Let’s be honest- Elon already has your personal data. Cambridge Analytica really spelled out that any anonymity we may think we have is long gone.

No, they can’t sue you for voting for anyone you want. A), they have zero rights as a third party to confirm who you voted for. In fact, the HAVA (Help Americans Vote Act) not only protects you from this, but has actionable penalties should anyone access your voting record outside of state/federal business.

Correct. There are major flaws and rampant abuse; it truly needs reform. But it absolutely needs to exist and benefit those that create.

Its kind of weird for them to take the fascist thief’s side in pretty much anything

Ummm… no. Copyright law sucks, but it’s really the only protection for artists/writers/etc. in this case, Trump sucks way worse than copyright law lmao.

He’s literally stealing someone’s work and attempting to make money off it as his own.

Yet you say “Go Trump.” Copyright law is all it takes for you to publicly support a fascist. Absolutely amazing.

*bottom 20%

Because it’s not okay to write off underserved and disadvantaged as “silliness.” How we treat the least of our people says a great deal about how “good” the economy is.

The least paid full time worker should be able to live on the federal minimum wage. They can’t. That should be a huge red flag to anyone who A) cares about people in general and B) understands that corporate profit doesn’t equal a good economy.

And yes, people should be able to waive the salary they are entitled to and take $1 instead, of their own volition. But that has nothing to do with the question: how could the lowest paid full time wage be the best measure of anything in our economy? It absolutely the best indicator of our humanity and empathy (or lack thereof). You could look at the median of the bottom 2% but it wouldn’t point to our failures we need to fix as clearly as looking at the lowest paid full time salary.

Yes, we are 100% looking at people working 40 hours a week for this particular insight. The basis is, our economy is only baseline good if the least paid full time worker makes a living wage. Any other answer is a fail. Incentives for employers to hire staff from traditionally underserved persons can absolutely be affected through better means than giving them less of a share of their work.

As well, the question above that spawned this little thread was: Why would the lowest full time annual wage be the best measure of anything to do with an economy?

How the lowest paid full time worker is compensated is a keystone data point. The current full time yearly pay for a standard worker (should be ANY full time worker if the economy was good) is $15,080 a year. Before taxes and workers comp and health insurance. Not nearly enough for someone to survive, nonetheless better their situation. The underserved populations are getting even less currently, which should really grind your gears.

It is not the only data point that’s important, but to suggest it’s useless as a data point is ridiculous

Idk, I’d counter that the paperboy or special needs cashier would be a good starting place because they deserve the same quality of life for their work as others 🤷‍♂️ why should they be paid less and just ignored in the data “because they’re problematic?” Keep in mind that we are discussing full time wages.

The least a full time employee can make is absolutely an indicator of how good the economy is, as it impacts if there’s opportunity or not for the worker to better themselves. If the full time employees on the bottom couldn’t possibly work to the middle without additional assistance, the economy is shit.

You can’t skeet on my ex, I trademarked that ass ;)

I mean, isn’t that the whole mentality of Techbros? We want copyright followed with AI- it’s one of the two biggest issues with it.

That fair amount of irrigation was created by the Hohokam, who also abandoned it like sane people.

I’ll never understand how settlers moving out west to the beauty and resources of the coast, got to a blank desert and decided to ”This is the spot!”

No lumber, fucking hot, and natural water is scarce. WTF

Guerrilla style social media activism suffers when the platform in question actively bans for reporting facts or algorithmically hides progressive voices and trends.

It also benefits the very fascists we are attempting to address by driving engagement on their platform. But no group at this time can be sure that they won’t be banned, (or worse, get Twat by Elon and end up receiving death threats) tomorrow. It’s also very risky to rely on such a platform.

But more pragmatically, these groups won’t stop organizing. The general public will also be migrating from Deadbirdsite.They’ll all use the next best tool and still persist, so there’s no real disadvantage there. If the effort can’t exist outside of Twitter, it isn’t really trying.

The usefulness of Twitter ended when Musk took over. This is absolutely a new positive thing, as it’s better to use alternatives as opposed to the fascist website. There are lots of communication alternatives available, so it’s not like people won’t have a way to communicate.

Defederation and limiting posting for certain users on Reddit are in no way ill natured. To suggest it is, is no different than Elon Musk’s “freedom of speech absolutism.” People who go out of their way to personally start a community have the right to draw a line (not including protected classes) as to who can join their party.

You are seeing the consequences of engaging with the worst of Reddit.

I mean, it’s Reddit. What did you expect? This has been status quo there for years. Maybe don’t use it, or accept the that Spez is a piece of shit and each community can decide it doesn’t want crossover from other communities.

But really, is blocking people who have activity in another sub so different from a mastodon instance defederating from another instance? Just in a shitty Reddit way?

I can attempt something and succeed. Or I can attempt something and fail. Attempt does not imply it didn’t work

I never said it didn’t 😆

When someone attempts to italicize the title of the post

Yep. The issue is that they put out a tool that does some good things, but is also heavily adopted by criminals who piggyback on it.

Should we let child abuse just proliferate with these tools, because there’s so much need for privacy? How do you weed out the bad without kneecapping the good? There’s no good answer here. The good parts of the tech working enable the bad parts, too.

There has to be a certain level of knowledge and acceptance of the bad parts to continue developing it. It’s a catch 22, so law enforcement has to pick between sacrificing the privacy or allowing a tool to exist that proliferates child abuse material and other ills.

There are valid arguments for the importance of privacy, and valid arguments for making sure there these crimes shouldn’t have a safe haven. Action to either end will hurt some people and enrage others.