sous-merde

I’d be curious to hear their explanation as to why the Tiktok “addictive” system of switching from one video to the other is more addictive than YT shorts who does the same(, or Instagram reels, switching videos on 𝕏 or Facebook, Vine back then, …).
For now, their arguments are : infinite scroll and push notifications(, present on every social media), autoplay, recommandations, …

This includes features such as infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and its highly personalised recommender system.

Tiktok is being accused of using the same system as other social platforms, sure we believe that our arguments are more coherent, or everyone knows that they’re just lazy excuses, and nobody cares.
Yeah, it’s probably that we gave up on democracy, and nobody with power cares about Tiktok.

Also, our french president keeps repeating over and over the lie that using Tiktok leads you to salafist content after 3-4 videos, and no-one stops him.
I know for a fact that it’s false since almost half of my use of Tiktok was for islamist content(, ~50-100h over ~3 years), and i never once met salafist content(, there was Shahid Bolsen that was fiercely anti-imperialist, and he was pro-Sahel countries, that’s the worst i found, but i suppose that the trick is that extremism is relative ; i believe that the Quran should be interpreted in its historical context and show(ed) a path, but most literalists will be frowned upon by ‘most atheists’/‘any islamophobes’).
I do recognize that anti-imperialist[1], communist, and islamist content appears more often on Tiktok than YT Shorts, but i.m.o. it’s because Tiktok doesn’t censor as much as YT Shorts, and not because it promotes such content.
They probably already interfered in Google results, and intend to interfere in l.l.m. results as well, masks off right ?

He also said a few times that the chinese Tiktok is mostly focused on educative content while our Tiktok is focused on entertainment, but just hope that nobody will verify to see that there is everything on both platforms and it depends on the user choices.
It’s just like when they’re claiming that social media use will modify the shape of our brain. Now, they claim that violent games may make people violent(, despite the experiment of the last 30 years, it’s violent people that choose violent games, boomers). That’s quite certainly a throwaway issue put forward in order to make a concession later though.
I spent a lot of time as a teenager on loup.org and it helped in improving my writing&social skills, most americans had so many great experiences with Club Penguin that it still exists today, even if some pedophiles were indeed there, but let’s not throw the baby with the bathwater. Anyway, we just use this pretext as an excuse to regulate our internet.

They can just say what they want unchallenged, i’d like to see once a debate with someone knowledgeable really disagreeing with him.
And when they do have a contradictory debate, then they’ll just end up disagreeing after exchanging arguments for an hour(, sometimes less). Lock them together in a room for 1-2 days until they agree with each other. I’d like to see a debate ending with “can i invite you to discuss it further this evening at a table ?”, they have five years between each election and won’t spend most of their time talking with each other.
Or, if they’re truly so busy, then force them to exchange public letters(, with the help of assistants), so that they can have the time to think more deeply about ‘their own’&‘the opposite’ arguments.
It seems that they’ll instead decide something, advance a few valid arguments(, without any counter-arguments), and we just roll with it. At least, i don’t see a contradictory debate(, deputies aren’t really debating, and i don’t see how they could, so each one is just making a speech, and often have voting instructions by their party), which would be useless since we’re not deciding anyway, so continue like that…

[1] : I never said that it doesn’t mean being anti-France : one could have been against royalism when France was a kingdom, or slavery when it was allowed, would it have been being anti-France ? Now, some people are against imperialism/hegemony. There are (+) and (-) to most things, and that includes France who has, e.g., an interesting past.
By definition, you can’t evolve without diversity, both external as a species and internal as a (commune/)country(/federation).

