Other parties (including the ones you mentioned) have sizable stakes in twitter, but they are much smaller than Elon's stake, not the other way around. (Remember, it sold for $44B, you can divide that by the numbers in the article by that to see how much each investor mentioned owns).
I know it came out especially “the snozzberries taste like snozzberries” like but the sentiment is basically that: the commenter doesn’t view her as having the authority of a member of Congress regardless of her actual position because they see her person as inherently incapable of achieving that.
To allude to another post on here, it’s like a black man being elected mayor and no one recognizing his authority.
They're called fascists. They'll bang on and on about how your rights are being taken away so you should empower them to protect you. Then, the second you do, they'll be the first to take away the rights you thought you were protecting.
I think there will be a lot of random actions in the coming days. Reddit is really mad right now and admins are taking random actions that are later overruled because it's bad optics.
They really scared about Lemmy? Being so blatant about this shit... I have learned the following:
They do not like subreddits going NSFW it makes them no money. I for one welcome all furries and rule 34 artwork to Reddit.
They do not like people promoting Lemmy, any kind of competition gets them trying every tactic they can muster, playing all their cards now.
They do not like people deleting or removing data from Reddit. You know what would suck? A GDPR deletion request... That would be a real damn shame. No data to sell then lol
Wouldn't they have to have some sort of presence in the EU? If all of their operations are US based (I don't know if they are or not), can the EU really do anything about it?
All governments have the power to block a website, there have been sites blocked by the government such as pirate bay and MEGA upload. It isn't outside the possibility they can get blocked at an ISP level or beyond that.
They can even contact the website host which most companies will use Amazon services and they will definitely comply with EU regulations
Outside of Europe, the UK and California you probably won't have much luck to be honest, as they do not legally have to comply with you if you are not a citizen of any of those places.
As for if Reddit tells the EU to go away, that is suicide, whilst 49% of users are in the USA the rest of the 51% are everywhere else, that would be a very bad look for investors if the website was blocked in Europe and it would look especially bad for the company to be fined for gdpr non-compliance. So they would be in worse not to comply... Not to mention the loss in ad revenue. Nobody wants to serve ads when only half the site is going to see them. USA won't be much affected but anyone in the EU will.
They could also increase the fine, and if they still refuse to pay, sue them and seize assets. Either way, a massive headache
I just want to add that as a European citizen you also have a right to get a copy of all your data, and an explanation how and when this data has been used.
Also, I'm pretty sure that their response "you first have to delete your comments manually" does not comply with EU guidelines.
Also found this blog post and made the request to Reddit for GDPR data removal. However I removed comments by using the Power delete suite (https://github.com/j0be/PowerDeleteSuite).
After few hours got email (similar as in the blog post) from reddit and followed by the instructions given in email (basically send as a reddit message confirming account deletion). Few hours passed again and got confirmation email from Reddit "We’ve now flagged your account for irreversible deletion. Please allow some time for this action to complete."
Basically not much effort needed in case you're willing to remove the comments (etc) manually or using scripts, extensions, etc.
However not sure if it would be GDPR compliant for Reddit to leave the comments if the user data is wiped out even if the username is removed from the posts.
I feel like “mansplaining” has lost all meaning. It used to be about men going out of their way to correct someone that didn’t need correcting, particularly if they were wrong themselves, and most often with women. Now people use it on men just…saying things to anyone.
I get that people are touchy on the subject, and I respect anyone’s right to not want or need help. I think how Mr. Solomon handled it was correct - ask if they want your input and respect their answer. It’d just be nice if people didn’t use cultural memes to dismiss others out of hand.
Thought it was assuming someone you’re talking to needs to be eli5 something like properly configuring a firewall. As a woman I always have to step on eggshells not to embarass guys doing that because every time I mention anything that indicates I have experience in IT and tech support they seem put off and stop talking to me lol… especially if then I try to share what I’ve done to fix an issue that has been plaguing say the office and they don’t understand what I’m talking about. I think though intersecting into someone’s conversation is very rude at least where I’m from. In public I don’t expect to interact with a stranger unless they’re about to warn me about a bobcat behind me lol. I don’t interject in other people’s conversations even though I may be knowgeable about it because who am I to them? They’re having a friendly conversation and I walk up and go “xcuse me ma’am, actually, it was Jennifer Lopez that was being referenced in the taco kisses episode of South Park, not Shakira”. Again, just awkward?
I definitely agree that you don’t just butt into a strangers conversation in public. That’s just weird.
When it comes to tech though you have to at least get where those guys are comming from. It’s not because you’re a woman, it’s because it’s tech. You can’t assume people know anything about tech otherwise you’ll be half way through explaining the thing before you find out that the person you’re explaining it to doesn’t know what a right mouse button is and they think the internet is an icon on their desktop. You can’t know what everyone else knows so the easiest thing is to assume they know nothing. If you work in IT or any other tech field long enough it’s really easy to wind up talking to everyone like they lick windows just because that’s the safest thing to assume until proven otherwise.
