Itty53

No joke, start digging into the guys who made ancient aliens and not too long after you start seeing Nazi shit in their past. Like explicitly so, not tangentially related, not “neo” but actual Nazis. Historical revisionism is literally the basis of the show, so you shouldn’t be surprised that the main players are Holocaust deniers.

Wanna know who wrote the book the show is based on? It wasn’t Von Daniken. He only wrote the first, unsuccessful draft. Utz Utermann rewrote the second draft that actually became very popular. Guess where he was from? Guess what he was doing during WW2? Writing propaganda for the Hitler Youth and working as the editor for Nazi newspapers. I’m dead serious.

Ancient Aliens is just soft selling literal, actual mystic Nazism and it always, always, always has been.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Utermann

Big “I’m the main character” energy here. Enjoy yourself, because people around you don’t.

Just an inbox that forwards to Elon so he can laugh at inquiries. Jokes aside, they moved on this one because she was caught as a fake in big and loud fashion (WaPo) and if Twitter didn’t, they couldn’t keep up any appearance of bipartisanship. WaPo would’ve just beat the drum louder. This way Twitter hardly even has to comment, and they can deny they promoted the account.

Are you admitting you don’t even contribute and yet you deign to judge the people who do?

A fake person affected public opinion by interacting with real people, which is only made possible by society’s current relationship with social media. This was done presumably to incite and rage bait for the opposition and supposedly by an outside nation actor, making this an act of cyber warfare. One of many we’ve seen, and more each day. And guess what? The way you combat that kind of information war is by informing the public, especially that circle of people who actually build these technologies (soooo this sub, pretty much).

It is absolutely not redundant to call it a technology topic. How society interacts with and is affected by technology is an exceedingly important topic within technology and it’s continued development it we want it to be for the betterment of humanity and not the enslavement of it. Technology isn’t just how the electrons move, that’s literally only a teensy tiny part of it.

Be the change you want to see then brother, post what quality content you think ought to be seen and shared. You’re allowed to.

There you go again, pretending technology only has to do with the next breakthrough. I mean did you read what I wrote? I literally talked about that explicitly.

Technology is technology. If it’s relevant today then why shouldn’t it be here? If the US was constructing water wheels again all of the sudden it would be a technology topic and relevant to this sub.

If you don’t like it and you’re leaving, great. There’s the door, what makes you think anyone cares? Or ought to?

Imagine being so inundated in social media that you don’t even recognize it as technology anymore.

It’s the same post. You commented here twice. Which is ironic in hilarious ways. I guess you don’t quite understand this technology…

Faking a person in the digital world and then using that likeness to affect real world politics has everything to do with technology by the way. We don’t only discuss the bleeding edge of new consumer toys, it’s a pretty broad topic. And politics being the process of how people function together in society … I mean it’s gonna be everywhere.

If you want to unsubscribe I guess, bye.

The value of the Russian ruble has fallen by almost half in the last year. They have taken a severe pay cut, that ten percent doesn’t even kind of bring them up par.

Removed by mod

For the record, OP posted the article title and not a question of their own.

Yup. Remember this when they tout how threads “already has millions of users”. They’re all zombie accounts.

Ah yes, Facebook, where all the users on activity hub are from.

Wait. That’s not correct at all.

Just because it happened a once or even twice does not mean it can’t succeed despite that. Facebook doesn’t have some core of active users using there activity hub protocol that they can unplug and snuff out the protocol for. Also every implementation like Lemmy and kbin and even mastodon have custom implementation allowing additional features beyond just what the protocol itself has.

At this rate mastadon, lemmy and Kbin themselves are more likely to hinder the growth of activity hub as FOSS. They’re the ones implementing bunches of features the others have to either keep up with or defederate from. But a hundred walled gardens is still better than the one.

There’s also a lot to say about the mindset of the users. Reddit still exists. Twitter does too. So does Facebook, etc etc etc. The users here chose this over those. These are distinct differences that make the argument of the article a bit weightless. The warning isn’t weightless, and people need to be adamant that new users use different instances in order to block all this from being effective. But again, the fact that that article is shared over and over here shows the mindset of the users. We can’t stop them from federation. Protocols are protocols. That’s the point.

I’m gonna point out that the author of that article closes out with this …

In a worst-case scenario, Twitter may collapse or destabilise if certain elements within it go offline. Aside from Twitter trolls, this outcome would be in nobody’s best interest. So it’s more likely Twitter and Google Cloud will find a mutually agreeable way forward.

And offers exactly zero information to back that warning up. Just a vague hint at bias, “Google better let Twitter not pay or no one will benefit”… Doesn’t sound very objective to me.

Because I think it would be in quite a few people’s best interests for Twitter to shut down, maybe when it’s owner, but definitely a lot of users and the rest of us fed up with journalism being defined by Twitter.

Ask yourself these questions…

How long until http protocol is monetized?

How long until POP, IMAP and SMTP (collectively referred to as ‘email’) is monetized?

How long before torrents are monetized?

The answer is, quite nearly from the start you could … but anyone can still do everything you could with those protocols by themselves, for free, without any strings. Still people monetized all those things early.

Because those are all just protocol, or a digitized agreement on rules of communicating fixed sets of information. Sets like an email, or a website, or a collection of files. No one owns any of these rules they just exist and any two computers can agree on them and use that to exchange information.

Fediverse is a protocol. Lemmy, kbin, mastodon, and the others are all just programs talking the same protocols. No one allowed any of them to do so, they just agreed to. All the entities that make up the fediverse agreed to the same thing, so all of them can talk to each other, in theory. In practice each one can choose which others it wants to talk to. Just like you can build an email client that just will not send emails to Gmail. It’s not because it can’t but because it doesn’t want to.

Social media and tech aren’t the same rules. Twitter was social media, therefore most of its valuation was speculation. Markets. Stock price. Twitter actually was way ahead of the pack (was) because they offered Twitter Firehose. Active data analytics api. They were making more real revenue than any other social media outlet, per user, because of that. But the technology on that backend was not small, and they’ve driven away the devs who made it keep working.

And even still it was not enough to counteract the cost associated with being social media.

The users don’t have an obligation to care because they are the product itself. This is big tech wanting to have its cake and eat it too. Pick a business model, one.

“Don’t wrestle with pigs. You just end up covered in shit and the pig enjoys it.”

When someone says a thing and you deliberately interpret anger where there was none (especially after they’ve said it, “I’m not angry”) and insist they “calm down” rather than addressing any valid criticism or complaint they actually bring up, that’s quite gaslighty. It’s intentionally presenting a false reality and insisting I adhere to it “or he’s just wild, he won’t calm down”.

Or “he’s just a troll not worthy of consideration” as you put it. Which is definitively dehumanizing as well, but you don’t see me whining about it. It is ironic though. Me calling childish arguments childish, whoa! You calling someone a troll, that’s perfectly reasonable. You calm down.

It’s not strictly the same as gaslighting but that’s why I said “gaslighty”. But go off about the hypothetical strangers I belittled, please, whatever gets you going down there.