Not sure if you want an answer, but :
If we were on lemmygrad or hexbear it’d be the opposite ? That’s one thing that’s great with Lemmy, there’s no sitewide “moderation” like reddit(, until state censorship laws start invading our internet, which shouldn’t take much longer now, as always in the name of safety).
The members of feddit.org should decide the future of feddit.org, and the members of lemmygrad should do the same.
Similarly for Lviv, Transnistria, Crimea, the Donbass, Kiev, Odessa, Transcarpathia, …

(sry if you didn’t need an answer, i like that you’re against wars and this opposition is a good compass. We(sterners) got as much as we could from the eastern side of the Iron Curtain, and didn’t spare our efforts to get Ukraine as well, i can’t help but see the ukrainian bourgeoisie at work there as well as here, they won’t bite the hand that fed them. Russia fell low, but is raising fast and the “neutral” ukrainians that aren’t in/against either side kinda forgot about China, their news could be full of its amazing progress, it’d give hope, there’s a glorious future for Russia ahead and they could be part of it, in the name of the past. It’d be a loss for the little european union though, who lost its colonies and don’t want to expand in ‘islamic territories’/‘the sole other direction available to them’.)

Or the pro-Europe can emigrate there, and what if they love their lands ? Refusing to allow a referendum(, or to recognize the previous ones,) is the side you’re ending up defending then. Ideally, that’d be a more peaceful(&democratic) way of resolving such problems. I can’t blame Ukraine for choosing power over justice, that’s what most countries do(, exception, or not).
Some ukrainians have chosen Russia, others Europe, so be it.

Well, ideally, instead of having to choose between the european union and the russian federation, we’d all be united in diversity, in city-states with very different laws, and without ever having to fear for our safety(, which is always the n°1 reason we(sterners)&others invoke to be agressive).

I don’t want to annoy you or anyone here, but it wouldn’t be polite to leave your comment unanswered, even if i’m wary of the moderators’ dis-information/censorship.

if South Tyrol wanted back to Austria, and Italy ignored that, it wouldn’t be reasonable for Austria to invade Italy

So what would be reasonable to do in order to respect the will of South Tyrol ?

That’s the problem with Russian “politics”. If it’s not going their way, they will force it through.

Russia waited eight years, to the point that a (relatively )common criticism heard in the Donbass in 2022(, confirmed in Patrick Lancaster interviews on the ground,) was to ask why Russia waited that long before helping them.
How many more years should they have waited according to you ?

Ukraine was improving its military during these eight years, and got closer with the e.u. and n.a.t.o., would it really be wise to give them more time to prepare ?

Petro Poroshenko was the worst president that Ukraine ever had(, even worse than Yuschenko), he did everything he could to escalate the situation, except an invasion because Russia was very clear of its reaction : he forbade them to vote, imposed an economic blockade, banned the russian language and russian medias(, as well as old russian books), and i could extend the list if it’s not long enough for you.

Vice did many good videos if you’re interested, even if they were bought back in 2023 by Soros&others.
Worth noting that, in 2022, the inhabitants of the Donbass fought the pro-european ukrainian army from the east, while Russia invaded from Belarus and fought the ukrainians from the west : both were fighting for the Donbass liberation.

If you know what Russia should have done i’m interested.
You probably know that they gave the Donbass and Crimea less than a century ago, and now they took them back according to the will of the local population because Lviv and other pro-european parts of Ukraine decided to work with them against Russia.

Things would have gone differently if Russia’s population wasn’t concentrated on its western side, or if the 2014 western-backed coup had failed. We(sterners) did everything we could to bring Ukraine on our side, partly to improve our power, and partly to contain/weaken the Russian Federation, that still dares to support countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, North Korea, Yugoslavia, Irak, Syria, Lybia, …, despite the 1991 disaster(, that made Ukraine join those responsible for that disaster).

The Russian Federation will take the part of Ukraine that wanted to join them for decades(, like Transcarpathia voted for autonomy since 1991 but wasn’t ever heard) ; while the European Union will also take the part of Ukraine that wants to join them.

I don’t see that as unjust, but Odessa and Transnistria remain “problems” to be solved, what do they want : autonomy, Europe, Russia ?

Edit : Oh. You didn’t know that Crimea and the Donbass voted for decades to join the Russian Federation ? That’s what happens when you only read western medias.
Now we’ll make a point of refusing Ukraine’s demilitarization, in order to prepare its revenge, because that’s a lot of lost territory and they won’t accept it, it’ll be a permanent risk, a thorn in Russia’s side, we’ll see.