As far as the IT guys avoiding you, they may just feel awkward for treating you like a window licker, or they may just be leaving you alone because now they know that you know what you’re doing. I work in a different support job now but I still have coworkers that I don’t really interact with because I know them and trust them enough to do most stuff on their own. However that also means that if they seek me out then something is very wrong and it’s probably going to be a pain in the ass because if it wasn’t then they would have fixed it themselves.
I get what you’re saying about interjecting in stranger’s conversations, but that actually happens all the time (initiated by men and women, to men and women) here in Canada. It’s actually one of my favorite things about Canada! I’ve got into some spirited discussions with random strangers about all sorts of things, and bonding with strangers with immediate familiarity is something I’ve grown to really enjoy.
Unless I’m in an introverted mood, in which case I just mumble and run off lol
I have never liked the term. I am also in a technical role and feel like if I say anything to a women at work I will be yelled at.
Like okay I had to go to speech therapy for years the very fact that I can talk at all is a miracle of medical science. Any other time in human history I would be effectively mute. So now I am working with someone, I have to not only figure out the answer to their question I have to spend all this effort to get my mouth to move to say the answer and if I explain it even slightly wrong I am an awful person who deserves to have their life ruined.
I don’t know what you don’t know. Sometimes I am not going to simplify my answer not enough sometimes I am going to simplify it too much. I am going to make a mistake and for that I am sorry.
Frankly I do avoid it because I don’t want to be accused of something. If I don’t interact I can’t interact incorrectly.
Mr. Solomon handled it was correct - ask if they want your input and respect their answer.
You forgot step #3! Not whine about it online.
He offered, they declined, we didn’t need to hear about it. The only reason we heard about it is because he felt slighted, or is trying to make some anti-feminist point. I’m sad that he felt bad, but not everyone is going to want the free stuff you’re offering. That doesn’t make them bad people, or feminism a bad movement.
I was just saying that bc it seemed too cynical when you said we didn’t need to hear about it at all. I guess I don’t 100% know his intent either but there hasn’t been any reason to doubt it so far.
I never said anything about feminism or that they were bad. I’m just making an observation on the situation here. I also don’t think it’s unreasonable for a person to share an interesting personal experience on a forum designed to share exactly that. And he doesn’t sound “slighted” to me. More amused than anything, because it’s an amusing story.
So if a female biologist who wrote a PHD thesis on the origins of RNA overheard some men talking about the origins of life and when the women wants to chime in because she is a subject matter expert, the men tell her they “don’t need a black woman’s explanation”. And after being told this she is in the wrong for venting online? Please. Your just as sexist as the people you claim to be opposed to.
You cannot in good faith compare people who have suffered because if their skin color to those who have not, when talking about situations where skin color comes up.
Are both situations racist by pure definition? Sure. Just like punching a man and punching a child are both punching. One is much more wrong.
Mocking a culture that has been abused because of their culture (Jews) is worse than mocking a culture that has not been abused for their culture (Karens). But mocking white looking people for being white isn’t the same as their culture. It matters what you mock.
Don’t punch down. It’s not more complicated than that. And if you’re not sure if you’re punching down, don’t punch.
As a brown person. It doesn’t matter what color you are. Someone’s race shouldn’t matter at all when comparing how fucked up something is unless it’s directly culturally relevant.
A white guy vs black woman RNA paper writing PhD being told gtfo is equally offensive. Race only matter like if you told the white guy vs black woman something like a joke about picking cotton or the white guy a joke about him fucking his sister.
Telling someone “you don’t matter / you are the enemy” for over a decade and to millions of people is how an actual white nationalist movement became a thing. You can only tell people how horrible and evil they are until they start to believe in it.
One racially motivated act (say hitting someone because of their skin color) is not any more or less racist depending on the race of the victim. If you believe that, it is by definition a racist value you’re holding.
There’s a difference when it comes to contextual, social and historical factors. Like the word cracker is insensitive but doesn’t carry the hateful connotations and discrimination that the N-word possesses.
But anyone trying to say it’s more or less appropriate to hate on any single group is just demonstrating their own implicit and explicit racial biases.
It’s reductive to take that as saying “it’s more appropriate to hate on white people”. They worded it a bit poorly imo but the analogy they’re responding to is still crappy. There isn’t an issue of black women assuming white men don’t know the origins of RNA, but there is an issue of men assuming women don’t know anything about “nerdy” things like film. Obviously they assumed wrong with Ed Solomon, but the analogy is still in bad faith because it’s wouldn’t be for the same reason.
This specific situation described in this post is an issue of “women assuming that the man offering his take on a subject was ignorant about it and driven by machism” (as that’s exactly what they accused him off when they called his offer one of “mansplaining”).
(In fact what makes this a bit of a story is that rather than just saying “No thanks”, they instead explicitly accused him of offering an ignorant opinion driven by sexist)
Surelly both the “men assuming women don’t know anything about ‘nerdy’ things like film” and “women assuming that men offering their own take on a subject are ignorant and driven by sexism” are equally wrong?!
How is instantly presuming such bad things about other people purelly on the basis of the number of Y chromossomes they were born with, less sexist if its acting/voicing prejudice (quite literally: they prejudged the other person) from XX persons towards XY persons than if it is from XY persons towards XX persons?
