b3nsn0w

@b3nsn0w@pricefield.org

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It would have to be a VERY lazy dog to allow a fox to jump over it anyway.⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  and yet you should be allowed in a kfc? double standards smh

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It would have to be a VERY lazy dog to allow a fox to jump over it anyway.⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  counterpoint: quick broen fox is corporatized af while sphinx of black quartz has one hell of a vibe. you’re right that the fox is comfy because the cozy zone is the only spot where fun and corpos intersect and this one just so happens to fall into it but keeping it people-centric was never the point.

  case in point: the test sentence we use in my native language translates to “floodproof mirror drill” to test out all our weird diacritics. no autumn vibes there, only corpos

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Barack Obama: “For elevator music, AI is going to work fine. Music like Bob Dylan or Stevie Wonder, that's different”⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  you can already api into chatgpt and dall-e 3 as one cohesive service, and make a system in an afternoon’s work that reads the artivle, decides on a thumbnail, and automatically generates one. the whole thing costs like 8 cents per article.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  i wish the eu could stop fucking around on this one. fines for gdpr violations can reach up to 20 million euros or 4% of global revenue, whichever is higher. if they actually prosecute over this, it will be far more than a slap on the wrist. (which is why everyone was so scared of the gdpr back in 2018, but apparently that didn’t really last)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  no, ever since 2018 when the gdpr actually went into effect, they had to allow users to opt out of data processing individually for different purposes. like, if you want to allow facebook to process your data for improving their site but not for marketing purposes, you need to be able to set that, and facebook needs to respect that. as such, you had the option to use the site without “paying for it with your data” at all.

  and if that’s not a viable business model and they need to charge a subscription fee, that’s alright. there’s nothing in the gdpr that says you cannot charge for services. the problematic part here is that they do provide a free service but only if you consent to data processing. like i said, i’m not a lawyer, but i’m pretty sure that’s illegal, and it absolutely should be illegal. if they decide to provide a free tier (or a paid tier for that matter), it needs to be available even if you don’t consent for unrelated data processing. they’re not obligated to provide anything, but if they do provide something, they cannot discriminate against users who don’t want to share their data.

  that’s the problematic bit here. privacy cannot be a premium feature. facebook is trying to charge for something here that should be available to all users, whether or not the underlying product is freely available or not.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  then don’t host the site if they don’t want to. or charge people for shit if they want to. i’m not asking for them to not do that, i’m asking for one thing and one thing only: don’t make service, free or not, conditional to consenting for data processing not related to providing that service. that shit, to my best knowledge, is illegal in the eu, and it’s for a damn good reason.

  facebook is not entitled to a profit either just because they’re for-profit. they need to earn it. and no, they don’t have a right to take a “whatever means necessary” approach on it – just like a company cannot legally rob people, or cannot legally entice minors into gambling addictions to make that money, in the eu it also cannot coerce people into giving up their personal data just so it can then profit off of that either. consent for that needs to be given willingly, without pressure, and without deception. why is this principle so hard to understand?

  you paint some ridiculous strawman arguments here in your efforts to lick the zuck’s boots, but i never once asked for facebook to continue giving their service for free if they don’t want to. the only thing i said is “paying with your data” is not a valid idea under the gdpr (and honestly, it shouldn’t be a thing in any civilized country.) if facebook relies on it, tough shit, their options are to figure out an alternate revenue stream or go out of business. that’s how it works for every other business as well.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  then offer the subscription service as the only option. if they want to do that, it’s on them. but you can tell by the dark pattern on this ui element that that’s not their main goal, they just want to use the threat of having to pay to coerce people into consenting to data processing.

  it’s not about entitlement, it’s about playing fair. removing the option to “pay with your data”, and leaving only the subscription or cancellation as options would be fair play. it would also destroy facebook but that’s on them, it’s their decision to make. but if they decide to provide a free service of any kind, they cannot discriminate against those who wish to choose privacy.

  and if we’re being realistic, they’re not expecting even 1% of their user base to pay. they are, however, expecting to keep nearly 100% of their user base. that’s what makes this about coercion – if they didn’t have the option to coerce people (and i’m fairly sure they don’t have it legally, but again, i am not a lawyer) the options presented would be very different, because facebook itself wouldn’t be able to afford to only give its service to paid users. you’d probably have a free tier with optional privacy included, which is missing some features, or a paid tier with extra features and privacy included (hopefully non-optionally, but it’s facebook so they’d probably still try to track you).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  flair, mostly. lol

