this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2025
241 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

72356 readers
2974 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 97 points 4 months ago (1 children)

so musk will be investigated over how he runs xitter, right?

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 73 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He’s already investigated himself and found that Xitter is a bastion of freedom. Same goes for Truth Social.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How long until hosting a Lemmy instance is illegal?

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Well, as a lot of us are on instances hosted outside the US, a very long time.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 60 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Compelled speech it is then?

So when are bakers going to be forced to bake cakes for gay couples?

Oh, right, hypocrites. Naturally.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Reveling in their hypocrisy won't save anything.

They don't care that you think and I see them as hypocrites.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 16 points 4 months ago

It slightly saves my sanity. Only slightly though.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

For them, them being able to be hypocrites is a "cool thing"

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 2 points 4 months ago

More accurately, they think everyone is as hypocritical as they are, so the fact they did it in their favor means they "won"

[–] reiterationstation@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago

Do as I say not as I do is power of no one stops you.

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 36 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

When they say tech censorship they mean people should be allowed to say bigoted shit

[–] francisco_1844@discuss.online 7 points 4 months ago

And post as much disinformation as they want without "censorship".

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 30 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Tomorrow: Trump installs loyalist with zero qualifications as head of FCC.

[–] vonbaronhans@midwest.social 20 points 4 months ago

You misunderstand. This IS Trump's chosen stooge. FTC Chairman Carr.

He's complaining about tech companies "censoring" conservatives for "speaking their minds", aka being hateful bigots and spreading misinformation during a public health crisis.

[–] skepller@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I wonder how long until Elmo arrives to "make the FTC more efficient" lmao

[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

We need fELONs crack team from X -said no one

[–] tal@lemmy.today 30 points 4 months ago (3 children)

If we wind up in a situation where the EU mandates a form of censorship that the US bans, I assume that the platforms in question would have to separate their EU and US users and sites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splinternet

[–] daddy32@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's not censorship, it's "censorship". You know, like banning nazis, calls for harming women etc.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Generally speaking, when a much stronger party forces upon you a mechanism, it doesn't work in your favor. Whether they call it free speech (for bot campaigns too, while you get banned) or moderation (your opponent insults you in every comment, and they are fine, but you insult them once - you're banned).

The super weirdest thing is that people again and again believe that the strong party belonging to "their" side will do things right this time in history.

[–] techforwhat@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago

It should be interesting to see how it plays out, indeed.

I don't expect the US will entirely ban all forms of content moderation. I wouldn't be surprised if the US moved more in the direction of the EU Digital Services Act: required transparency on recommendation algorithms and some sort of NGO trusted flagger system.

Also, similar (but opposite) to Splinternet: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect

[–] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

I doubt it. They could just sensor based on location.

[–] beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org 29 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And by "free speech", we mean you have to publish what we tell you.

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 33 points 4 months ago

Never stops being true.

Hey government how’s it going

Jesus fucking christ

Good thing we have a fair and balanced FTC? Right?

Lets see:

We have 2 Democrats 2 Republicans, and...

oh... one vacant seat 👀

(also, one of the Democrats was appointed in 2018, we all know who was president then)

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

If someone got banned on Reddit for calling Clarence Thomas a house slave like Stephen Candie in Django, can he file a complaint with the FC for tech censorship? Asking for a friend.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

I know the point of this is probably just intimidation but 35 companies? Are there 35 social networks that moderate content? Why is Apple included? Is there some conspiracy theory that they’re censoring conservative App Store reviews?

[–] Gingerlegs@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Defunded in 3…2…

[–] iamanurd@midwest.social 4 points 4 months ago

DOGE will soon make cuts there…

[–] AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

This would have been helpful 10+ years ago