~~LGBTQ+~~ Everyone, but LGBTQ+ people especially need to get the the fuck off of Meta services now, they've showed what side they're on.
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
473 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
67474 readers
4967 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Straight+cis people too. I'm downloading an export of my Facebook info as we speak in preparation for closing it down.
I just deleted my old, disused Instagram account I hadn't touched in a long long time. Nothing even worth saving since I never uploaded anything to it. It was the only Meta account I still had around.
Did this about 5 years ago. Can't believe people still use fucking Facebook of all things.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
That sounds like encouraging queer folk to flee public spaces which sounds like a favourable outcome to the conservatives. Is giving ground the best idea really?
I don't know how to stress this any more clearly: A privately owned social media site isn't actually a public space. It's literally the definition of a private space. It's more akin to a mall than a library. That's the whole issue, how does it help to be on a site where all the admins have to do is shut down your speech and ban you anyway? Where everything you do, every move you make is tracked and monetized and studied to be used against you? It's by definition a surveillance state where you have no rights.
You realize they make money from ads and if the majority of people stop using their services they stop making enough money to function as a business? They may already have your data but you don't need to be giving them more.
The bigger issue is that corporations have commodified public spaces. You can take back public spaces by choosing to not use their services and convincing others not to. Facebook is already dying which is why they rolled out bullshit AI profiles and the public response to that went really badly. But they live and die by engagement so if they already are needing to turn to faking engagement to keep people on and money rolling in, then isn't a boycott literally the way to cut them off at the knees and stop them being a public space?
Forgive me if I didn't make clear that everyone needs to do it, not just LGBTQ+, my point is there are very few reasons to keep using these services for any person with a conscience.
Like you’ve mentioned, real public spaces have been killed so by quitting FB and other corpo social media you effectively self-ostracise as there are little alternatives. Yeah, you’re playing their game but when you’re losing you need humility rather than some moral high ground. If you want to affect the change you need to talk to people.
Real life exists dude. Facebook isn't the only place to talk to people.
load more comments
(10 replies)
Okay, let's be clear about this: staying on Facebook isn't "humility." It's selfishly selling out to simp for the fucking enemy.
load more comments
(1 replies)
There is no talking. There is no convincing them to change. Let them rot where they sit. Let them die off in their old folks homes, hating the kids and the queer. It's not our job to sit on Facebook and leading them in a round of kumbaya. Since you can't protest a private social media network effectively on that network, you just walk the fuck away.
But don't delete your account, before you simply never login again, upload as much high def white static video as you can.
Screw Facebook and their advertisers. They don't need our eyes while we tried to tell some racist bigots that they're racist bigots.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I guess advertisers have no issues with Meta’s changes. Interesting. A few years ago, they’d be falling over themselves to signal that “hate has no place here”. But it is no longer profitable to be LGBTQ+ so let the hateful bell ring.
Eh. The advertisers will be back to supporting LGBTQ whenever that month of year comes back
This year? Doubt.
I wonder why nobody is considering the most obvious solution to all this complication around what is NSFW and what is not: Children shouldn't be on these platforms at all to begin with. They shouldn't be anywhere near social media until age 14. Definitely not free roaming everywhere on the internet.
For us adults, I honestly cannot say whether moderation instigated by a company is better than moderation instigated by the users. The devil is in the details. This place isn't moderated by a company and you'd probably think the moderation here is superior to Meta's.
I disagree with this point.
I used the internet extensively as a minor to socialize and find friends and to be exposed to viewpoints different from those of my peers. If I only had my peers to socialize with, things would have been much worse off for me. I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into. I learned about the world and gained skills that made me a more well-rounded person. I even met up in person with thousands of strangers and had a grand time.
I see the gatekeeping of minors from internet spaces and worry about the impact that would have had on me and my development as a young person. If I hadn't been welcomed as a minor online, I would not have been welcomed anywhere.
That said, I stayed the hell away from corporate spyware like facebook and twitter that only serve to reinforce existing problematic systems, expose people to the toxic IRL social environments that they may otherwise be trying to escape, and amplify the kind of hatred and bigotry that I personally was evading.
I miss the old internet where kids were safe. I don't think that the solution is to ban kids; the solution is to ban platforms and profiteering incentive structures that create unsafe environments. The kids are the canaries in a coal mine. If the canary isn't doing well, you don't just ban it and keep digging: you get the hell out and find somewhere else to be.
I understand this sentiment because I had a similar story growing up, but I've had to come to terms that the internet of that era does not exist anymore.
Now we have these corporations who made it their goal to algorithmically trick you into spending more and more time engaged with their website for ad revenue, not caring how angry or misinformed people get in the meantime. It used to be a place we could escape to, but has turned into just another echo chamber/prison and worst of all - we're addicted to it.
I think places like Mastodon and the Fediverse can help bridge this gap, but on the whole, the internet is just not a safe place for developing brains anymore.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm with you on this. My childhood church was christo-fascist, and it was my wide wanderings on the web that showed me a different way was possible.
I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into.
Do you think your classmates found those influences from somewhere outside the internet? At least in Europe, the alt-right has been way more efficient at reaching young people online, especially boys and men.
I'm also talking about 15-20 years ago.
The influences I had were furries (queers), science/scifi nerds, academics, service members of the military who were otherwise separated from community, etc. The internet brought us together.
It was that or rural Florida where if you went outside and got stabbed by one of those poison palm you'd just get told that those have to be there because they kept the slaves from escaping the circus in the good old days.
What you're talking about with kids today is what I mean about them being canaries.
load more comments
(12 replies)
Never used Facebook, never fucking will.
I haven't in over a decade. I think I'm up to eight different word filters trying to stop news stories about this from showing up on my feed. If they didn't have such a stupid name I could just block the term meta.
