Messages is better than text. Is requesting a switch to telegram not ok? I do that mostly so we can share pictures and videos that don’t look horrible.
I don’t think you can use RCS unless both of you are on android though. So isn’t it reasonable to ask to use telegram or some other messaging all if you don’t both have the same platform?
Sure, but that isn’t the issue that’s being discussed. Unless I’m reading this whole thing wrong, this has more to do with people excluding others, WHOLLY, because they don’t have an iPhone.
The op is conflating two different things weirdly.
In my experience, when people find out my texts are green, they oftentimes would rather switch to a different platform altogether like Instagram or just not text at all.
I totally understand wanting to move the conversation to a different platform or format.
The last line about it being a friendship dealbreaker is weird though.
I have no problem with people making educated decisions or ask for change based on facts. Fully agree about quality over quantity as well. My issue is FUD, having no idea what you’re talking about and still trying to convince everyone of that is harmful. When people working day and night on these protocols say there are no privacy concerns and no one can show you ads etc. and yet someone with literally zero understanding of the matter claims otherwise.
I dunno. I just stumbled on a movement to push instance owners to defederate any instance that doesn’t defederate Threads.
This seems very much in the vein of dictatorialism / authoritarianism. It’s honestly just gross. This whole “you’re either with us or against us” tribalism is what has made social media so awful these last several years.
I think it’s more like the instances are countries, admins are governments, and defederation is embargo. Information and influence are the resources. Eventually, you’ll have instances that keep to themselves and others that throw their weight around regardless of any real world political alignment.
Not exactly. state actors and political party-sponsored troll farms have nurtured that tribalism and dialed it up for the past decade while the companies running the platforms stood by and raked in the cash because anger is engagement is money.
Technically the concept you’re referring to is totalitarianism.
Generally speaking that’s the view that there is one truth, one set of morally-correct beliefs, and that because What Is Good is known, it can be assumed those who don’t agree are Bad People.
The basic seed of totalitarianism is this idea: “We know everything that needs to be known”
An example of a totalitarian culture is Nazism: they thought that they’d worked out The Truth and that gave them the confidence that they were doing the right thing even as they did horrible things.
Another view on totalitarian belief is this common argument against capital punishment: “Given there are errors in determining guilt, a system of killing people determined to be guilty, will in fact kill some innocent people.”
That’s an anti-totalitarian argument. Basically it says “Given that we don’t have omniscience, let’s take it easy on the drastic action”
The totalitarian view on capital punishment relies on this implicit argument: “Our courts have determined that guy is guilty, and our courts are always right, so the only ethical move is to kill him”. Then you might ask “why’s it okay to kill that guy but not other people?” and the totalitarian say “that’s different, because the first guy is guilty and the second guy is innocent”.
It’s that certainty that defines totalitarianism.
And the way it leads to dictatorships is this: If determining the correct move is a finite process that proceeds deterministically from observations and the already-determined set of moral rules, there’s no reason to ask multiple people’s opinion about this law. Therefore it will be law because we know it’s right.
The non-totalitarian stance is open to new information, and doubts the ability of any one individual to have final knowledge of the right move, and so polls everyone on major decisions. ie democracy, or the distribution of power.
Great comment! Totalitarianism better describes this notion. My biggest problem is with these people thinking they know better, truth is we don’t know. All of these are social experiments and instead of taking preemptive drastic measures we can take a light handed approach and make decisions democratically whenever actually needed.
One of my favourite things about early days Reddit was it’s growing community of positivity. There was actual encouragement to be nice to each other and subreddits were built around celebrating stuff.
Negativity was downvoted into oblivion so you never saw that stuff on the All page and popular pages.
I’m seeing the same thing with Lemmy right now and hope it continues long into the future. The lack of profiteering should really help with this.
It’s the kind of thing that’s easy to start and hard to continue. Time will tell, but I hope we can develop the kind of community values here that will grow with scale, rather than shrink
If you attach so much of your personality and self-worth on your hair, this is probably for the best. Time to do some inner-reflection and figure out something a bit more meaningful to tether yourself to.
You’re a new account who shows up and immediately starts arguing with people and insisting your interpretation is the only correct one. And you keep fighting and fighting and fighting long after you have anything new to add. Frankly you come across as the bully or at least you hold no moral high ground.
And I say this as someone unafraid to call out the zeitgeist when I think they are wrong. I take my downvotes when it happens and I engage honestly and respectfully with people I disagree with. I don’t think I’ve ever had a comment deleted.
So it’s not that you’re being censored for your views, but because you’re an asshole about them in places that don’t tolerate that. And frankly I would rather an asshole on “my” team be censored than someone I can disagree respectfully with.
Food for thought. Come back when you’re ready, if you want.
This whole thing reeks of “I came here, acted perfectly reasonably and logically, and everyone else, astoundingly, was illogical and mean to me. I’m so smugly innocent. I’m the victim. This makes no sense!”
Not one bit of self-reflection.
Is there an archetype or myth about this behavior? There must be. Some type of ironic “innocent” contrarian? The little brother who provokes then runs to mommy to tattle?
It’s even better when you break the name down kwarizam is where he’s from and Muhammad is a common first name. It’s like saying Johnny English (or may be Jean Francois) invented calculus in 10-diggity-dig
kbin.life
Top