Comment on Surprise EU rollback of 'GDPR' digital-rights rules prompts alarm

• gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Explaining something no one asked to be explained without providing an opinion on the subject itself reads like tacit approval. On a subject such as this - "reduce your privacy for the benefit of AI companies that are some number of:

  • monopolies that should have been busted many times over
  • run by evil, greedy people who do not consider safety for the entire world when developing these things (reference Musk saying there’s a chance these destroy the world but that he’d rather be alive to see it happen than not contribute to the destruction)
  • companies aiming not to better the world in anyway but explicitly pursue money at any real cost to the human lives they’re actively stealing from or attempting to invalidate." - it’s no surprise the comment is unpopular and gets downvoted.

  If I stopped my comment there I’d get voted on based on my explanation of what just happened assuming I was pro-this process because that’s human nature (or maybe it’s a byproduct of modern media discourse where they ask questions but don’t answer them and expect you to fill in the blanks (look at most of conservative media when it’s dog whistling or talking about data around crime or what have you)).

  I don’t think someone should be voted into the ground for explaining something, but I also think every online comment should do it’s best to make a stand on the core subject they’re discussing. We are in dire times and being a bystander let’s evil people win.

  So practicing what I’m preaching: Privacy laws should absolutely not be reduced for the benefit of AI companies. We should create regulations and safety rails around AI companies so they practice ethically and safely, which won’t happen in the US.

  source

  • iii@mander.xyz ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Explaining something no one asked to be explained without providing an opinion on the subject itself reads like tacit approval.

    Do some people’s brains really work like that? I prefer it when people simply describe a problem, instead of making it all tribal and mixing reality with opinion!

    source

    • gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I mean, I like when I ask someone to explain a problem and then do. I don’t personally like it when someone explains a problem that’s pretty obvious.

      My point is the original commenter, by explaining something no one asked to be explained, sort of gave away their opinion with their explanation. Actually, on second read it’s far more explicit - they’re defending why the change was made, not just explaining what happened. The downvotes were warranted (if you use downvotes as “this is a bad opinion, perspective, or contribution” which is debatably not their purpose).

      But the reality is even in describing a problem you’re coloring reality with your perspective. There are facts, things everyone can agree on, but in describing those things you color them. It doesn’t have to be tribal to push back on someone coloring the loss of privacy laws for the betterment of AI companies as a good or necessary thing (like the original commenter did).

      source

      • iii@mander.xyz ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        explaining something no one asked to be explained, sort of gave away their opinion with their explanation

        I understood that point of view. I just don’t agree, at all! I prefer factual conversation, describing the dilemma. OP demonstrated that they understand that the problem has multiple tradeoffs.

        coloring the loss of privacy laws for the betterment of AI companies as a good or necessary thing (like the original commenter did).

        The original commenter didn’t do that? They described the tradeoff.

        I think you prefer tribal, coloured conversation. To the point where if it doesn’t match your preferred colour, you very quickly and incorrectly assume people are anti your colour?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• iii@mander.xyz ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  The quality of discourse on lemmy is fucking dire.

  Amen. A large fraction of the people on lemmy lack empathy and the ability to consider other viewpoints in general. Very closed minded crowd.

  source

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I do have to give kudos to the mods here, though. Even though my comment was extremely unpopular they've removed the responses to it where people were outright insulting me for making it.

    source
• FaceDeer@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Yeah, the downvote button isn't even being used as an "I disagree with this" button in this case, it's an "I hate the general concept this comment is about" button. And now you're getting downvoted too for pointing that out.

  Guess I should have just said "boy howdy do I ever hate AI, good thing it's a bubble and everything will go right back to the way things were when it pops" and raked in the upvotes instead.

  source