Yes, I was thinking about the broader discussion; targeting more .ml because that is where it is most visible, but it is not as if it does not happen in other instances or even in other Fediverse spaces; I had to go to fsebugout, poast and veenus.art on Pleroma for the same thing, and I’m doing pretty much the same thing on Fediverse in general. It’s a shame how it’s evolving, even if in theory you can just migrate to another instance or create your own, it won’t actually be a solution if everyone defederates from your instance and then you isolate yourself, because that will create another echo chamber on your side; That’s how 4chan started and that’s how any tabloid starts.

I won’t defend the OP because he’s surely just an embarrassing attention seeker, but in return I’ll say that you can’t really say that there isn’t misandry out there, especially on the leftist side of Lemmy, just as you can’t say that there isn’t a black swan out there (i.e. the induction problem), and in fact there are a lot of misandric women, and you can’t just rationalize it as a “valid reaction to centuries of oppression” because it’s a genetic fallacy. (where someone is held responsible for something they were not involved in because they were born much later, just because they are a descendant of that group).

Also there’s AudD, that’s pretty neat for that purpose.

🤪

Oh no, the AI slop is in danger then, I’ll stop for sure

Wiggles their balls

Oh yeah, almost forgot, this is their first rule: “Be civil and nice.” Just that:

I can’t afford a YubiKey, and also I don’t have the time to do that ad infinitum. Just not my thing.

Yeah lmao

And, again, I hate US too, but I hate every government/state/party/politician equally, so well… I’m just really pesimistic, more as I live in Venezuela, that basically divinizes China, and here we can barely even exist peacefully; just now we even have an arbitrary curfew for the army to steal everything they want in my town.

It is the same as the United States and Silicon Valley; I won’t defend China because I hate America, just as I can’t ally with Baphomet just to kill Lucifer.

I am politically pessimistic, so I don’t believe that any good state, government or politician really exists, they are all equally disgusting and putrid, and as such, I hate each and every one of them equally.

Thanks, but not thanks, I don’t want to be logging in every site every single time I restart my browser; I just simply use AdNauseam with DandelionSprout lists (not all tho), NoCoin lists, the integrated lists, then I use Decentraleyes for not having to depend on external CDNs for almost anything, HaGeZi as my DNS provider, and OpenSnitch for system-wide interactive blocking of any suspicious domains or IPs…

Oh, and hBlock, just to add a little more of paranoia, and ClamAV with Clamd and ClamOnAcc.

Oh, well, the fact is that I use Arch btw, so it might have impact on it, maybe. Idk really, because I don’t think that a simply PKGBUILD update would suffice. Maybe just the Debian/Ubuntu artifact was broken?

Well, at least for me it has worked within a few hours.

Well, about these messages I have to agree with you, but I can’t simply agree with absolutely anything else.

Let’s see, I’m not from the United States so I don’t know their situation well (although I must say that I HATE Trump anyway), but I’m from Venezuela, which is really much, MUCH worse; Nicolás Maduro was literally a fucking dictator who killed anyone who dared to mock him (if you’ve never heard of Helicoide, I recommend looking it up), and now that they took Maduro they left us with Delcys Rodríguez, who is another fucking harpy. I really cannot understand how someone who has not experienced a true dictatorship and who has not faced offense and repression for ideological reasons can say so calmly that freedom of expression should be limited; What blissful ignorance of yours to live in a bubble like that, you make me sick (with every intention to offend :3). It really seems absurd to me how you think that “emotional harm” is a valid criterion or is in any way different from offense; No, they can apply in different areas, but epistemically and ontologically they are the same: pure subjective whim, and an ideology that the world revolves around you and your problems.

I’ll put it to you this other way:

1. Or only some speeches are prohibited (therefore falling into totalitarian arbitrariness).
2. Or all speeches are prohibited (and therefore language and existence themselves are also prohibited, in a non-metaphorical, non-figurative and non-hyperbolic, but literal sense).
3. Or no speech is prohibited, but only real and concrete actions (a defamation, a social lynching, a false denunciation, a fraud, a robbery, a coup or a murder), and, at most, imperative speeches (not a mere “hatred of X” but an explicit “X should die”).

Strict logic is the only reasonable law, and your ideology falls under the above reductio ad absurdum.

Oh, also straw-man fallacy.

​I will restate what I mentioned in a previous comment:

​Offense (or being offended) is simply not a valid criterion for determining what constitutes hate or violent speech.

​Because at least one thing will always offend at least one person, if we attempt to regulate offenses, we will have to choose between regulating only some of them — thus becoming arbitrary — or regulating all offenses, which would kill not only speech, but also expression and, furthermore, existence itself, as the mere existence of certain people might be offensive to others.

​When LGBTQ+ people fought for their rights, when Black people did the same, or when abolitionists fought against slavery, all of these individuals were viewed as “hate groups” (in the terms of their respective eras), “violent groups,” or “dangerous groups” because they were challenging the status quo and the power structures that oppressed them.

I’ll tell this, that I told in a previous comment:

Offense ( or being offended) is simply not a valid criterion for determining what constitutes hate or violent speech.

Because at least one thing will always offend at least one person, if we attempt to regulate offenses, we will have to choose between regulating only some of them — thus becoming arbitrary — or regulating all offenses, which would kill not only speech, but also expression and, furthermore, existence itself, as the mere existence of certain people might be offensive to others.

When LGBTQ+ people fighted for their rights, or when black people did the peoper, or when some people fighted against slavery, all of these people were looked at “hate groups” (in the terms of their times) or as “violent groups” or “dangerous groups”, because they were questioning their status quo and the power that opressed them.

Ad hominem fallacy.

​He isn’t saying that spreading hate is something that should be done or that it is good; rather, he is merely stating that there is a huge logical, epistemological, and ontological leap between “I hate X” (whatever that X represents) and “we should kill X” or “X should die.”

​Moreover, offense ( or being offended) is simply not a valid criterion for determining what constitutes hate or violent speech. Because at least one thing will always offend at least one person, if we attempt to regulate offenses, we will have to choose between regulating only some of them — thus becoming arbitrary — or regulating all offenses, which would kill not only speech, but also expression and, furthermore, existence itself, as the mere existence of certain people might be offensive to others.

Freedom of speech SHOULD be an ABSOLUTE and UNRESTRICTED right, even over any other right.