You Should Know
YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.
All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.
Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:
**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated. We are not here to ban people who said something you don't like.
If you file a report, include what specific rule is being violated and how.
Partnered Communities:
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Credits
Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!
view the rest of the comments
I notice you left education off that list
"Why the education system is horrible and needs to be dismantled and entirely reconsidered" is slightly off topic, but yeah you got me I do not think the argument is all that different wrt education. It is very different from those other things though.
Its perfectly relevant to my point, which is that the government is already involved in the sort of behavior we're discussing. If we accept that preventing societal damage, or promoting social well being, or whatever else you want to call it, is a part of what the government exists to do, then why would something like preventing mega corporations from hijacking the development of children fall outside its purview?
I accept that providing social commons which are largely independent from culture and belief is the legitimate purview of the government, but there should be a line right there because when governments manipulate their populations to think or behave a certain way it usually isn't towards the best interests of the people.
Which isn't to say that nothing should be done to prevent mega corporations manipulating people, I just don't think that should come in the form of things like, for instance, what they've actually done with TikTok since this article was written, which is mandate the creation of a US specific version that is obligated to be increasingly friendly to the propaganda interests of the current regime. I think that any solution in the form of a formal government regulation will be subject to that kind of corruption, and real solutions need to be found elsewhere.
I think that's a fair statement as it relates to the current US government but I don't think that's a valid general philosophy. I agree that our current priority should certainly be to implement a government that can be trusted to regulate things effectively. If that isn't taken care of first then the rest doesn't matter. As evidenced by, well, everything happening right now haha. Still, the ultimate goal should be government action on this topic because we cannot solve the problem at an individual level. Some people can have better outcomes than others but there's no level playing field without government intervention.
I don't, limiting the danger it poses to us and guaranteeing civil liberties should be a higher priority.
To me what a level playing field would look like for social media would be mostly about the government no longer doing harmful things that prevent such equal chances, enforcement of the DMCA in particular comes to mind. Exercising more control over who can use which parts of the internet and how, is obviously incredibly dangerous especially given that we know it is possible for a government like the current one to come to power.
If you trust your government less than you trust GAFAM then there is a problem.
One solution is to reduce government intervention, the other is to increase government 'trustworthiness' (whatever that means)
I like the second option more in general but of course it depends on the specific legislation.
Oh and fuck the DCMA.
I don't trust either, they're in cahoots