Change your brain

    • LeftistLawyer@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Dude, if you can find a bot whose job it is to disparage the very environment that let’s bots exist then let me know. Viva la meatspace! Viva la luddites!

  • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Not the internet, but billionaire controlled platforms. The Internet is one of the best tools ever for fighting against centralized power!

      • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        21 hours ago

        It allows individuals to distribute content to a network of hundreds of millions of people, with a very low barrier to entry, and in ways that are not centrally controlled. If my government is banning certain types of speech or information, websites in other countries may still be accessible with it. People in my own country may even make sites with that information, as it’s fairly easy to bypass those laws. The Internet holds all sorts of content that pisses off billionaires. Piracy, privacy tools, the Internet Archive, government document leaks. Think how I can read about the Epstein files so easily by searching or asking about it here on Lemmy - and then think about how much harder it is for me to find that information from a news company, if it’s even possible at all. Why do you think governments and billionaires around the world are so eager to monitor and centralize and rewrite the fundamental workings of the internet? They are coming after the internet because it is a threat to them.

        I look forward to your counterargument.

        • LeftistLawyer@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          21 hours ago

          “Content” … Ohhhhh … what in the world did we do before “content.” Just hafta have more of that “Content.”

          Silly little screen time fiend.

        • LeftistLawyer@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Right. “[H]undreds of millions of [really really stupid] people” who don’t habve the cognitive capacity to do anything useful with the information but conspiracy theorize.

          Where is all the miraculous positive benefit to society of this magical tool designed by billionaires to sell you shit you don’t need?

          If it’s doing all this good … where is the good? All it’s done is concentrate power. And you continue to aid and abet it.

          Bravo.

          It was a good idea. Then the billionaires hijacked it for their own purposes. Now, we live in reality and you sound like a naive 3rd grader who believes all the pap propaganda you’re fed.

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            You seem to think that internet = web. And even then web = social networks.

            That’s a very dwindled take on the whole thing. Your takes are entirely correct on social networks and maybe search engines (when they stopped being actual search engines) too, but that’s such a subset of Internet as a whole.

          • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            21 hours ago

            I don’t have time to fully respond to this right now, but I just wanted to say that I do understand and sympathize with the things you’re bringing up here. I was hoping to engage with you politely, and my feelings are hurt by your insults, but I understand your anger. When I said I look forward to your counterargument, I meant that earnestly and respectfully. I’m sorry for upsetting you with my reply - I was hoping to lend an angle of positivity to you that you may not have considered, not discount your own view.