Semua Gambar Berita Video Belanja Maps Sosial Media Files Science
Sekitar 20 hasil (2.21 detik)
Komunitas lemmy.blahaj.zone

Mark Zuckerberg wants Meta to launch its own prediction market

He has been for a while. He is always just trying to make his own version of something that is already popular, (metaverse when VRchat was already popular, established, and much more fun. Reels after tiktok because the big thing) or tries to buy the popular trend, (Instagram, whatsapp, he tried to buy snapchat at some point, but they declined) hell, facebook itself was just his take on Myspace. The man doesn’t have original ideas.

Komunitas sh.itjust.works

Zionists are Spying On Millions Of Christian Americans In Their Churches

I’m just so numb to this shit by now. Privacy is dead. It seems like EVERY company, even companies that aren’t ad agencies like Home Depot are collecting, scraping, and selling data. Literally everyone does it now. Capitalism is dead. Nobody wants to make money by creating an actual good product, it has to be taking advantage of you in some form. This modern world fucking sucks and nobody will do anything about it. Even me as I type this paragraph out I recognize the irony in me saying this because I should be out there actively doing something about it if I’m so passionate about it right? I try where I can though. I use all FOSS from my phone to my laptop and I boycott companies I don’t agree with. I try to make friends and family aware. I can’t do much else without upending my entire life though. Plus nobody cares. Everyone is too fat and happy with iphones and tiktok that they will passively accept these increasingly worse conditions and laws while those of us with morals are left behind

Komunitas fedia.io

Private community here on the fediverse?

I read all your comments in my previous post and one thing I realized I’m not qualified for this at all. This is too dangerous and puts my life and many of my friends at risk. I think that protest, organization and resistance are inherently risky, especially in the context of an authoritarian regime where you don’t have adequate constitutional rights or legal protections for speech. The man and women protesting the government and morality laws in Iran are putting themselves at considerable risk, as are the people protesting against Putin in Russia, and people who make small acts of rebellion in places like North Korea. There’s probably no way around that, I’m afraid. With that said, deepening your understanding of privacy and security technology puts you in a position to allow you do the kinds of things you want to do while limiting the personal risks to yourself. This means learning about things like Linux, encryption, containerization, VPNs, VPSs, TOR, cryptocurrency, etc., and understanding that tools exist to allow people to communicate anonymously. If you haven’t already, I would start first by improving your knowledge of cybersecurity. Do you have an encrypted email provider like ProtonMail? Do you use encrypted messaging tools like Signal? Those are a good starting point. Discord have all this but that’s not my preference at all. I know Reddit has private subs but I don’t like reddit like many of you guys. Discord and Reddit are corporate, specifically American corporate. As such, neither of them are truly “private” or anonymous, and to some extent they are beholden to American corporate interests, and thus, American government interests. Much like TikTok’s relationship with the Chinese government, I think that platforms like Discord and Reddit can only be trusted to the degree that you trust America in general, if that makes sense… With that said, Discord and Reddit are popular platforms, and it can be easy to create a reasonably protected space there if you can vouch for the people that you are allowing in the room. (Remember that every person who is allowed in the space is a potential vector for leaking of data out. And so, for example, if one of the members of the room was to be captured or coerced in some way, they could provide access to the room to people who you may not want to give access to.) “Security through obscurity” is not a great strategy on its own, but there is something to be said about getting lost in a crowd… So, as much as I prefer the Fediverse as a key tool against corporate social media, I can see how Discord and Reddit could be useful tools. (Discord was absolutely instrumental in organizing very effective protests in Nepal just a few years ago!) The best approach is probably something broad, where you use some combination of the fediverse and legacy social media together, but only after you’ve gained the appropriate knowledge and privacy/security tools needed to protect yourself.

Komunitas lemmy.ca

What do you think about the dead internet theory?

I think there are dead networks, like Twitter, YouTube comment sections, facebook, TikTok etc. I just have to create my own networks or participate in different networks than the mainstream where there is sufficient human activity and limited bot activity, and wherw there is bot activity it is clearly delineated.

