Ancestors

Toot

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:13

Imagine how absurd it'd be for the Boston Globe to publish an op-ed from someone on the "Meta Oversight Board" celebrating the censoring of #tiktok with an absurd strawman.

That'd be so crazy, right? https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/01/14/opinion/tiktok-ban-teens-mental-health-privacy/

=> View attached media

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Descendants

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:30

Funny story, this Suzanne Nossel person's career appears to be built around getting paid at high-profile, good-sounding nonprofits (including anti-censorship orgs!!!), and then using those positions to advance...special interests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanne_Nossel#Controversies

=> View attached media

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by Negative12DollarBill on 2025-01-17 at 22:16

@cemerick

To be fair they do acknowledge it at the bottom in small letters…?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from negative12dollarbill@techhub.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:18

@negative12dollarbill Ech, I'll go out on a limb and say that it's not cool to invite people with vested interests to opine in elevated platforms using the most halfwit arguments

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by Itamar Turner-Trauring on 2025-01-17 at 22:19

@cemerick Personally I keep dithering between "oh hey that's some good reporting on how corrupt the statehouse is" and "I don't want to pay Jeff Jacoby's salary" so this par for the course really.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from itamarst@hachyderm.io

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:23

@itamarst it's all very WSJ-esque (tremendous news and journalism work with a masthead that would eat your dog's entrails for a dollar)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by Trash Panda on 2025-01-17 at 22:28

@cemerick@mastodon.social

Man there's so much wrong with this one.

But let's pretend for a moment they naively believe this:

Imagine thinking youtube shorts won't replace tiktok for american teens.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from raccoon@hollow.raccoon.quest

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:31

@raccoon I would think that too, except that yt shorts is a trash dump of a product

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by nasser on 2025-01-17 at 22:43

@cemerick this is such an unhinged paragraph

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nasser@friend.camp

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:45

@nasser I wish I could see you live-react to the brief personal/family bio, 'cause whoooo-wee the dates and locations are interesting

=> View attached media

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by cerement on 2025-01-17 at 22:31

@cemerick

(in the meantime, the teens in question are all heading to LittleRedBook rather than coming back to the loving arms of Meta)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cerement@social.targaryen.house

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-17 at 22:33

@cerement I will never get this "teens" bit. Tiktok is used by half of the US population. It's such a bozo bit

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by cerement on 2025-01-17 at 22:39

@cemerick

classic boogeyman for conservatives – it’s always “those wayward youngsters not listening to their elders”

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cerement@social.targaryen.house

Written by Jhooper on 2025-01-18 at 00:10

@cemerick Fox News ban would give Boomers a much needed reset.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jhooper@techhub.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-18 at 00:26

@jhooper @cemerick

Yeah, TBH, the headline is not wrong, it's just not general enough. We'd all be much better off with less corporate media of any type.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-18 at 00:28

@naught101 @jhooper yes, it's wrong. The government taking a paternalistic role re: what media anyone consumes is flatly wrong.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-18 at 00:32

@cemerick @jhooper

I disagree. We need regulation of advertising, for instance, and hate speech. There's a very large grey area between that and actual beneficial community controlled media.

(Whether government is the right tool to check power in this regard is a separate issue, but it's what we've got now.)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-18 at 00:57

@naught101 @jhooper government regulation of advertising and hate speech? No, no, no thank you. Just look at current efforts to classify BDS as illegal hate speech.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-18 at 01:08

@cemerick @jhooper

How do you think it should be regulated then? (If at all?)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-18 at 21:51

@naught101 @jhooper Which "it" are you asking about?

I am deeply allergic to ads (I basically don't tolerate them at all, and do everything I can to avoid them), but no, I mostly don't think advertising should be regulated. Attribution (i.e. clearly labeling ads as such) is good. I'm not sure if there are other bright lines that represent a compelling gov't interest.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-19 at 02:05

@cemerick @jhooper

Out of interest, what kinds of things do you think should be regulated, and why?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-20 at 03:32

@naught101 @jhooper That's a very silly thing to ask someone to enumerate

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-20 at 10:46

@cemerick @jhooper fair point.. I wasn't trying to get you to list all of them. I was more interested in what your threshold and reasons are.

Advertising seems like a huge problem in modern western society, it's a key tool of oppressive power. Beyond obvious things like violence and selling toxic products, it seems to me up there with the things that need regulating most.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-20 at 20:42

@naught101 @jhooper Advertising is pretty close to the bottom of my priority list. Off the top of my head, wage and worker protections, environmental/industrial practices, food/water/air safety, anti-monopoly enforcements, about 5,000 things around financial markets, etc all go way ahead of ads in the queue of "needs regulation".

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-20 at 20:44

@naught101 @jhooper

If you really care about the negative externalities of advertising, then stripping personhood from corporations would be a way more effective at curbing those (but would also yield positive benefits in domains way more important than malicious advertising)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by Jhooper on 2025-01-20 at 20:45

@cemerick @naught101 can both of you remove me from these posts? I got 2 kids if I want to hear some of the most pointless bickering

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jhooper@techhub.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-20 at 20:49

@jhooper @naught101 Sure, I'll be sure to not mention you again.

Also, no need for the snark. Every post you're mentioned in has a "Mute Conversation" action associated with it. 👋

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by Jhooper on 2025-01-20 at 20:51

@cemerick @naught101 then we will both be happy.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jhooper@techhub.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-20 at 21:13

@cemerick

Thank you. Great points, I think I agree for the most part.

I'd be super interested those financial regulations (because I'm working in an adjacent field, climate risk, but have little financial knowledge). But I also understand if you wanna drop the conversation here :)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-20 at 21:22

@naught101 Though I think I have a decent grounding in how a lot of the big pieces fit together, I am thankfully not a good source for details on financial markets regs. There's a whole cottage industry of people/think tanks/etc proposing various new rules/regimes, so there's thousands of pages for you to peel there when you're ready. If you're really green though, might want a good primer on those big pieces; https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44918/8 seems like a reasonable starting point

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by naught101 on 2025-01-21 at 01:21

@cemerick hah. Yes. It's a space that feels completely antithetical to my ethics. But valuable to understand.

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out!

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from naught101@mastodon.social

Written by homestargardner on 2025-01-18 at 03:29

@cemerick yeah tiktok does need to be banned

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from homestargardner@mastodon.social

Written by Chas Emerick on 2025-01-18 at 05:18

@homestargardner you're in the wrong place (a federated social network that is that way in part to minimize the systemic impact of an authoritarian censor) to advocate for censorship

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cemerick@mastodon.social

Written by homestargardner on 2025-01-19 at 02:49

@cemerick oh I thought it just meant shut it down

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from homestargardner@mastodon.social

Written by prasket on 2025-01-18 at 03:34

@cemerick the fact that Zuckfuck thinks users are going to magically come to meta/insta shit is quite hilarious. Im hoping he is very furious the fact that the Xiaohongshu number one free app on app store right now lol

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from prasket@seattlematrix.org