• 3 posts
  • 19 comments
Joined 6 months ago
Cake day: April 19th, 2026

People act and speak differently depending on who they’re with.

Web-forums of old didn’t unify a user’s identity like Lemmy does. One forum was held at one domain, hosted by one set of computers and administrators; another forum had a separate domain, set of machines and administrators. Identities on one forum were not correlated to another. A forum dedicated to cars had no reason to know about the you that also posted to a forum about crocheting.

Software has been trending towards centralized identities. This never made sense to me as it’s diametric to how identities operate in real life. Your employer knows one side of you and your friends another, which is still different to the you you might show to your partner.

This centralization stems from surveillance-capitalism’s desire to surveil and tie independent pieces of information to one real human, creating a higher-resolution profile of that individual from which the subject becomes easier to exploit. Monied software has been the impetus. Free-software is affected by that dominant culture of surveillance-capitalism. The temporal context is pertinent and Lemmy functions with one central-identity interacting with a multitude of separate communities.

Creating separate identities on separate instances of Lemmy is possible, but it doesn’t change Lemmy’s design and that design seems to be a reflection of surveillance-capitalism. The very fact that you can view a user’s previous posts appears voyeuristic, being pointless outside of that context for users.

I am a proponent of anonymity. The ability to write posts anonymously or under different identities would be welcome. That central-identity (that is the Lemmy account that’s established on a particular instance) could still exist for the purposes of administration. I would also like to see finer grained controls for the user’s content and profile.

What if the user does not want a public profile at all? What if the user does not want a long-term identity? Creating a multitude of identities on one instance could be perceived as spam or malicious activity. Allowing the user to create sub-identities that are not publicly attached to that central-identity would still allow for ordered administration whilst empowering users to share what they want to share with a particular community without also exposing the entirety of an identity.

  • Buy a used Pixel and install GrapheneOS. Literally couldn’t be any easier. If you use Google services other than Android it’s a simple matter of well… not using them. It’s not tricky or difficult. No guidance is needed. If they want to do it they will. These sort of posts usually come from people who aren’t genuine. They’re aware of something that makes them uncomfortable about Google (an American surveillance-corporation drenched in blood), but they don’t know how to use computers because the state failed to provide a proper technical education. If they don’t have the motivation it’s pointless. No matter what you say or what you do you’ll always get the same response: it’s different; it’s too hard; but on Google you just did this; blah blah blah.

    Their whole framing isn’t grounded in reality. It’s looking at a computer from a consumer point of view: Google does all those things that free-software could do, but it does it better and more! Why would anyone use free-software? They can’t even sell it it’s that bad! No one’s paying people to repackage free-software into a consumer-friendly commodity. There’s a reason why free-software fails in a capitalist-market as a consumer commodity. No one’s buying it. It’s free. Without the influx of capital from sales there’s no capital for marketing.

    What ever changes happen usually aren’t worthwhile or they think they’re doing something, but don’t do anything at all. “I removed/don’t use any Google apps on my Google Android.” Ok… you accomplished nothing. Glad you felt like you did something though.

  • Every other day! I just can’t help myself! A new model is released and the hype machine starts up; updates are released to downgrade performance on older models–I just wag my tail non-stop! It’s so exciting! Those flashy lights and colours! Ooooo! This money belongs in their wallets and everyone’s going to get a hold them! And I tell myself pathetic lies: oh, the battery can’t be replaced… if only it had screws… it’s way too hard to heart up glue and put a new battery in. Besides–all my friends are going into debt too! Plus those new features: it can make phone calls and text! Look! E-mail access too!

  • Shift the conversation towards autonomy, dignity and self-respect.

    The user’s interaction with the-billion-dollar-company’s software is unpaid labour, which is why they profit and the user suffers. They suffer from having their data stolen; they suffer the expenses fostered on to them; they pay for the computers that spy on them; they pay for the electricity to run the spyware; they pay for the data-subscriptions that facilitate the theft of their data. They cover all the expenses of a billion-dollar-company and are deprived of any profit. They do not even garner a wage.

    If one wishes to move towards the point of “my data is worthless” point out the company’s profits or even its speculative valuations. Clearly it’s not worthless. The products that are derived from their exploitation lead to even greater profits for those companies. “A.I.” is a looting of the collective commons. A privatization of humanity’s interaction with computers.

    Do they like being exploited? Do they like their batteries draining faster, because their mobile-computer is running software to spy on them? Do they like running out of data because their mobile-computer is forcefully downloading ads and spyware-updates? Do they like ads? Do they like being interrupted by the highest bidder? Do they like annoying notifications that are just ads? Do they like this shitty experience? Are they complete docile slaves? They are less than wage-slaves for they do not even garner a wage! Have some self-respect and dignity!

  • Thanks for the links. I’ll give them a read through.

    They didn’t separate artificial sweetened beverages from those with sugar in the article about gallbladder cancer. That’s sort of… important from my perspective. Cancer and gallstones are different things anyway. I’m confidant my issues were with malnutrition over my gallbladder and the problematic gallstones.

    Likewise, obese people consume “diet” sodas in an attempt to diet. Even in that review it has garbage conclusions like “consumption of any type of soda”. Yea, that’s real helpful in figuring out if aspartame is a carcinogen–let’s sample people who don’t drink aspartame exclusively to collect two data-sets: those that drink water exclusively and those that drink sugar-soda exclusively. That says nothing about aspartame.

    A lot of this is garbage. I hate meta-reviews. They’re always garbage.

    Like, I’ve already stated I’m not obese, yet people keep bringing up obesity and sugar-related diseases. Thanks for not reading.

  • Yea, I specifically noted the no-sugar content. I don’t like sweet things in general, especially food that’s majority sugar. I’m not an American. Real food exists in my country. I’ve never struggled with weight abundance, but the inverse: being too skinny. I don’t like eating. I’ve talked with doctors about this and I’m assuming it’s due to being skinny, but I get no response.

    My teeth are “ok”. I’ve had one dental filling over my life. Dentists usually comment on how clean they are. None have yet to say anything negative about overall hygiene. They’re overcrowded so cosmetically they don’t look great.

    Right now I’m going through 8 cans a day, or 3 liters. On days I’m not occupied, like weekends, it could be more.

    I’ve also always been physically active and I continue to be.

    Again, weight or excess sugar and its diseases are not relevant.