Komunitas news.abolish.capital

BHB-Northern Samar, aktibong nakadepensa laban sa 20th IB, 5 sundalo patay

Naglunsad ng armadong aksyon ang Bagong Hukbong Bayan (BHB)-Northern Samar (Rodante Urtal Command) laban sa nag-ooperasyong tropa ng 20th IB sa Barangay Catotoogan, Las Navas, Northern Samar noong Hunyo 4 ng alas-2:37 ng hapon. Naunang nakapamutok at aktibong nakapagdepensa ang Pulang hukbo laban sa nag-ooperasyong mga sundalo. Limang tropa ng 20th IB ang napatay at maraming iba pa ang nasugatan. Dalawang sugatang sundalo lamang ang inamin ng 20th IB na kaswalti nito. Mismong mga residente ng komunidad ang nag-ulat ng kaswalti sa hanay ng mga sundalo na pinatunayan pa ng tuluy-tuloy na pagdating ng mga ambulansya noong gabi. Gumamit rin ng helikopter ang 20th IB para makuha ang mga kaswalti sa hanay nito. Samantala, ligtas na nakaatras ang yunit ng Pulang hukbo matapos ang limang minutong pagpapaputok nito laban sa mga sundalo. “Labis na nagimbal ang 20th IB sa kanilang kabiguan,” pahayag ni Ka Amado Pesante, tagapagsalita ng BHB-Northern Samar. Aniya, katawa-tawa ang pahayag ng 20th IB sa mga komunidad na tatlong platun ng BHB ang lumusob sa kanila sa kabila ng nauna nilang mga deklarasyong nabuwag na ang mga larangang gerilya sa prubinsya. “Sila mismo ang nagsasabi sa masa na marami pang NPA,” ayon kay Pesante. Dagdag ng tagapagsalita, patunay ang insidente ng mahusay na taktikang gerilya at superyor na kaalaman sa tereyn ng hukbong bayan. Pinasinungalingan rin ng BHB-Northern Samar ang pahayag ng 20th IB na may nakuhang mga armas mula sa Pulang hukbo at mayroong kaswalti sa hanay nito. Anito, desperado itong hakbang para pagtakpan ang pagkatalo ng mga sundalo. “Ang matagumpay na pagtatanggol sa sarili ng Rodante Urtal Command ay patunay ng pagpupunyagi ng BHB sa landas ng digmang bayan,” pahayag ni Pesante. Dagdag niya, ang mga putok ng baril ng hukbong bayan laban sa mga pasistang sundalo at kinakatawan nitong reaksyunaryong estado ay nagbibigay pag-asa sa mamamayan. The post BHB-Northern Samar, aktibong nakadepensa laban sa 20th IB, 5 sundalo patay appeared first on PRWC | Philippine Revolution Web Central. From PRWC | Philippine Revolution Web Central via This RSS Feed.

Komunitas lemmy.ml

"We Listened" - Commodore Reduces The Price Of Its Forthcoming Callback 8020 'Dumbphone'

I was also thinking about buying it, but I want my phone to be my phone. I actually use my browser from time to time. What is the use of a phone if you need a “backup phone” just to look something up? Also, their reasoning for blocking the browser is absurd: “you could use the browser to access social media.” I don’t use TikTok, Instagram, X, or the like, so why do I need to be nannied?

Komunitas discuss.online

Meta gave 6 executives options worth up to $921M each, then cut 8,000 jobs after a record $56.3B quarter

I’m speaking of the intentionally addictive nature of social media and the short. Addictions can consume anyone, even the educated. Though unless it’s food, going cold turkey is always a possibility. We all still have choices. In terms of dopamine, those dopamine hits are available elsewhere. Shorts aren’t the only source. Feels like watching ads to me. But I’m old, so I know what an ad break (usually 3-4 ads in a row, unskippable) on tv felt like. It’s almost the same head feel watching TikTok’s as those ad breaks from back in the day. I’m not sure why you’re angry at me about shorts. I didn’t create the advertisement adjacent format, nor do I encourage its consumption. Pointing it out is like saying: Look! Sky! Blue!

