this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
51 points (80.7% liked)

Technology

60071 readers
3827 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 38 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't know how it could get any worse than now. Basically we're all in echo chambers whichever platform you use. Including Lemmy.

Agreement with "consensus" of whatever bucket you're placed into is rewarded, and disagreement is punished. Even if only by upvote/downvote. Switching platforms won't change much.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you stray from world, things are a bit better. World, however, hasn’t seen a ban or anti-free speech action they didn’t embrace fully. World is a cesspool of smug libs that refuse to engage with anyone they perceive to be on their left or right.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think you’ve been in an echo chamber for too long.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] michael@lemmy.chrisco.me 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I haven't had any issues with .world. Ive had more issues with smaller instances banning people/topics. World seems like the most bland or popular of the lemmy instances.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Most of the issues I have with world are invisible because the comments are removed and the users are banned. As long as you stick with their narrative (that Trump bad and Biden/Kamala good) you won't run afowl of them.

[–] michael@lemmy.chrisco.me 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Cant you see everything via the modlist + API? I thought that was one of the benefits of Lemmy is that the modlist is open. I have seen people down-voted for specific comments but not banned.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Many have been banned. A leftist named linkerbaan (or to like that) was one for sure.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The discussion here shows me that linkerbaan's ban was the right decision: https://p.lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/lemmy.dbzer0.com/29384791 . Please provide receipts of actual attempted Orwellianism.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

After looking at your “evidence”, I still disagree with the ban. Linkerbaan was angry at people literally preventing the truth about an actual genocide being broadcast live for all to see.

Downvote those you disagree with and walk away. Banning is for death threats and stuff like that. Calling people names like “fascist” is not abuse. It’s public discourse.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There's outright lying, this thread of what I can only describe as trolling, chanting "what about clinton's blowjob" on a post asking for people to debunk a list of bad things Reagan did, and there's a ton of calling everyone Zionists within the very thread I linked to. Such spreading of vitriol at everyone he disagrees with is definitely bannable IMO.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Calling someone a Zionist when they’re arguing AGAINST a ceasefire is ABSOLUTELY not below the belt. Zionist isn’t a slur. It’s a word used by actual Zionist’s.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Calling someone zionist is not a slur. Calling someone a bot is also not a slur. Both are thought-terminating cliches. Also, by thread, I meant including the comments as well. Plus you have the trolling.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I can agree that they’re cliches and perhaps thought terminating.

I “have the trolling”. Are you implying that I’m trolling? If I’m trolling, every single hippie in the 60’s was also trolling when they asked for peace.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

you have the poweeeer

haha no. i meant the examples of trolling i provided lol, not you.

[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 11 points 2 weeks ago

Oh ok. Carry on.

[–] AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

Nearly all social media is full of ~~eco~~ echo chambers.. I still post and follow stuff on several of the platforms. There is very little nuanced conversation.. Seems like it is more and more just an up vote or downvote storm, or people claiming one thing or another without any supporting evidence.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago (15 children)

And that makes me genuinely sad. When I joined Lemmy, I was a little put off by the leftist bent here, but then I realized that I appreciated being challenged on my views, especially since people here are generally nice about it.

I wish I could find something like that for conservatives as well. Better yet, I wish there was a place like Reddit or Lemmy where all views were respected, provided claims are supported with evidence. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be compatible with the world we live in, and that makes me sad.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Happy to see the word “nuance” being used… wish there was more of that too. This whole binary with-me / against-me mentality will bring us all crashing down.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] garretble@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I look at it this way: I don't let in the crazy person on the street screaming racist garbage into my house, so I also don't have to listen to or engage with that person on the internet, either. That doesn't make my house an "echo chamber."

For a long time I tried to treat "internet people" with some level of "respect" so to say. That is, I didn't spend time blocking people and whatnot. But now? Screw em. I don't have time to listen to nonsense, so if someone tries to come in to a conversation in bad faith, it's very easy to block and move on.

Or on short-form social media like Bsky or Masto or whatever if someone posts a racist thing. Or a bigoted thing. Block and move on.

Those trolls live off of engagement so just don't give it to them. And those same trolls are the ones complaining about "echo chambers." "Waaa, no one wants to listen to my racist nonsense. It's an echo chamber!" No, you are just a trash human, and no one is obligated to listen to you.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Those trolls live off of engagement

Not anymore. Back in the day trolling was a recreational activity done for fun. Deny the fun, cut off the troll's food. Now it's being done for political purposes, so cutting off the fun no longer functions since it no longer strikes at the primary motivation.

