31–40 of 240 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I, for one, don't make accounts on services with a hate speech rate as high as current Twitter. I'd consider an account an indirect endorsement.
What is wrong with respecting people's right to have opinions you don't like? Isn't that what everyone wanted?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is wrong with respecting people's right to have opinions you don't like? Isn't that what everyone wanted?
Respect and endorsement are not the same thing. Also, when tolerance is the goal, there must be an intolerance against intolerance - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In fairness, Strict Tracking Protection is not a Firefox problem; it is very clearly a Firefox feature. The problem is the sites. X is not really an important site anyway.
I don't think most people in the world would agree with your definition of important. Perhaps you believe that's a good thing anyways. Not sure where I was going with that.
The threat to privacy is well documented.
It's enough for a some people to consider such websites as not important, at least to them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I, for one, don't make accounts on services with a hate speech rate as high as current Twitter. I'd consider an account an indirect endorsement.
What is wrong with respecting people's right to have opinions you don't like? Isn't that what everyone wanted?
To the first, the paradox of tolerance.
To the second, we can use traffic numbers as a proxy as to what "most people" want and if that is increasingly or decreasingly found on the platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I, for one, don't make accounts on services with a hate speech rate as high as current Twitter. I'd consider an account an indirect endorsement.
What is wrong with respecting people's right to have opinions you don't like? Isn't that what everyone wanted?