Komunitas lemmy.dbzer0.com

Welp, there goes the bourgeois

I would take this notion or feeling more genuienly if said people then actually stopped using and deleted Facebook/Instagram/Tiktok, etc. The reality is that social media with a profit motive is basically a digital drug that operates via dopamine pathways, and most people these days are addicts. Quit then, go clean, and I’ll take these people more seriously. Don’t make tiktok reels about the idea of this so that you can feel ‘appreciated’ by view count and follower number go up. I do appreciate that this can be very difficult and scary. But … you’re gonna need real self-control and discipline to quit an addicition, and you’re gonna need to actually quit, to achieve the goal you say you want to achieve. Us here on lemmy, we’re largely here because in some way or another… we recognize this already, on some level, to some degree, as we’ve specifically sought out a kind of ‘least insane and systemically exploitative’ way of mass public communicating with randos. But the normies just don’t truly ‘get it’ yet.

Komunitas aussie.zone

Social Media are drugs and their CEOs are billionaire drug dealers

Myself and everyone I know considers Reddit to be a social media. Along with TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, Lemmy. Some grey area ones are Discord and Snapchat. So if you work backwards from there, the Aus Gov definition you listed above is actually pretty reasonable. I agree that the forums I used to ask for help in Diablo 2 don’t count as social media, and they are rightly excluded in the definition you listed. So you’re really just trying to argue that Reddit and Lemmy is a forum instead of a social media, which you’re entitled to your opinion of course, but most people will disagree with you.

Komunitas piefed.social

Slackline

[email protected] ∀ ∈ {🌳🤸‍♂️🌳} Rules: ✅ Post relevant to slacklines. 💢 Don’t act unethically or in bad faith. E.g., no ad hominem arguments, no plain juvenile behaviour to belittle others. 🚫 No posts that link to Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, or any other corporate billionaire-owned society-eroding cesspools. YouTube is “fine”, for now.

