this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2023
724 points (99.2% liked)
You Should Know
33235 readers
37 users here now
YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.
All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.
Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:
**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content.
**
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities:
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Credits
Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There's something amusing about people feeling violated by their activity being made public, but not necessarily by corporations hoarding and capitalizing on that activity & data. I mean, one of them is out in the open. The other is pure abuse.
How about both are bad.
That is the entire (and only) point I was making. x)
Ah, the old ~~Reddit~~ Lemmy switcharoo.
You are probably seeing two very different vocal minorities, and conflating the two.
Also, there's a very clear difference in expectations between posting/commenting and upvoting. I blame the UI. We naturally expect public actions to be easily visible. The lack of universal accessibilty to the public data makes people unaware that the data is public. Lemmy UIs, including apps, need to make this information (a list of upvoting users) universally publicly accessible before people will change their expectations.
On the contrary, I'm not conflating two specifics. I'm speaking in general terms about the demonstrable public perception (read: billions of social media users who happily hand over their data vs. the palpable unease over data publication in all walks of tech discussion) and how it is innately hypocritical.
It is perfectly normal and useful to discuss societal contradictions. For example: "We hate school shootings, but we do fuck-all to stop them from occurring." That statement does not conflate two different vocal minorities, it purports to accurately describe the generalized societal contradiction at hand.
The rest of your post is completely off-topic.
Why does the person have no problem sharing their address with the DMV but gets upset when their address is leaked publicly? Curious. They claim to value transparency, but oppose doxxing?
Is this sarcasm?
The DMV is government-regulated and has a legal duty to safeguard your data. Unlike the corporations we were happily discussing before you decided to try out as Ben Shapiro.
Corporations have a financial interest in safeguarding your data. It’s not valuable to advertisers if it can be gathered for free.
People enter into contracts with individual entities regularly without expecting that any rando could join at will.
I really didn't expect to have to read this corpo-apologist BS here.
You're sick, please get well.
Capitalism causes enough actual problems that you don’t need to make up more. Making your data available to businesses is marginally more secure than publishing it freely.
i dont think a humongous corporation can afford to screw me with this data as much as the random people running instances, what're they gonna do? give me midget porn ads?
It makes sense to me that people are more worried about potentially any corporation / bad actor accessing their data rather than one
here, have my upvote. but please don't tell anyone.
Why? The masses have no issue forking data over to big tech. What difference does it make if it's one or a million corporations using that data when it's being sold willy-nilly to anybody with a checkbook?
The point is not how many actors have access to your data. The point is that in both scenarios (public data vs. single-corporation-controlled data), your data is pragmatically public from data sales, data leaks, and so on. However, in only one of them, your data is ostensibly "protected" by a corporation - the lie at hand. In the other scenario, you are under no spell that your data is protected or private - the truth.
My comment was simply pointing out how they're effectively the same thing. Giving your data to a big tech firm is effectively the same thing as making it public. Hence, the outrage over one not matching the outrage over the other is amusing to me because it implies how effective the corpo framing of this issue is.
Well it's just as bad but in a different way.
Big cooperations may not respect me as an individual, but they have a self-preserving interest, a brand image to loose, and are checked by privacy watchdogs.
A Lemmy I stance can be run on any PC in some anonymous guys basement; there really no way of telling.