WhatsApp groups are big in the UK, I think you can do QR join codes.
Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
251–260 of 401 posts
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#252Yup. Same situation. I suspect same motivation. Interested in collaboration.
I've never used this before but you can try:
2i2wbyza4 at mozmail dot com
Or suggest a contact method.
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#253[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#254I run a discussion group that meets once a month - our tech stack is 1. A blog running WordPress that I use to announce meetings 2. A meetup.com account (free tier) that has the same information as the blog 3. A MailChimp account (free tier) where I send notices about the meetups 4. A very active Slack group (free tier) where I announce meetups and we have entended discussions. Discord would probably work just as wel…
This is why Facebook ended up being the tool of choice. Stay in one app instead of logging into 2 and checking your email and a website. I'm only surprised that 1-3 can't all be done via Meetup.
> Stay in one app instead of logging into 2 and checking your email and a website.
The point seems to be that you can pick whatever service you want and will still get the information because it’s repeated across channels. The manager needs to post to all four, but everyone else picks one.
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who pays for it?
I'd suspect the 'free' and 'no ads' would be somewhat mutually exclusive. Perhaps a particular group organizer pays a modest amount - $19/year(?) - to manage/moderate groups up to X000 members.
Which means it isn't free, it's a charity project paid for by the group organizer(s). That's probably fine in the short term, maybe even longer, but eventually the organizer(s) will move out of the area, or get tired of managing the group, or die, or whatever, and someone will need to manage it.
Honestly if it really would just need to cover the price of the cheapest hosting you can find and the domain registration a single small-to-medium Adsense ad in the sidebar might generate enough to cover it. I don't know how many impressions/pageviews it takes to generate $20 but it can't be that many.
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
you're arguing local, short term benefits with global long term damage. Very near sighted, but an actual problem government, good governance, has struggled with absolutely. Part of the techno fascism is emerging because people are entirely easily manipulated with todays egg prices and not tomorrows suffering of human rights.
> techno fascism I keep hearing this. What does this mean? My guess would be "a system in which big technology firms can effectively censor speech with coordination from the state". But I think those that use it mean something else.
I think "techno fascism" is a term people are using to describe tech company CEOs operating as unelected oligarchs embedded within the new US government.
If you're looking for a better term, we could call it "technocratic anti-liberalism" to perhaps cover all the bases. People are attempting to describe the current situation in which the wealthiest humans in all of history are supporting an anti-liberal executive by making financial donations to anti-liberal leadership and making changes to their products to further the messages thereof, e.g. broadcasting Nazi ideology and making Nazi salutes.
"Wealthy" as in "holding more personal wealth than the bottom half of the US population"; "anti-liberal" as in "espousing and acting in opposition to classical liberal values of consent of the governed and equality under law by denying the validity of elections, attempting to overthrow the US liberal democratic government with force, pardoning foot soldiers found guilty of such an attack, utilizing king-like executive direction to undermine the highest law of the land, avoiding all punishment for his own guilt, and so forth.
That's how I interpret the term.
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it is true and has been covered in all major newspapers many times over. The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored due to warnings from the FBI, and Zuckerberg has repeatedly said that Facebook was pressured by the Biden administration to censor Covid-19-related content.
The FBI did not say anything about the Hunter laptop story to Facebook, they warned all social media companies that they had detected suspicious activity and that the companies should be aware of foreign disinformation ops The laptop story was always nonsense anyway, because the chain of custody of the laptop was compromised, and forensic analysis of the hard drive showed that the contents had been modified after it…
Oh, come on. No, per the reporting, they didn't specifically mention the laptop, but they DID tell SM and tech companies to expect an imminent disinformation dump the week before the NYP published their story (which they'd been sitting on while working on verifying it), and gave enough of a characterisation of what that specific impending dump would contain that employees of the warned companies sent each other messages affirming that, yes, this was clearly the dump the FBI had warned them about. Then when they asked the FBI if this was indeed the Russian misinformation they'd just warned about, the FBI didn't deny it.
(Right? I have no insider information, here, but as far as I understand it none of the above is controversial.)
I don't know the exact content of the messages the FBI sent (I don't think they've been published), but on its face it seems perverse to me to characterise that sequence of events as the FBI not saying "anything about the Hunter laptop story" to Facebook. They presumably were referring to the Hunter laptop story, and Facebook correctly recognised that this was the case when the story broke, so in what sense are was the warning not "about" that story?
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’re not discussing the total population of the Earth. The thing about words is that their meaning may depend on context. If we were discussing everyone who has lived and will ever live, the current population of the world would be a limited snapshot. Same if we were discussing every planet and civilisation in the fictional world of Start Trek. But we’re not discussing that. Making up something we’re not talking abo…
And for the purposes of the stated goal, for one person or even a company to get 50K people to switch from Facebook or to use another platform especially when all someone else has to do is start a group on Facebook, might as well be “the number of people on earth” difficult.
Yes, I agree, I’ve said that several hours ago.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42781581
What you’re arguing against is not the point I was making. My point in this thread is way up there: it replies to someone saying you cannot make the world better without communicating with other humans, by presenting someone who on their own improved the world more than most (if not all) Facebook groups ever will.
When I used the word “limited”, it was clearly in reference to it being an “isolated” specific community and not everyone.
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#259Everything I do is either a Whatsapp group or a Telegram group these days. Whatsapp is owned by Meta but is at least encrypted, private and free from the bullshit of a real social media. Telegram is a better alternative if you really want to leave Meta behind. People will suggest Signal but in my experience literally nobody uses it except radical organisers. I have only one group on there and its for a protest group.…
It’s owned by Facebook
Re: Ask HN: Organize local communities without Facebook?
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it is true and has been covered in all major newspapers many times over. The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored due to warnings from the FBI, and Zuckerberg has repeatedly said that Facebook was pressured by the Biden administration to censor Covid-19-related content.
Both of those claims are false, and Facebook's own internal communications showed that they did not censor any covid-related content. SCOTUS ruled that the govt asked them to filter out misinformation without putting any undue pressure on them, and Facebook declined to do so I already posted the link refuting this nonsense with sources
No? So this whole section on Wikipedia is just false? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Facebook#COVID-1...
(You may be right about the government "pressure" being grossly overstated, I dunno. But the censorship itself happened.)