Komunitas news.abolish.capital

Reform and Restore activists kick off in Makerfield

TikTok user Carl Fairhurst has recorded an agitated encounter between Reform UK and Restore Britain. It’s yet more evidence the two parties are very, very upset with one another. Restore and Reform are beefing in Makerfield. pic.twitter.com/Z94a0CYm01 — Mukhtar (@I_amMukhtar) June 15, 2026 Let them fight Restore is a Reform breakaway party which exists because the latter party wasn’t right-wing enough. In the video above, a Restore-branded Land Rover has pulled up in front of a Reform-branded bus. It’s hard to make out what’s going on, but men from each camp are yelling at one another. At one point, a man wearing a ‘Restore Britain’ t-shirt says: We’re Restore, mate. We’re Restore Britain. Either he forgot he had the t-shirt on, or he assumed the guy filming couldn’t read. Either way, it’s not the best look. One Farage fanboy responded by crying, saying that they’d been bullied: This isn’t the look that Restore thinks it is. Bullying an ordinary bloke who is simply driving a Reform bus, is utterly embarrassing.pic.twitter.com/N9jCFWFv7z — Ben Graham (@BenGrahamUK) June 15, 2026 Not sure this is the strongest argument, given that Reform is a ‘might-makes-right’ party. We all know the Farage-led party can give it, so why can’t they take it? Here’s another example. Isabel Oakeshott complaining some Restore members are aggressive on social media. I had Nigel Farage’s good friend Raheem Kassam taunting me about being glassed in the face a couple of weeks ago… https://t.co/N4rs0IcmB9 — (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) June 15, 2026 Breakaway As Dan Hodges noted, it’s difficult for Reform to attack Restore, because Restore is just Reform on Berocca: Something quite surreal about watching Reform’s current strategy for dealing with Restore. “They’re racists. They’re going to split the vote. They only exist on social media. They’re not a national party. They don’t have serious policies”. Identical to the attacks on Reform… — (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) June 15, 2026 Honestly, it’s like watching I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter criticise butter. Reform is trying to paint its rivals as an extremist far-right party: I am absolutely disgusted by this Brendan!!! We sat for 45 mins talking. You have let me down. You promised me you would be fair and honest about our conversation. We had a lovely, open and honest discussion and shared practically the same views. We come from similar backgrounds… — Orla Minihane (@orlaminihane) June 15, 2026 The problem with this line of attack is who is it for? Because the voters who want Reform/Restore style politics are going to see it and think: ‘Oh, so I guess Restore is the real deal, and Reform is just another controlled opposition party‘. The leader of Advance UK — another Reform breakaway party — had this to say: All eyes now on the Makerfield result. If Restore polls over 5% that would be a first in British political history. If it polls over 10% that would be seismic. There can be no bleating from Reform. Restore’s existence is Reform’s fault. — Ben Habib (@benhabib6) June 14, 2026 And this is true. As we reported, Restore exists because of the inherent contradictions in Reform’s policy platform: As an example of this, take Zia Yusuf. Yusuf is one of Reform’s most prominent politicians, and he’s constantly arguing that white people are the most oppressed group in the UK… If you’re a far-right voter who buys into this, why would you vote for the party with Zia Yusuf and Suella Braverman in it? Why wouldn’t you vote for the all-white Restore Britain, which is more obviously following through on Reform’s propaganda? If Restore didn’t exist, voters would possibly just ignore these contradictions. Because it does, it’s impossible for many to buy into what Farage is selling. And that’s why Restore might be on the verge of preventing a Reform victory in Makerfield: Makerfield | Burnham leads by 5pts: Lab: 45% (-) Ref: 40% (+8) Res: 8% (+8) Grn: 3% (-1) Con: 2% (-9) Lib: 1% (-6) Via @Moreincommon_, 28 May – 12 June — +/- vs GE2024 pic.twitter.com/2wQdBsZ3fL — Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) June 13, 2026 The shift The problem with pursuing a political project that constantly shifts right is the ground can shift beneath your feet. It happened to the Tories in 2024, and it’s happening to Reform now. In other words, it’s no wonder it’s all kicking off. Featured image via X (Twitter) / the Canary By Willem Moore From Canary via This RSS Feed.

Komunitas news.abolish.capital

Letting Big Tech Off the Hook, UK Kids' Social Media Ban Called 'Right Diagnosis' But 'Wrong Prescription'

