this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2025
51 points (100.0% liked)

Fedibridge

529 readers
16 users here now

A community to organize and discuss the growth of the fediverse as a whole

Related communities

Megathreads

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The fact that "non-profit social media" exists is not nearly enough to disprove the technical veracity (the best kind of correct, after all) of the accusation that the overall technology does target, modulate, and commodify interaction — regardless of the eventual use of said data.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The technology of social media is just writing + ways to find it. The criticisms being leveled apply way better to the narrower technology of large scale, opaque content algorithms (which for most are indistinguishable from social media because the only use platforms that have it).

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

While I don't discount the veracity of your specific example, its existence doesn't diminish the societal threat that is the accepted mode of social media itself.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What do you mean by that though? What I object to is reducing the problem to the label. I agree with the sentiment of the OP title, and what I see in the linked thread is people dismissing the idea of a possibility of addressing the problem with basically reductive semantic arguments like

You are aware they will all be social media as well right?

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 13 hours ago

We don't disagree, then. ✊🏽