Plot twist: that was their plan all along.
What about WhatsApp?
What about Instagram?
Also does your Lemmy instance federate with Threads?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Friendly reminder: Deleting your account won't accomplish what you think it will.
Facebook will still keep all data that is associated with other users as per their own disclaimer. They also still keep logs that are "disassociated with personal identifiers. "
So all training can still occur. And understand what while Jane Smith may have deleted her account, they still have all the data it takes to indicate that User 12345 was tagged in photos with John Smith at the Burger King on 404 Fake St. And, because of that, the data that User 12345 had previously provided is ALSO John Smith's data. And Fred Wilkerson since he was at that Burger King once. And so forth.
And ALL that data is still there for training.
So do what you gotta do to make it less appealing to other users. But understand your data is already out there and is never going away. Same with reddit and all other social media (which includes Lemmy).
Yeah but you know what? That's still better than actively engaging with their "services".
Eventually, it'll just be bots interacting with themselves, given enough time.
Yes. Like I said. Do what you gotta do to make it less appealing to other users.
But if, for example, you are an LGBTQIA+ person who thinks this will provide any form of protection...
Eventually, it'll just be bots interacting with themselves, given enough time.
It seems like that's a good chunk of it already
If you're in the US, sure. If you're in Europe you can compel them to completely delete everything as per the GDPR.
And I am sure a company that is now openly training their LLMs on copyrighted materials is going to totally comply with all of that...
One of these days people are going to learn "But it is against the law" doesn't apply to the rich and powerful, law enforcement, or megacorporations.
load more comments
(5 replies)
No, I tried, they don't comply, and tell you to make a complaint to your DPA and the Irish DPA or go to court if you have a problem with that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I was in admin chat on facebook and it was blocking any posts with links to https://lemmy.world. I was talking to admins about firing up a lemmy instance and leave the FB group as a link to a lemmy community
I'm kinda shocked people still actively use Facebook.
Only ~3,000,000,000 people/month.
I would take the 3 B number with a pinch of salt. Its 3 B accounts, not unique individuals.
At one point last decade I had 11 seperate Facebook accounts, used for various purposes. They're all deleted now, but my behaviour is not unique. There will be many, many people running multiple accounts, and don't forget bots
load more comments
(3 replies)
No, it means all speach is welcome. Freedom of speach is a fundamental right and anyone advocating for censorship should take a long look into the mirror before calling other people fascist.
Clearly you didn't read the article. The first paragraph is about Meta censoring LGBTQ+ content
On Monday, Taylor Lorenz posted a telling story about how Meta has been suppressing access to LGBTQ content across its platforms, labeling it as “sensitive content” or “sexually explicit.”
Posts with LGBTQ+ hashtags including #lesbian, #bisexual, #gay, #trans, #queer, #nonbinary, #pansexial, #transwomen, #Tgirl, #Tboy, #Tgirlsarebeautiful, #bisexualpride, #lesbianpride, and dozens of others were hidden for any users who had their sensitive content filter turned on. Teenagers have the sensitive content filter turned on by default.
When teen users attempted to search LGBTQ terms they were shown a blank page and a prompt from Meta to review the platform’s “sensitive content” restrictions, which discuss why the app hides “sexually explicit” content.
People who comment on articles without reading the article itself should take a long look into the mirror before implying other people are advocating censorship.
Censorship is a constant. Power dynamics is a thing and will always be. Thinking that any of those big players truly care about any ideology is a mistake and the only true way of seeking "freedom of speech" is really to find your "tribe" that can support itself.
That's why we came to Lemmy. We don't want to be censored by big boss, we'd rather be censored by the owners of the Lemmy instances because at least they are closer to us.
What's going to happen is that you will now start listening more to people that were censored while your guy was in power, while they got censored for their opinions, as bad or as good as they are, you had your chance to speak, now as long as you are using mainstream media you will sit and listen like the good user you are.
The choice is yours Neo, either wake up and understand power dynamics or sit and listen like a good cumsoomer.
The choice is yours.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Free speech absolutists are so annoying. Your tolerance of the intolerant is so stupid. Yeah, protecting marginalized communities is fascism.
Go outside and check the political landscape. Now figure out how this change of policy relates to that atmosphere.
Now shut the fuck up about things you know not of. Protecting LGBTQ+ people is fascism? The fuck out of here with that.
Freedom of speech isn't a fundamental right. If you doubt this try publicly and clearly threatening people with the intent to harm. You will be prosecuted for that action.
You should avoid using words you almost cettainly do not understand which in this case is "fascist".
Cool, so you wouldn't mind if I went to all of your neighbors with your photo and told them about how you molest children, because freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Correct?
load more comments
(2 replies)
I remember there were plenty of little bitches saying that censorship won't be turned the other way and that it allows to remove bad people from the Internet. That bad people should be censored, and Reddit\Twitter\Facebook when used for politics will not be abused by bot armies, and that censorship will not be repurposed very easily.
I was being accused of being a right-wing troll, a luddite, a retard, an incel and what not for saying that they were wrong on every point.
Yes, even bad people should not be censored. When they misbehave, they should be barred from the place they harmed, ideally not forever, but for a week or so maximum.
I've learned this not just in morals, but in practice, when repeatedly banned on one forum by an admin of directly opposite political views ... for 24 hours max each time after multiple warnings, and only once a week or a month (can't remember) much later when I joked about exploding Muslims. Despite that, I was (I hope) a good enough member of that forum for like 10 years after, till now. Apes waving banhammers today have something to learn from that.
But that's not the point, the point is that even if you consider centralized censorship good, that's how it works.
So getting back to little bitches loving censorship - where are they now and do they have anything to say?
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›