It’s not yet clear whether Australia’s ban on social media for children under age 16 has had a positive impact on kids’ mental health and safety, but British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Monday that the country’s law is being used as a model for the United Kingdom’s own blanket ban—leading critics, including the parent of a child who died by suicide after viewing harmful content on social media, to question whether Starmer was simply opting for a “politically expedient” solution to the harms of online platforms. Banning young teenagers and children from using social media, said advocacy groups, does nothing to ensure powerful tech companies will make their products safer by design for all users. Starmer announced the ban online in a video in which he highlighted his support for the policy “as a parent as much as a prime minister,” and noted that in public comments, “thousands of parents” said their children “are addicted to social media.” We are banning social media access for under 16s. These days kids must find their feet in a world where technology intrudes into every area of their life. I just can’t let that go on anymore. So we’re giving children their childhoods back. pic.twitter.com/jn7iQrcwk8 — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 15, 2026 “It can leave them trapped in a cycle of endless scrolling that displaces play, sleep, and time with the family,” said the prime minister, who leads the Labour Party and is facing threats to his leadership following the party’s major losses in May’s elections. “It can harm their mental health, and frankly, parents need our support on this. That is why today the government has decided to ban social media access for children under 16.” Starmer said new age-related regulations for social media platforms including TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat, as well as gaming and livestreaming platforms, will be introduced by the end of this year, with the new laws going into effect in early 2027. The government also said it was examining restrictions for users under 18, such as “overnight curfews” and mandated blocking of “infinite scrolling.” More details about the ban are expected to be released next month. But Kerry Moscoguiri, chief executive of Amnesty International UK, said that removing children from platforms that broadcast harmful content is “a case of the right diagnosis but the wrong prescription.” “The UK government is right to recognize that many children face serious harms online," said Moscoguiri. “Too many social media companies have built products and business models that prioritize keeping children engaged for longer, often at the expense of their well-being, privacy, and rights.” “But the problem is not that children exist on social media; it’s that social media companies have built platforms that are unsafe by design," she added. “Banning under-16s risks treating children as the problem rather than addressing the companies and systems that create the risks in the first place.” The ban comes after mounting reports of Big Tech companies’ efforts to keep all users, including young people, on their platforms for as long as possible using algorithms and “infinite scrolling.” Numerous cases have linked children’s suicides to their exposure to thousands of posts regarding self-harm and suicidal ideation, as well as to cyberbullying through social media. And reporting by Reuters last year revealed that Meta’s artificial intelligence chatbots were permitted by the company to have sexually provocative conversations with minors. Advocacy groups like Amnesty have called for restrictions on social media platforms’ most addictive and manipulative features, such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, and hyper-personalized recommendations. Moscoguiri warned that bans like the one imposed by Australia last year will force children “to surrender their privacy in order to participate in modern digital life.” In Australia, companies are required to perform age verification by collecting data from bank accounts or scanning users’ photo IDs. Instead of a blanket ban, she said, "we need strong regulation that tackles surveillance-based business models, protects children’s data, and puts safety ahead of profit.” “The responsibility for children’s safety should rest first and foremost with the companies that build and profit from these platforms," said Moscoguiri. “Government action should focus on ending invasive profiling of children, [and] tackling addictive and manipulative design features.” As children’s safety groups in the UK were expecting Starmer’s announcement in recent days, Ian Russell, chair of the Molly Rose Foundation and the father of a 14-year-old girl who died by suicide in 2017 after viewing content related to self-harm and suicide on social media, told the BBC that he was, “quite frankly, dismayed” that a blanket ban was likely coming to the UK. “Keir Starmer promised to tighten up the online safety world by regulating better,” said Russell, who has called for social media giants like Meta to remove and regulate content that’s harmful to young users’ mental health. “If he’s playing politics, what he’s doing is gambling with young people’s lives, and I find that deplorable.” https://t.co/oqDAdFFI8p Very strong words ahead of expected social media ban from @mollyroseorg - Ian Russell tells us govt is rushing in a blanket ban, rather than more sophisticated controls, under political pressure, in a ‘deplorable way’ pic.twitter.com/AMxcleLixU — Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) June 13, 2026 In Australia, which last year became the first country to impose a nationwide blanket ban on kids under 16 using social media, the law has had unclear benefits, with many young teens still managing to use the platforms—where Big Tech has not been forced to place controls that would make it safer for young users to be there. Carole Cadwalladr, an investigative journalist, said that imposing a ban that includes age verification, as Australia’s does, “looks like rushed populist techsolutionism that will hand more power to the platforms.” “This is going to hand even more surveillance powers to the very companies that already know way too much about us. Do you want [X executive chair] Elon [Musk] to have a copy of your biometrics? Do you want [Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg] to scan your face? That’s what we will all be doing,” Cadwalladr added. “This isn’t reining in Silicon Valley power. It’s gifting them even more power. Of course, parents want these companies safe and regulated but that’s a job for government, not the end user.” Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, acknowledged that he has advocated for a ban on social media for children under 16 and called it “the right step to protect young people”—but said the UK government must impose restrictions on social media giants themselves, not just their most vulnerable users. “Bans only treat the symptom, not the problem,” said Khan. “Social media companies need to reimagine their platforms so they can offer a safe and healthy environment for all users, where restricting access wouldn’t be necessary.” “There’s nothing inevitable about algorithms which feed us a diet of dangerous content,” he added. “Londoners deserve platforms which prioritize people, not just profit.” From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

Komunitas news.abolish.capital

Starmer has banned kids from social media instead of reining in capitalist big tech

