if it’s left leaning or right leaning because it just doesn’t seat right with me being dictated by a corporation what is correct enough for me to hear and see, and I will always move to the platform that has the least amount of paternalistic attitudes towards its users. Thats it, that’s the bottom line.

If you prefer heavy moderation and an enforced point of view of the world then that’s fine, there are plenty of social media networks with that approach. Just look at hexbear or r/conservative. No one is taking away your right to be dictated to.

No they weren’t but they sure as fuck weren’t banning people for slurs either except the few really socially unacceptable ones. It was a good balance.

Also who’s the YouTube historian you cite? Because I was there too and I know exactly how it was. Lemmy has the right amount of moderation imo most of it enforced by users themselves as it should be.

Also I’d like to add, since you keep bringing it up, that 4chan often had more stringent moderation than other websites because on-topic discussions were strictly enforced. Outside of the adult boards (I forget their name, blue boards was it?) stuff like gore, porn etc was not allowed at all.

Fuck your paternalistic bullshit is all I have to say. Let people say whatever they want, let society decide what is acceptable or not. Not fucking corporations.

This is revisionism of the highest degree. Everyone knows Google et al were very heavy handed at dealing with any dissent with the liberal agenda, for the lack of a better term. Facebook fired Luckey Palmer because he supported Trump! That’s how far the tech industry went to protect left wing views and for the best part of the last decade.

And no one is being allowed to say any of those words on any major social media. Hell my comment up there that says faggot would have gotten me suspended in all the major social media. So stay grounded and stop making shit up.

Its mind boggling that these are the same people who will claim the corporations are oppressing them but in the same breath they ask for seconds. The political tribalism is so great right now that people don’t even realize how contradictory their narratives and views are I guess.

True which is why I think an upvote/downvote system is the best form of moderation. Of course there are things you cannot allow, but it’s mostly the illegal stuff. I’m for low moderation, not no moderation. Facebook et al were not doing low moderation, it was heavy handed and unnecessary.

If that’s the case, it should be easy enough for you to come up with an actual argument against it.

There’s no speech police in the real world, you don’t need it online either.

I’m in the US, we have advertising for everything. I haven’t thought about this to be honest. Because advertising medicine feels wrong to me, but at the same time I don’t have much of an issue with advertising alcohol or even tobacco. I think I would allow them with the caveat that for every dollar invested in their advertising the companies also have to invest in a fund for advertising responsible drinking etc. makes it expensive to advertise, but not illegal nor difficult.

I’m for banning or regulating the alteration of products in such a way that they become more addictive than they would naturally be, but in terms of things themselves I don’t think anything being illegal or heavily regulated to the point it is almost illegal solves any issues. So for example smoking being prohibited in public spaces makes sense because you are forcing others to smoke with you; but who exactly is harmed by gambling except the one gambling? Will they stop gambling if it is illegal? Probably not. So for me the historical evidence tells me that prohibiting the supply of anything while the demand exists simply causes black markets to pop up, which cause infinitely more issues than the thing itself being legal. So I’m pretty much against making any of these things illegal.

Limit the age to which the thing is accessible and put some taxes on it that fund awareness of addiction and programs to help people recover from addiction.

In terms of social media I think the regulation should be that by default the algorithm is simply “chronological “ ie it shows you everything posted by everyone you follow in the order they posted it. Then there can be a discovery or suggestion algorithm as a separate feed but it should be fully open so that anyone with the technical know how can pin point exactly what signals it is using to suggest content. I think that would go a long way.

Most of lemmy is like that already.

No it isn’t. Technology is the evolutionary adaptation of humanity. It would be like a tiger cutting off its claws, or a rabbit breaking its own legs.

This left wing Luddite attitude is simply fueled by fucking tribalism because it wasn’t really anywhere to be found until the tech bros turned republican.

That’s no moderation, which isn’t the same as low moderation. Meaning there’s a few red lines that will get you banned.

If people wanna say faggot, they shouldn’t be banned for life from a site. If they want to talk about how Biden is a transdimensional vampire that eats virgins, let them do so fuck it.

A simple vote and downvote system solves many of the issues with over moderation because it’s how it works in the real world. You can say any dumb shit you want at any moment and people will react positively or negatively. It’s simple and elegant and doesn’t push people into forming their own sites and communities where their dumb ass ideas won’t get challenged at all which leads to them reaching the mainstream as it is happening now.

1. consoles have mods these days, though they do need developer support

2. not everyone cares about mods, I’d go out on a limb and say most pc players don’t use mods

3. this new Xbox thing is not an OS, it’s an app. The device still has full windows in there and it is accessible. But when you’re using the Xbox app windows suspends many of its functions.

The next Xbox will simply be a prebuilt PC and it won’t be subsidized (or it will be subsidized less) so expect a $700-$900 price tag for the Series X, and a $500 for the Series S. It wouldn’t make sense any other way. Steam et all will be usable, as it is usable in the Xbox Ally as well.

Now tell me what would you rather buy? The PS5, which is absurdly locked down (even more so than the current Xbox when it comes to mods)? Deal with the gpu market shenanigans? Or buy the prebuilt Xbox PC that lets you play all your Steam games as well?

It’s fucking genius.