It’s kinda the whole point of this whole comment thread: prejudice is prejudice and its discriminatory to excuse it for some people but not for others purelly on the bases of some having being born with certain characteristics and the others not.
One racially motivated act (say hitting someone because of their skin color) is not any more or less racist depending on the race of the victim.
This is only true if you don’t think the severity of the damage correlates to the severity of the racism. If we go with your definition, then all racism is equivalent, and we can’t tell any apart. That seems like an arbitrarily limiting and useless way to think about it. Why would we not want to be able to compare how severe each racist act is?
But anyone trying to say it’s more or less appropriate to hate on any single group is just demonstrating their own implicit and explicit racial biases.
This is only true if you think all groups are equally strong and equally oppressed by each other and the system. But if that’s not the case, then I would say it’s OK to be mean to the ones who are stronger or less oppressed. It’s a means of coping with the inequality. Just like we normal folks like to mock billionaires, while they’re actively causing suffering.
If one person engages in a racially motivated attack on another individual, it is not any more or less racist if the victim was black or white.
If a man was walking down the street and was beaten to death by an angry mob based entirely on the individual’s race, is it less racially motivated if the victim was one race over another?
Are we punishing people for the sins of our ancestors? Does historic racism against one race justify mistreatment of another thru a retributivist mindset?
This backwards hypervigilant, hypersensitivity and hypocritically encouraging implicit and explicit racism as morally permissible retributivist actions needs to stop. Racism is racism. We need to respect each other as equals if we want racism to stop. You’re calling for unequal treatment/enforcement of social policies based on one’s race. Fuck that noise.
Yeah in my books, “Mansplaining” has never had proper meaning. It was just a way of blaming men for a particular behaviour, which is generally neutral to begin with.
Is an interesting topic of discussion, unfortunately, they always seem to attach these things to a specific gender or race and it makes the whole thing sound childish. It’s like the concept of micro-aggressions, I like the idea of investigating the subtleties of human behaviour which can have covert but large effects, but they immediately attach it to race and racism.
The people who came up with it just didn’t have a lot of real world experience dealing with people. Most likely college kids writing from their own, narrow minded viewpoint (with a dash of narcissism)
Womansplaining I guess? It’s not a popular phrase or even one I’ve ever heard anyone else use, but it somewhat fits as she explained it because she felt like you don’t understand cooking as a guy. But it’s missing the other context where mansplaining only became a popular term because lots of women could identify with their own personal experiences of being condescendingly explained to just because they’re a woman.
In a perfect world wish reddit corp wasn’t such assholes and this whole thing didn’t happen the way it did.
A lot of us here, are here and have the opinions you don’t like (FOSS, privacy is important, big tech is bad) because we too wish Reddit wasn’t such assholes.
Don’t take this the wrong way, but it sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. Lemmy users are jaded. We have come to accept that big tech companies will continue to act the way they do because it is in their nature.
The free ride is over bub. The walls are closing in as venture capitalists squeeze users for profits (especially in this economy). With big tech, you are the product. You don’t get a say in how you use the product. Instead you are cattle, to be hearded. If you want to be a sheep and mingle along with all the other sheep and just keep your head down and accept whatever the big tech companies tell you to do (and that’s fine if it’s what you want), then maybe Lemmy ain’t for you. But one thing is clear Lemmy must shed the ills of big tech and investor interests and privacy harvesting business models if we are to not return exactly where we ended up using Reddit.
I’m sorry, but to me, it’s not normal to be transparent to the bones for big tech. It’s not normal to be pushed around by big tech just like Spez, Elon and Zuck do it with their userbase. It’s not normal to be the product and to be followed around, often even without consent.
It’s the opposite of normal to think that this is normal. To me, people who think this is normal nave been successfully brainwashed by big tech. Think I’m wearing a tinfoil hat? Okay, go ahead.
But if we don’t finally step up against shit like that, it’ll only get worse.
I dunno. If the federation came across a space faring species enslaving others by pretending to be their gods I think they would act against the Goa’uld.
Like in this meme the prime directive would stop them from talking to the primitive humans on the planets but they would totally have beef with Apophis and co who are obviously warp capable and where the prime directive doesn’t apply.
This is essentially how the Klingons originally worked. They would enslave weaker and/or less advanced planets and make those people produce raw materials for the Empire. It was very imperial/feudal/mercantilist.
It’s almost always cultural appreciation, not appropriation! Please try my culture’s foods, wear our clothes and watch our movies. Ask me about how I lived, what parts of my culture signify and where they came from. This is how we bridge cultural gaps, not by isolating and gatekeeping!
I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows to be stuffed. I want the cultures of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. - M K Gandhi
Due the circumstances right now, we’ve got more tech and privacy minded people, as well as more “principaled” folk, so we definitely skew a certain way.
I’d say give it time. Imo, things will sort of water down if more people keep joining. (For lack of a better term)
But I will respectfully disagree, I’m kinda enjoying it, and I’m not half as smart as some of the people on here, but I do totally understand your perspective.
Random
Top