PM Keir Starmer has announced a social media ban for under-16s which will prevent access to apps like Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X. Taking inspiration from Australia, the UK will introduce a similar ban to take effect from Spring 2027. However, the government will go further by restricting livestream and ‘stranger communication’ for children including on gaming sites. In his address, Starmer stated: All I’ve ever wanted for my own children, hand on heart, is for them to be happy and for them to be safe, I think that’s what any parent wants. BREAKING: Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has announced a social media ban for under-16s. Live updates: https://t.co/Jxi67uC5Qk pic.twitter.com/VnIFMyjAhs — Sky News (@SkyNews) June 15, 2026 However, this follows a pretty clear refusal from tech giants to make platforms safe and age appropriate. Instead, Starmer is simply kicking a dangerous can up the hill that will then hit young people further down the line. After all, the problem is unregulated, unyielding tech companies and unfettered capitalism – and the government appears to have chosen to go after an easier target in young people instead of holding billionaires accountable. Starmer: ‘social media is making children unhappy’ Starmer has insisted the ban is essential as the use of social media is making children miserable. As the PM says, it has increased access for bullies and intimidating behaviour, whilst also making it easier for strangers to contact young people through gaming platforms and other social media. Therefore, some parents have welcomed the ban, with the bereaved mother of Esther Ghey stating: I’m so glad now that this announcement has been made. Adding: Another thing that I’m really happy about it the government is investing in after-school clubs, because we can’t just take things away from children. At a time when many children have too few opportunities to build friendships and develop social skills, increased funding for after-school clubs is a welcome development. Giving young people more places to connect, learn and belong can only be a good thing. Nonetheless, this policy wouldn’t be necessary if we didn’t have capitalistic, self-interested tech bros profiting from the misery which social media fosters and breeds. Isaac, a young boy from Wythenshaw who will be affected by the ban, seems to get it far more than the corrupted politicians in Westminster, telling the BBC: Annoyed and disappointed in this decision, because they’re not trying to make it better or safer – instead they are gonna wipe it out completely. I think there should be more restriction and parental guidance on the accounts, but not a ban. Risky strategy Meanwhile, Jim Gamble, founding chief exec of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Center, believes the policy won’t even work and will just push children to “darker corners” of the internet: Many (Australians) bypassed restrictions using virtual private networks. They circumvented them by submitting fake IDs or altering their appearance to trick AI (artificial intelligence) age estimation. … If you actually look at the statistics, it’s a double-edged sword because the internet does as much good. For isolated, alienated children, for children with neurodiversity, with children exploring different aspects of their young lives, it’s a space and place where they can build positive networks. But this ban is merely addressing a symptom of a far greater threat facing our society and going further, it may even provide a backdoor for pushing through digital IDs on the general public. So, what appears to be a protection measure for young people could in practice increase the access to private data for tech companies through age verification checks which are reported to include bank checks and email surveillance. Fourth, other age checks cited like bank checks and email surveillance are literally insane Far from “reining in Big Tech”, this is a gift to them – a huge transfer of power and data from the public to the tech companies, wrapped in child safety branding. — Silkie Carlo (@silkiecarlo) June 14, 2026 Labour chooses to ban the children, not the business model Don’t get me wrong: stronger restrictions on social media use by young people have become increasingly necessary given how toxic, abusive, and harmful many platforms have proven to be. But the repeated failure of tech companies to address these problems meaningfully means the dangers will not simply disappear because a ban is introduced. Harmful content, disinformation, and online radicalisation will continue to exist, and young people will often find ways around restrictions. It is important to note, this policy has not been successful in Australia – a whopping 70% of parents in Australia have reported that their children are still on banned platforms – which hardly suggests this will have any impact on children’s safety. More importantly, we have already seen how algorithms amplify division, anger, and extremism across the UK, influencing adults as well as children. The challenge is therefore not just who uses social media, but how these platforms are designed, regulated, and incentivised. If we fail to address the business models that reward outrage and hate, we risk treating the symptoms while leaving the underlying causes untouched. After all, we’ve seen these platforms profit from some of the most harmful and abusive content imaginable, and when every click is a source of revenue, even material that exploits children can become part of the business model. That isn’t just a moderation failure. It’s the predictable and futile result of putting obscene profit ahead of public safety. Even more concerning is the fact that this ban will drive users ‘underground’ which will work to reduce transparency for adults. If children respond to social media bans with VPN workarounds, the result may be the worst of both worlds: the risks remain, while parental oversight and awareness vanish. Rather than treating children as the problem, we should be forcing tech giants to make their platforms safer. If we change the business model, introduce real safeguards, the internet becomes safer for everyone – not just young people. What are they really after? There is every chance this amounts to little more than virtue-signalling: a tokenistic gesture to “protect children” while changing sweet naff all about the very systems causing great harm in the first place. After all, this crisis should really be a watershed moment to finally confront the cynical, corrosive influence that social media platforms and their billionaire owners exert over society. Tackling the business models, algorithms, and incentives that drive abuse would create a safer environment not just for children, but for adults too. Nevertheless, that is not what the government is pursuing. Instead, critics have argued that this is a manipulative way of pushing through digital ID across the country, ramping up digital surveillance of British citizens and reducing our right to privacy. In practice, horrifyingly, this could actually wind up handing the already immensely powerful tech giants more access and control over our data, creating an even more oppressive environment for adults – whilst leaving young people unprepared for the fallout when they ‘regain access’. Featured image via Getty/Carlos Jasso By Maddison Wheeldon From Canary via This RSS Feed.

