redditrassholes9344

joined 1 month ago

The violent ones produce change one way or another. They're significantly less desirable for leaders, and that's kind of the point.

[–] redditrassholes9344@discuss.online 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

People haven't been using the alternative, and that's the problem. Reddit and tech giants have grown complicit. They do not believe people would do it to them, or they think they could survive thousands of people trying to do it to them, if one can then many can.

That's not a good method though on it's own, there needs to be effort to undermine them. And since they don't want to do peaceful protests, the only option left are the more violent and less legal ones. The ones that compromise their platform and its data.

[–] redditrassholes9344@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The old alternative is better IMO, makes change happen one way or another. Specifically the unsanctioned, and non-peaceful protests. Boycotts don't work in the days of ad-revenue, since ad-revenue funded companies have immunity from user dissatisfaction in that regard (can replace a substantial amount of users with bots that look at ads and they still get ad-revenue).

What we need are old-fashioned style pitchforks and fire protests against them, but in the digital age, using cyberwarfare, like this.

(reposted because SJW deleted my others)

[–] redditrassholes9344@discuss.online 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This is not a smart choice, they do know that the alternative to peaceful protests like this is violent protest right? They want to challenge that or do they think it won't be done because it's "illegal", that didn't stop these guys now did it?

[–] redditrassholes9344@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

that's auto-moderation for you, really gives high hopes for the people claiming automated is the future.