931–940 of 1000 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get the Libredirect extension and this will happen automatically (to a server that is actually working).
> Libredirect Just looked at it. Unfortunately it requests permissions for all domains, not only the relevant set.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem companies have is that "doesn't suck" generally means "it's free with no ads". The internet has this innate expectation that everything digital be totally free and have no form of tracking or ads, or if it does have ads/tracking, that you are trivially capable of blocking them while still totally enjoying the service/product. xcancel, archive, whatever are all tools almost solely meant to access monetized…
> The problem companies have is that "doesn't suck" generally means "it's free with no ads". I feel like way too many people forget that there was a great middle ground for the longest time, in the form of Google AdWords. Text only, no animations, flash, iframes serving malware, or any of the other bullshit that had already taken over banner ad networks like Doubleclick at the time. I recall at the time one of the ea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congratulations, Elon Musk has just forced you to either feed his propaganda machine or successfully locked you out of the conversation.
You mean like Zuck prevents me from seeing any Instagram content without login?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a pretty in-depth investigation into the workings of X as far-right propaganda machine: https://news.sky.com/story/the-x-effect-how-elon-musk-is-boo... > right-wing content was shown most prominently, regardless of users' political leaning. > Left-wing users saw almost the same amount of left-wing and right-wing content, even though they only followed left-wing accounts. But only 14% of the political content s…
Before X flagged me as a bot for no reason, I had a mostly unused account and can confirm it was showing me a ton of right-wing content. Also lots of stuff related to Elon Musk in particular. On the flip side, X has less moderation, and it's pretty even-handed. They're allowing a lot of pretty mild right-wing content that Twitter was banning people for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. What I mean is that you can create an account to view posts and not reply, i.e. have a lurker account.
I tried to create an account but Elon banned it within a couple of hours for being inauthentic. Ironic given the large number of bots on the site
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does one not engage with the corporate product at all? Im typing a comment on a website of a corporation whose goal is to grow companies into corporations, via a computer manufactured by a corporation on a keyboard produced by a corporation, staring at a screen produced by a corporation, while connecting to an internet service offered by a corporation. Never mind that im also employed by a corporation, dressed by…
It's basically impossible to not engage with any corporate products at all. It's trivially-easy to not engage with specific corporate products. I don't engage with Twitter, because I won't sign up and that makes it useless to me. I'm not missing out on anything I care about.
Neither this post nor the linked site explain what XCancel is/was. Since I wasn't familiar with XCancel, an announcement that it's suspended is not particularly informative. Apparently XCancel is an instance of Nitter. According to Wikipedia, "Nitter is designed to allow access to X without tracking, advertisements, or the need for an account. It only supports browsing, and cannot be used to sign in or interact with…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wikipedia has become a cancerous blight on world politics Genuine question: why? I don't understand how Wikipedia is relevant to world politics, are people reading it as a news source?
It suffers from the same fundamental flaw as a self-selected poll: the people most motivated to participate are not necessarily representative, impartial or even particularly reasonable. What appears like a diverse community of fair, objective and well-intentioned people is nothing of the sort. The community-driven model necessarily means that control of narrative rewards persistence and an aptitude for social engine…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My point is: companies stop making your product suck, and people won't have a reason to try and fix it for you. Boy this would be nice! X have obviously decided that using the law to take down people fixing its issues is more profitable than fixing them. I'm really curious though, are they right? (Ignoring ethics etc) I used to glance at Twitter when it was less hostile, now I don't bother since it tries to force y…
Is the point really to be profitable? Or could perhaps its owners be willing to risk losing money for more power over the information landscape?
I don't see how any government or business (especially the former) can justify using X at this point when it doesn't serve the public interest or the interest of customers who deserve at least some choice. It's as unreasonable for them as using Instagram or a dating app for something intended for broad reach and accessibility. I don't particularly like Bluesky, but it's publicly readable and has RSS. Any real solutio…
> I don't see how any government or business (especially the former) can justify using X at this point If your logic is that some citizens won't be able to read what is posted there, then I assume you similarly object to other social media platforms, newspapers, cable TV stations, etc.