[–] garretble@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

The result for the people who block them is still the same, though: they no longer see the troll garbage.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It decreases the spread. Cutting form the engagement means free people who aren't already subscribed to that content will see it, since there's fewer people arguing with it. Which means those who are susceptible to falling for it have less chance to even encounter it, meaning fewer fall into it.

Even if the incentive to create the trolls has changed, the counter to letting it spread hasn't.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 5 points 2 weeks ago

Deplatforming works.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Groups of any kind are echo chambers. That's why they exist.

[–] Juice260@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I doubt that it can be any worse than tech companies with financial incentives doing it. Surrounding yourself with like minded people will surely cause some bubbles like that but since when is letting a targeted algorithm funneling us for ad revenue a better option? I don’t personally think it’s a big deal and guessing that people are just upset that their obsession with mass engagement is getting shook.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 9 points 2 weeks ago (11 children)

It’s a valid claim, IMO. The libs leaving Twitter all seem to be VERY into Orwellian practices like “official block lists” and other absurd self-owns.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] sxan@midwest.social 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I don't know that it'll affect the echo chamber effect; you create that through your subscriptions, and avoid it by browsing "all." What will be impacted is the amount of simply shit content, both from idiots and from bots. Moderators' jobs will get harder: the bots follow the people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

No social media site controlled by Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg is going to be a healthy experience. You will have much more varied content anywhere else.

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 7 points 2 weeks ago

Echo chambers are on par with human nature: we fear the unknown and flock to like-minded people. It takes a degree of discomfort to read something you don't agree with (explained rationally and with civility) and trying to argument in kind - it's easier to down-vote and here we are...

[–] AnotherWorld@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The echo chamber is a good thing. For some reason, everyone thinks I'm obligated to read their opinions that disagree diametrically with mine, constantly, non-stop, from hundreds of thousands of bots working for propaganda. I don't.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You are both right and wrong there.

You need different opinions in your life, otherwise your echo chamber will tend to move to more extremist. Pretty soon you think those "others" are evil and so you are willing for anti-democracy coups by your side, or to fight wars to kill those infidels or other evil things. You need a steady input of other opinions to remind yourself that reasonable people can disagree and that is okay.

Also sometimes you are wrong. Few people have the guts to read a well reasoned opinion and admit they are wrong, but it is one you should be willing for.

Of course there is far more possible opinions than you have time to read. So eventually you have to say I don't have time to deal with this subject and shut it out. So long as you avoid the problems of an echo chamber they are fine. Be aware of them though and make sure you are not falling into those traps anytime you shut something out.

[–] AnotherWorld@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I recognize and demand that everyone has an opinion, that everyone can speak their mind. And I have the right to have mine. And so, when all of Twitter is full of russian bots on the government payroll, there are hundreds of thousands of them, in all languages, I'm not kidding and not dramatizing. What i supposed to do about it? Read it all? Or retire to the echo chamber? I'm withdrawing, for now here, and if anything, from social media

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] beatnixxx@fedia.io 5 points 2 weeks ago

The freedom of speech crowd isn't real big on the other half of the equation. Freedom of association. No one is obligated to listen to anyone else's bullshit. They're free to be butthurt about it, I'm free to not give a shit.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

I've been on Bluesky very early on, and with the mass exodus of liberals from twitter, they are recreating their own toxic echo chambers on Bluesky now and it's bleeding through into every post they disagree with.

[–] FreeBooteR69@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I think having a marketplace full of alternatives helps prevent that kind of entrenchment somewhat. Here is my problem though, who decides what an echo chamber is? I like a good back and forth conversation, but hate bad faith arguments. If people talk stupid shit, how much tolerance should one reasonably expect?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well that's kind of baked-in to social media. If you'd otherwise talk to lots of different people in person, read much etc and now come to the internet and choose any of the mentioned platforms... That'd be bad. You're now in a smaller filter bubble. If you're already in some echo chamber and for example switch from mastodon to bluesky... that's a minor change. The situation is a bit different if you change from a nazi platform to a regular one. It's still not good. But better.

[–] stinky@redlemmy.com 4 points 2 weeks ago

It's like saying everyone who drinks water will die. It's correct, but it's not a problem.

Echo chambers exist everywhere.

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 4 points 2 weeks ago

Far right radicalization will get worse if progressives leave X. Conservatives will stick around simply because they aren't banned and then the white supremacists will be free to start pulling them without push back.

[–] inkrifle@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

You should see the Gab echo chamber, it's absolutely horrifying.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

One thing to bear in mind is that, whenever someone accustomed to one platform explores another, they’ll tend to ascribe any differences between the communities to the other platform being an echo chamber of some kind.

load more comments
view more: next ›