I had a feeling playing the victim and name calling was coming next after your last message.

But just in case anyone arguing in good faith needs it spelled out: Not every thing has to cater to every audience. Lemmy, at least for me, is primarily for sharing information, whether news, opinions or just memes. On such a site, I believe it is more important to avoid echo chambers and misinformation. So it requires a moderator or an admin to ban people. It’s not as if Lemmy is an unmoderated hellscape, it just leans more towards free speech over creating perfectly safe spaces than you may like. Avoiding echo chambers and misinformation benefits all users, including minorities. Therefore, every site hast to find a balance for it’s use-case. I would expect many people, whether minorities or otherwise, can handle occasional mean words or words they disagree with on their screens. But it is also alright if you are more sensitive or not in a good place psychologically and don’t want to deal with this. There are other places on the internet you can go, that do have the kind of blocking you want. Some places will lean towards free speech, some towards heavy moderation. That’s the great thing about the internet, not every place has to be the same.

Then go to a private platform. This is a platform for public discourse, not private communities.

PS: You could even make a community on lemmy and ban people as it’s moderator. Although a different platform may still be a better fit.

If you care what they are saying, you shouldn’t block them. If you don’t care, you shouldn’t care they are commenting on you.

I don’t want other people being able to hide criticism of their posts/comments they don’t like from me. Allowing you to completely block engagement with your posts would just strengthen echo chambers and bolster misinformation IMO.

keep something like this alive and happy

An AI, even AGI, does not have a concept of happiness as we understand it. The closest thing to happiness it would have is its fitness function. Fitness function is a piece of code that tells the AI what it’s goal is. E.g. for chess AI, it may be winning games. For corporate AI, it may be to make the share price go up. The danger is not that it will stop following it’s fitness function for some reason, that is more or less impossible. The danger of AI is it follows it too well. E.g. holding people at gun point to buy shares and therefore increase share price.

How can the company SENDING the takedown request be legally required to take anything down?! They have nothing to take down. If they could take it down themselves, why would they need to send a DMCA takedown request?!

Again, it’s not the companies complying with the takedowns we are complaining about. It’s the companies that automatically send takedowns, with no regard for whether the takedowns are legitimate. These companies are supposed to have a duty to verify their copyright claim is valid before sending a takedown. But no one is enforcing it, so they don’t do it. That is the biggest issue here. We need to punish companies and individuals for sending illegitimate takedown requests.

Yes. So? How is that relevant, if we are talking about companies automating the requests with no regards for their accuracy ruining the internet? Isn’t it a given?

I think it says automated takedown requests, not automated reactions to those requests.

It being shit does not stop corporations for using it, especially for stuff like customer service.

I use tuta. You can also add your own domain for infinite addresses (great for managing spam).

I am not telling that to republican politicians. There are clearly a lot of people who use gmail for republicans to care about it and I have seen people here worried gmail would stop respecting their filter settings. So I advise them to stop using gmail.

Again, what is the difference between a tariff and a tax? Tariffs don’t apply to domestic companies, while taxes do. EU controls tarrifs, but not taxes. This tax technically applies to all companies, domestic or foreign above certain revenue, although in reality, there are no domestic companies it would affect.

So it is a tax, not a tariff by a technicality. It may even be the case that a court will strike this law down, saying they can’t pretend it is a tax when it is clearly meant to tax only foreign tech giants.

PSA: Don’t use gmail. Sure, it is a good email and is free. And you may not care about privacy, even though you should. But the bigger danger is your e-mail being tied to your wider google and youtube account. Get banned for spamming youtube live chat, or writing “inappropriate” comment, or maybe for using ad-blocker in the future, and you can say goodbeye not just to your youtube account, but emails and drive data. This has already happend in the past, when youtube algorithm evaluated votening in livestream chat by sending 1 or 2 as spam and banned peoples entire google accounts.

Well… Taxes are not unified, trade policy is supposed to be. So this is kinda gray area as it is a tax affecting trade specifically. But VAT kinda gives the precedence that countries can tax foreign company business.

Some neighborhoods tried, shops ended up closing, causing a lot of problems for the community. The corpos won’t make it easy to pull one over on them.

Right sorry. I thought you meant developers won’t sign them. Obviously you mean Google.

I hope Google at least will only sign identities, e.g. you really are DeathByBigSad and this is your key which you can sign apps with. Not look at the apps themselves. That may be too much to hope for. :(

Torrent clients are not illegal in any way. So why not?

I mostly picked top results for “porn” on duckduckgo, but I do find hqporner.com scientifically interesting ;)

The VM is associated with your name and payment method. It is about removing privacy so they can remove free speech and other rights. Not about porn. You don’t need a VPN to access porn in the UK. Half the porn sites don’t verify age anyway.

FYI, with Mullvad VPN set to UK, sites that require age verification:

• pornhub.com
• youporn.com
• redtube.com
• porn.com
• bellesa.co
• tube8.com
• thisvid.com
• quorno.com

Sites tha do NOT require age verification:

• hqporner.com
• xhamster.com
• youjizz.com
• alohatube.com
• qqqporn.com
• xnxx.com
• xcafe.com
• helloporn.co
• go.porn
• cartoonporn.pro

And xvideos.com is a bit special since it shows you the thumbnails of porn videos but won’t let you play them.

But we need to stop VPNs! Think of the whole two children that have VPNs! What if instead of just going to the half of the sites that don’t verify age, they figure out how to use a VPN?! Oh the humanity!

Yeah, UK wants to de-anonymize VPN users as the next step in their attack on free speech. It is laughable to think this is about anything else.