they can be fooled too.

Makes it harder: when I go to the wrong website, the manager simply doesn’t suggest credentials (it does not have) for it. That causes me to wonder why.

Without a password manager, a user is never prompted to wonder. They’d simply not notice.

The main weakness

is it’s a pain in the ass.

• Won’t generate strong passwords.
• Won’t fill out login forms for me.
• Manual, slower search and copying (worse for dyslexia).
• Increases risk of submitting credentials to wrong site/app (especially malicious ones).
• Increases error of mistyping credentials.
• More effort to back up & retrieve.

Some would argue it’s culturally imperialistic to impose US cultural sensitivities on the rest of the international English community. Wasn’t the inventor of git Finnish? The entire world uses git.

Maybe less is better: disability month?

image containing text lacking accessible alternative such as link to accessible source or proper alt text (instead of “July is disability pride month!”)

dat irony: a message to support disabilities begins with an accessible message

physics too hard: nonphysical things can’t kill? preposterous

Basically. Pretending the harm of something physical going wrong (potential to cause real death) is at all comparable to the nonphysical going wrong (a jumble of angry words) is unreal. Lemmy confirms the premise that this discourse & the people spouting it are broken & senseless. The distinction between physical & nonphysical is lost on these loonies.

How do you control the course of a failing rocket? Are you claiming such misdesign is impossible?

The fact remains that unlike with words, a physical potential of death & injury exists in what is technically a missile of significant weight carrying enough explosive substance to escape orbit. The difference between non-0 and 0 possibility of death/injury.

Unless magic exists, words are incapable. Do you claim magic exists? How do mere words cause death without the personal responsibility of something else culpably choosing to take several steps of its own? Or are you arguing the sight of words have deranged you into a mindless killer? If so, maybe you’re the real threat.

Seems like you’re arguing society is dangerous to life: I agree. That’s not a valid argument against words, though.

Again, total lack of perspective & sense.

reading comprehension: none

Don’t know, man: kinda think the potential loss of life from a failing rocket crashing into people matters somewhat more than words. Maybe?

Musk himself seems to abhor guardrails generally—except in cases where guardrails help him personally—preferring to hurriedly ship products, rapid unscheduled disassemblies be damned. That may be fine for an uncrewed rocket, but X has hundreds of millions of users aboard.

• Grok: writes embarrassing words.
• Rockets: can weigh hundreds of metric tons, carry explosive chemicals, can crash into populated areas resulting in loss of life.

In this discourse, anyone else find a broken sense of proportion & consequences at stake?

If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.

―Lindsey Graham

Maybe people need to learn to not suck as bad, check their sources, ask questions like how do I know this is true?

Basic shit we should have learned long before we reach adulthood? 🤷

This is a sentiment often repeated by manosphere influencers and there’s no actual tangible evidence it exists and I think that’s the real issue.

This is why I feel there is such a disconnect. I just have to open TikTok to see this, so if researchers are not finding evidence then I’m very curious how that’s possible. Heck, you just need to look at the same masculinity influencer content they are talking about to see it, because it’s not just them making shit up from nothing - they will often use clips of misandrist women to get their point across. So they basically find the evidence for you.

Why has no one here said “links”?

People here just talk in circles instead of providing concrete support.

Apple to Australianseveryone: You’re Too Stupid to Choose Your Own Apps

fix’d

There are speech police in the real world. Workplaces don’t allow you to use slurs or to harass your co-workers.

That “speech police” traces to the government in the form of labor laws & regulations in the remit of the EEOC, eg, Title 7 of Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Americans with Disabilities Act. Employers didn’t conceive of such workplaces policies on their own to invite lawsuits & put targets on their backs.

These laws do not apply to social media as a communication platform. Offensive expression doesn’t deny equal access/opportunities to platform resources they are under any legal obligation to provide. Should we put much confidence in social media companies voluntarily assuming unnecessary obligations just because?

It never made sense.

Do we really like people, though?

That’s hilarious. 👍

Nah, and cool opinion.

As someone else wrote, why should anyone put much confidence in “some giant/evil megacorp”? They’re not a philanthropic organization & they’re not real authorities. We can expect them to act in their own interest.

If content is truly illegal or harmful, then the real authorities should handle it. Simply taking down that content doesn’t help real authorities or address credible threats. If it’s not illegal or harmful, then we can block or ignore.

People already curate their information offline. It seems reasonable to expect the same online.

Maybe you’re right: is there verification?

Neither content policy (youtube or tiktok) clearly lays out rules on those words. I only find unverified claims: some write it started at YouTube, others claim TikTok. They claim YouTube demonetizes & TikTok shadowbans. They generally agree content restrictions by these platforms led to the propagation of circumspect shit like unalive & SA.

TikTok policy outlines their moderation methods, which include removal and ineligibility to the for you feed. Given their policy on self-harm & automated removal of potential violations, their policy is to effectively & recklessly censor such language.

Generally, censorship is suppression of expression. Censorship doesn’t exclusively mean content removal, though they’re doing that, too. (Digression: revisionism & whitewashing are forms of censorship.)

Regardless of how they censor or induce self-censorship, they’re chilling inoffensive language pointlessly. While as private entities they are free to moderate as they please, it’s unnecessary & the effect is an obnoxious affront on self-expression that’s contorting language for the sake of avoiding idiotic restrictions.

To most of us, few things are more bothersome than the dreaded cookie banners. On countless websites, you’re confronted with a pesky pop-up urging you to agree to something.

Thanks to dumbass EU laws fussing over nonproblems like (check notes) targeted advertising. Really? I voluntarily give out information to an ad-supported service I don’t pay for, they turn around & use this to try to show me more relevant ads, and I’m supposed to pretend the internet was ever private & shit my pants over this? While I can understand safeguards from identity theft, cookies aren’t that, I don’t understand how this concern ever blew up.

Before those laws, those cookie banners didn’t exist & I was happy not clicking them. I was under no illusion that online privacy exists with free services running on ad revenue that can track online activity and try to harvest voluntary information that’s mostly worthless to me. Free shit in exchange for mostly worthless information & ads I ignore seems like an obvious bargain, but some hypochondriacs had to stir everyone into a frenzy to bitch & moan about it. Do they think the world just runs on magic?

Do people still have to say unalive?

Censorship is goddamn stupid. They should just tag content & let people decide what to filter.