Komunitas piefed.blahaj.zone

How come people are stupid nowadays? Especially on social media

Algorithms push emotive ragebait at people. Then, when they’re angry and not thinking rationally, they push bullshit-merchants at the same people. As its now something they’re motivated to believe, they don’t check. Then they share the story to their contacts/friends/followers and now you have a big group of angry misinformed people who are now all also following the original account - and then lo and behold - MAGA. Or Reform. Or AfD and all their associated podcasters, youtuber ‘citizen journalists’ and tiktok flagshaggers.

Komunitas mujico.org

Pasos para re-entrenar tu cerebro y ganar mas libertad mental

El Arte del JOMO (Joy of Missing Out) Primeras 3 horas del día, estas no disponible para nadie, no checas correo o whatsapp, no abres ninguna mensajeria, te bañas, almuerzas, disfrutas la mañana. Permitido musica pero no videos. Evalua tus habitos de consumo, son las redes sociales o video tu trabajo? que ventajas te traen? Videos de DIY son buenos para tus metas personales, pero doomscrolling de videos de tiktok de gentes no haciendo realmente nada?; Si nada de eso te esta ayudando a cumplir tus metas laborales o personales, elimina de tu celular y obligate a solo verlo por PC, asi tu mente al ser perezosa evitara hacerlo tan frecuente. Deja el telefono en tu oficina, no comas con el, si puedes salir a correr a caminar sin el hazlo! Acostumbra a tu mente que no es una extension de tu cuerpo, si no una herramienta. Retrabaja tu pensamiento para aceptar que un celular es como una PC y no como un anillo que llevas siempre. Haz algo analogico, haz una actividad que no requiera internet o mobiles/pc, tocar instrumentos, hacer deporte (sin tener que subir videos sobre eso), leer, jugar juegos de mesa, etc. Si le enseñas al cuerpo que hay metas que se alcanzan de forma analogica tu mente se volverá mas concentrada y ávida. hazte un check up mental y fisico cada tanto: cómo me siento? Me he vuelto un NPC de redes sociales? Como esta mi cuerpo? Qué hay de mi salud fisica? Me siento mas intranquilo? Ansioso? Aletargado? Ultimadamente, hazte a la idea que el mundo virtual existe sin ti, si te vas no cambia nada, ni el discord donde estabas exploto ni las personas con las discutias en facebook o reddit se volvieron millonarias porque no estabas tu para evitarlo. La vida seguirá su curso. Pero tu mente estará más libre. Aceptalo poco a poco: No eres nadie para el internet y eso es grandioso. Me alegra estarmelo perdiendo.

Komunitas pawb.social

Bra_irl

I think most people are doing it just to get attention. That’s usually what happen on things like TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter…when something become trending, by redoing the thing in the trend the algorithm push your content so you get more attention.