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  youtube only makes around 2€ per user per month by the most optimistic estimates, and they serve full tv-like video ads which are also clickable and targeted, and a lot of them. that’s literally the final form of advertising and it still doesn’t reach a monthly 10€/user, the addressable market is just not that big.

  the dark pattern is real though. they’re going for your data and they’re not doing it for money. make of that what you will

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  this has to be illegal.

  like, no, seriously. i’m not a lawyer but i was working on a (since failed) startup in 2018 and distinctly remember how much headache the gdpr caused. literally one of the main things was that you cannot coerce users into consenting to data processing, or make features conditional to them. the gdpr makes a distinction between processing you do to perform a contract (that’s why no one asks for your consent for processing your email address to log you in, that’s implied) and processing you do for other reasons, which require user consent (that’s why everyone asks if they can spam you on the same email – it doesn’t matter that your email address is already on their server, processing it for marketing reasons requires consent of the data subject). opting into these kinds of processing needs to be granular, if it’s not they lose the validity of your consent.

  i seriously hope facebook gets slapped so hard over this that no one ever thinks about doing this again. “paying with your data” should never be a thing in any society that calls itself civilized.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I feel like Fediverse users are nicer to each other and more generous with upvotes than reddit.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s a very interesting question, actually. Can you explain how liberals are authoritarians? Beyond the contradiction in the wording (which, I mean, the DPRK exists, wouldn’t be the first time something isn’t what it says on the tin, lol) it sounds like a super interesting topic. I actually can’t figure out why they should scan as authoritarians to me so I would appreciate your input there.

  (Absolutely no sarcasm intended. I can’t seem to figure out how to phrase this better – I think it’s because from the context of the discussion there is an expectation that what I’m asking for elaboration on should be a trivial subject, but I’m no expert on this.)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I feel like Fediverse users are nicer to each other and more generous with upvotes than reddit.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  i’m always baffled by how the only people who hate far right authies more than the average person who has to live in their crosshair are far left authies. but that’s some interesting insight into 4chan, i didn’t know it was authies with specifically the right-aligned flags, they just scan the same to me.

  so yeah, thanks for the info, good to know that 4chan trolls are expected to appear on burggit or exploding-heads, and that they don’t overlap with tankies much

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I feel like Fediverse users are nicer to each other and more generous with upvotes than reddit.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  the instance admins likely aren’t and i doubt most users are either, i’m just saying the average 4chan user has an increased likelihood for joining an instance like that

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I feel like Fediverse users are nicer to each other and more generous with upvotes than reddit.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  it’s person of interest, and hella yes. i haven’t even got through the whole thing yet but it’s awesome so far

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I feel like Fediverse users are nicer to each other and more generous with upvotes than reddit.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  BADABAMM BADABAMM

  You are being watched. FAANG has a secret system. A machine that spies on you every hour of every day. I know, because… I built it. I designed the machine to detect spikes of dopamine but it sees everything. Violent emotions involving ordinary people. People like you. Emotions upper management considered irrelevant. They wouldn’t act so I decided I would. But I needed a partner. Someone without the spine to intervene. Hunted by privacy advocates, we work in secret. You’ll never find us. But lurker or contributor, if we can rile you up, we’ll find you.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I feel like Fediverse users are nicer to each other and more generous with upvotes than reddit.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  luckily they seem to be contained for now on instances like burggit and lemmygrad because it’s “funny”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hello-world.sh⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  only two-letter tlds are controlled by specific countries. i forget who owns the specific tld for .world but i doubt they can pull this trick, there’s a lot of competition there

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  i mean, good point on the project size, but buying a domain is honestly such a basic thing that it still feels like a weird result on that equation to me. for fmhy.ml, specifically, i understand their choice, since pirate sites do tend to be quite nomadic with their domains, and the fediverse being so domain-specific is a new thing.

  still, domains are hella cheap. the $10/yr figure i quoted is for a “serious” one on one of the major tlds, you can get away with much less if you’re willing to go for a somewhat more niche but still reputable one. especially one that’s longer than two characters.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  lmfao, frickin seriously? you’re gonna build up an instance where the domain is part of all of your users’ identities and you’re not even gonna spend the $10/yr to keep that solid? with how much time goes into running a lemmy instance and not getting overrun by bots, that’s an absolutely ridiculous assignment of resources

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"It has to be Chromium"⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  they’re 100% doing dev work at ms, afaik their contributions are public because chromium is an open source project. and i think it would be very beneficial for larger amounts of people to use edge (only if they’re dead set on not using firefox though) because having two different companies compete on that is still better than just having google have a monopoly.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Netflix axes its $10 ‘Basic’ plan in the US and UK⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Image