Awful to see our personal privacy and social lives being ransomed like this. €10 seems like a price gouge for a social media site, and I’m even seeing a price tag of 150SEK (~€15) In Sweden.

  • moitoi@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    My first comment has two statements if not three. The first is about social media and social lives. And, we have to learn that these aren’t the same. They have different definitions and are two separate things.

    The second is about private companies and that we don’t have to put our social lives in the hand of private companies. The article is about Meta.

    Now, Lemmy and Mastodon are different as they are federate social media. They don’t follow the second statement but the first is still true. And people have to keep this in mind when they use Lemmy and Mastodon. They must differentiate between social media and lives. If people use these two, they only avoid the private companies.

    Now, Lemmy and Mastodon is a ridiculous small fraction of social media users. The vast majority relies on private companies. And people put their social lives there. This is an issues.

    • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think forcing a differentiation between social media and social lives can be dangerous. I say this in the context of trans and otherkin people who use free social media. I think they are in the best position to judge their own safety individually.

      • moitoi@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re speaking about accessibility of the safe space. It’s easier to access a social media and use it as a safe space. But, it doesn’t opposite with the fact that social live and social media are different.

        Safe space was a thing before the event of social media. Social media helps people discovering their differences and accepting these. This is access to the information and not social live. I didn’t write people have to avoid social media.

        Before the wide spreading of the internet, people would move to a different town, will reach specific places for safe spaces. They were free or used networks and didn’t rely on private companies like Meta. This is a huge difference.

        • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think you’re ignoring me again. I said in the context of trans people who use free social media. Like the fediverse.

          And yeah, we had ways of doing it before the internet. And they sucked. Fewer people knew they were queer, and they stayed closeted for longer. And their safe spaces could be raided by the police, and that’s how we got Stonewall. I like the internet better.

      • samuel_mahler@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        By “free social media”, did you mean “no-cost” or “unhindered”? Because in my experience, at least 95% of people are completely incapable of judging their own online safety (especially in regard to the “no-cost” social media sites) just from their lack of technical background knowledge. I do not see why any of the stated groups should be exempt from that?