• surph_ninja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        The same way we fight it in the physical world. With debate and education and engagement.

        Wild that you would express concern with spreading of fascism while advocating for technocracy. You don’t oppose fascism- you just have a preferred flavor of it.

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          22 hours ago

          With debate and education and engagement.

          the algorithms will not show them to nearly as many consumers as it does with fascist content

            • Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              19 hours ago

              This I agree with. However, I disagree with debating fascists. They don’t debate in good faith. Their aim in any debate is to wear you down by spewing more lies than you have the time or energy to debunk.

              • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                The point isn’t to convert the fascist. It’s to humiliate them and expose them in front of everyone else.

        • nickiwest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Debate, education and engagement take time.

          The algorithm is instantaneously ready with the next easily digestible bit of content to send you further down the rabbit hole into radicalization.

          I worry that we need a more instantaneous cure in our current information environment.

            • nickiwest@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              I’m not, really. I just don’t think we have the luxury of taking the amount of time that we would need to educate people thoroughly enough to counteract the algorithm.

              Probably what we need is a limitation on free speech where blatant misinformation is involved. In the same way that shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theatre is harmful, so is repeating false claims to stir political discord.

    • gamer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      paternalism

      Whenever I see someone complaining about this on the internet, I imagine they’re an angsty teenager mad that their mom doesn’t let them get a face tattoo.

      • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        Yeah, you’re aware of the definition of paternalism then. That’s the whole point of authoritarianism. The leadership does not believe the people can trusted to run their own lives, and treats the entire population as disobedient teenagers.

        • gamer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          That’s the whole point of authoritarianism.

          Lol no. You could say paternalism is authoritarian, but not the other way around. Authoritarianism is just about power.

          But as an aside, would you mind sharing your age? You don’t need to be specific, just say if you’re over or under 18. I have a… theory about people who obsess over the concept of “paternalism”.

          • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            All paternalism is authoritarian. Not all authoritarianism is paternal.

            Middle aged. Your theory sounds bunk.