this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
333 points (99.1% liked)

World News

39011 readers
2867 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So how exactly would you decide which platforms are allowed to be anonymous then?

[–] iii@mander.xyz 1 points 2 days ago

Does it align with my opinion. If not, it's misinformation.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Number of users is an obvious example. There are others.

[–] nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

So what happens when a platform grows and that threshold is reached one day? Force everyone to de-anonymize and potentially reveal sensitive information about themselves or abandon their account?

There's just no good way to force only some to de-anonymize without running into problems.

While I believe in the right to online anonymity, I also don't think that de-anonymization would even work, when I see the same garbage being posted in places that enforce real names. It just doesn't seem like a detractor to those types of people.

Instead, I'd rather want to see harsher punishments for big sites failing to moderate their content. I'd also take a look at these personalized "recommendation" engine and maybe ban them altogether. (Bonus points if it also affects personalized ads.)

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca -2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Try to come up with a reasonable process for transitioning between the thresholds or stop pretending you're interested in anything but proving your point.

[–] nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sorry, but this comment left me completely stunlocked. Why am I supposed to solve the problems to a problem you've created? Since when is trying to prove your point not how an argument works? What even is an argument anymore?

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You can still have your dumb username. We just need to make sure you’re not a child or a Russian. Alternatively, we could also just wait for authoritarianism to make social media completely illegal or unusable. That’s our current track.

[–] nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de 1 points 1 day ago

I see you implying everyone arguing against you is either a dumb moron, a child or russians in your other comments, so it's worthless arguing against your, ironically, authoritarianism-fueled idea.

Bye.