Sure, you could pay people to do that as well, or maybe preferably, better tools need to be developed to ease the burden of individual instance admins. But this specific case is explicitly not about server costs.

"There's no such thing as free lunch" is a stupidity. There is. You have soup kitchens all over the world, the volunteers working for them do so because it gives them meaning, and they are often provided ingredients for free from supermarkets that would otherwise end in the trash.

It's a dumb metaphor that doesn't even work in the original example. There is more to life than capitalism.

That didn't mean nobody should pay. I make monthly donations to my Mastodon instance, and will probably branch out soon to support to other services I use as well. But everything is not always about money.

[–] Blaze@feddit.org 5 points 2 months ago

Then again, the Emacs server is not shutting down over costs. It’s shutting down because the admin is tired of dealing with assholes on the internet.

Sure, you could pay people to do that as well, or maybe preferably, better tools need to be developed to ease the burden of individual instance admins. But this specific case is explicitly not about server costs.

Thank you for pointing this out

[–] rglullis@communick.news 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

because the admin is tired of dealing with assholes on the internet.

You know another way to not deal with assholes on your instance? Charge just enough to make sure that people are minimally invested, and point them to the Terms of Service as the reason they are getting kicked out for egregious behavior.

maybe preferably, better tools need to be developed

If better tools was all that was missing, Big Tech would develop them and get rid of all these nasty meat bags. And as much as Google tries to do just that, they still hire tens of thousands of content moderators around the world for YouTube.

You have soup kitchens all over the world, the volunteers working for them do so because it gives them meaning,

The fact that things do not have a price do not mean that they are free. Somebody had to pay to get the food done and the volunteer can not take the hours worked in a kitchen soup and exchange for a discount on their electricity bill.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Why would big tech ever want to get rid of nasty meat bags when nasty meat bags drive much of their engagement and thus increase their advertising revenues? We can't escape the realities of how the human brain operates, how much it likes to be stimulated regardless of the qualities of the stimulus.

I think a much more logical goal would be to take just enough action to avoid most (but not all) legal consequences while otherwise encouraging as many nasty meat bags to encounter other nasty meat bags with opposing viewpoints as possible. That would maximize brain stimulation, increasing engagement and thus revenue. This improves the stock price and makes your boss happier with you.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nasty meat bags I am talking about is human moderators.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Oh, I see. Still not seeing a big incentive for big tech, those meat bags are providing free labor. No strong need to replace them.

edit: Oh wait, you're talking about paid ones. Nevermind.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Free labor? Google/FB employ these people.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Yeah I caught that when I reread your comment. I made an edit, just a little too slow.