It allows individuals to distribute content to a network of hundreds of millions of people, with a very low barrier to entry, and in ways that are not centrally controlled. If my government is banning certain types of speech or information, websites in other countries may still be accessible with it. People in my own country may even make sites with that information, as it’s fairly easy to bypass those laws. The Internet holds all sorts of content that pisses off billionaires. Piracy, privacy tools, the Internet Archive, government document leaks. Think how I can read about the Epstein files so easily by searching or asking about it here on Lemmy - and then think about how much harder it is for me to find that information from a news company, if it’s even possible at all. Why do you think governments and billionaires around the world are so eager to monitor and centralize and rewrite the fundamental workings of the internet? They are coming after the internet because it is a threat to them.
Right. “[H]undreds of millions of [really really stupid] people” who don’t habve the cognitive capacity to do anything useful with the information but conspiracy theorize.
Where is all the miraculous positive benefit to society of this magical tool designed by billionaires to sell you shit you don’t need?
If it’s doing all this good … where is the good? All it’s done is concentrate power. And you continue to aid and abet it.
Bravo.
It was a good idea. Then the billionaires hijacked it for their own purposes. Now, we live in reality and you sound like a naive 3rd grader who believes all the pap propaganda you’re fed.
I don’t have time to fully respond to this right now, but I just wanted to say that I do understand and sympathize with the things you’re bringing up here. I was hoping to engage with you politely, and my feelings are hurt by your insults, but I understand your anger. When I said I look forward to your counterargument, I meant that earnestly and respectfully. I’m sorry for upsetting you with my reply - I was hoping to lend an angle of positivity to you that you may not have considered, not discount your own view.
😂 Good one.
It allows individuals to distribute content to a network of hundreds of millions of people, with a very low barrier to entry, and in ways that are not centrally controlled. If my government is banning certain types of speech or information, websites in other countries may still be accessible with it. People in my own country may even make sites with that information, as it’s fairly easy to bypass those laws. The Internet holds all sorts of content that pisses off billionaires. Piracy, privacy tools, the Internet Archive, government document leaks. Think how I can read about the Epstein files so easily by searching or asking about it here on Lemmy - and then think about how much harder it is for me to find that information from a news company, if it’s even possible at all. Why do you think governments and billionaires around the world are so eager to monitor and centralize and rewrite the fundamental workings of the internet? They are coming after the internet because it is a threat to them.
I look forward to your counterargument.
“Content” … Ohhhhh … what in the world did we do before “content.” Just hafta have more of that “Content.”
Silly little screen time fiend.
Right. “[H]undreds of millions of [really really stupid] people” who don’t habve the cognitive capacity to do anything useful with the information but conspiracy theorize.
Where is all the miraculous positive benefit to society of this magical tool designed by billionaires to sell you shit you don’t need?
If it’s doing all this good … where is the good? All it’s done is concentrate power. And you continue to aid and abet it.
Bravo.
It was a good idea. Then the billionaires hijacked it for their own purposes. Now, we live in reality and you sound like a naive 3rd grader who believes all the pap propaganda you’re fed.
I don’t have time to fully respond to this right now, but I just wanted to say that I do understand and sympathize with the things you’re bringing up here. I was hoping to engage with you politely, and my feelings are hurt by your insults, but I understand your anger. When I said I look forward to your counterargument, I meant that earnestly and respectfully. I’m sorry for upsetting you with my reply - I was hoping to lend an angle of positivity to you that you may not have considered, not discount your own view.