No. Just no. Not even going to highlight anything from this article.

How can we go back? We're already on the way back. It's called the Fediverse.

This is a good point actually. That's almost like trying to ban Naruto because it's Japanese, but not banning Dragonball Z. We'l see where this goes. If they would enforce these law equally it wouldn't be as much of a concern. Overall, whether they ban TikTok or not, if as a user you don't like a said platform, just don't use it.

Remember the purpose of ads is to advertise a product that might potentially sell. Quality control isn't always a priority it's capitalism after all. At the end of the day, if you just want to block ads, just block ads.

This can be problematic for Peertube's adoption.

If user only uses Peertube to upload, they likely wouldn't notice a thing from this, but if it's a creator from Youtube that's trying to upload to multiple platforms this can cause major problems for ease of use and since the Peertube user base is small to begin with, this can potentially damage Peertube in the long run.

Anything to prevent getting my i.d in a database, i would actually be ok with using an ai to verify my age by my appearance if it really came down to it and I had to choose legally some form of age verification.

The Fediverse by design prevents this, while the internet of the old age had little if any guardrails against this specially since the platforms never really federated with another.

Did forum sites even federate? One forum sites would be dead and the next would have more activity. But what if the other forum with less activity was the one you wanted to use? The old internet was a good start but there's a reason why it's dominated by Instagram and Facebook, while email, you can use mostly any provider and not feel like you're left out.

Not a bad source actually since, you're atleast getting mostly stories posted/shared by regular individuals and not a search engine algorithm throwing the same few sites all the time at you.

I use Lemmy as one of my secondary primary sources for news, while not my major, which happens to be a small handful of nonprofit ones. For tech news particularly, Lemmy users tend to do pretty good at sharing some good stories.

Wait. Ai doesn't have logic built beyond untested data that's thrown at it? Who could had told someone this would happen ahead of time? Conspiracy theorists.

Not really, teenagers naturally want to socialize. It's pretty normal. Is it the best thing? no.

Some might have different tastes, but teenagers in a larger scale tend to not care about rules and will break them if they feel they're restricted. Depending on what it is, this could be things such as, getting out to some dance, or using social media without parental consent and faking age.

I heard of services like this that do this or similar I haven't;t actually checked one out long enough to see how well it works myself.

Yes, nonprofit doesn't mean unbiased. But, they do tend to report content in a public interest perspective, rather than a specific political leaning. Public interest may sometimes happen to lean a certain way. This is why I prefer them, you can atleast know that they'l report on some topics that people want to hear.

While a corporate news organization is going to report what *they want to report, based on their specific political leaning and/or their profit driving goals.

The Fediverse is still a new concept and it's gaining more usage then most other open source social medias. It's the best we have, and more and more people land on it. (atleast going by some Mastodon metrics.) It's not the biggest, but it's actually impressive for an an opensource project what you do have for it's userbase. I wish some people would understand that to an extent.

See the screenshot isn't intended to be a summary but a selected portion I react to with a select post. If someone wants to read the full story, it's linked to.

I, or if it's not a post I created then the op usually provides the link to the article and if any one were to ask me I would always tell them to read the article for full context.

I mean to some extent you aren't wrong.

If it wasn't for Twitter going downhill I am not sure if Mastodon and the rest of the Fediverse would had become as populated as they are now. While Reddit might had maybe gave some usership, both combined going bad really helped.

gasp ai is becoming more secretive and.. dangerous to fans who might be too interested in ai? The ones who want to study it?

Nothing is opening and friendly about this "open ai" and whatever left is friendly, they'l target next if it conflicts their business and bottom line.

unrelated but needs to be stated for some:

Before someone asks "why u filter out the screenshot content"

1. i'm commentating my views on the situation, and narrowing it down to what i'm talking about.
2. it's even more likely to be a fair use if I'm not reusing the entire content. Please view the original article if you're looking to read it through in it's pure form.

This basically has to do with how ai in unpredictable. Which, ai can be. You never know what wrong answer regarding logic and calculation it'l think up next.

It's not an ai summary because if it was the wording would had been different from the article. The content featured in the screenshot is from the article and I manually draw attention to parts I am interested in and also to narrow things down. I started highlighting instead of redacting just so people wouldn't say i'm censoring.

For those who think it's an ai summary idk what to tell you.

Is this some kind of attack on certain minority groups or am I over thinking this comment? I googled what normification meant and the results gave me some bad vibes regarding this comments direction.

Has a distinctive look.

Elon Musk used the word fascist? In Elon's response to this Australia bill noted above.

Wow, so revolutionary.

Any investors question would be, why did this take Google Youtube so long to implement such a feature, of course this is why the ads are being crammed like this on Smart TVs.

This is not necessarily true, while they are censoring people from spreading hate speach they would like they are protecting people who other wise wouldn't be able to live a somewhat ok life.

If you're not critising minorities, or spreading false information typically you would be fine. You can still talk about say capitalism, or even socialism in a bad light (freedom of speech) but you can't just have freedom to just bully and harass minorities.

It's not all about censorship just because, it's to ensure everyone can safely spread their own speech and viewpoints.

If somethings too long, narrow it down to the essentials.

It's highlighting, what's wrong with that? I thought it was an improvement from my earlier posts where I was blocking out filler to narrow down the article.

I highlight the parts I want to read if I were to revisit the article, to narrow it down and save time. Could be useful for users too who just want to get the story and not read a lot of filler.

Good question, because it's to narrow it down to the point, and it's more likely to be a fair use if I commentated it and contain less of the content. For the full content you should view the actual article.

The article at the end of the day is there. Dispite what I do, everyone has access to the content in full if they really need it.

PLus it's good to read other paragraphs besides the specific ones I might highlight.

It doesn't take much time or effort to do. If I highlight one or two things, then when I read it again, I'l have to gasp read through a good portion of the article again.

Sometimes there is more then just two things to highlight.