But what would law enforcement do without legal corporate surveillance?

Thank you!

Oh heck yes. That extra tip solves my other problem with fitbit.

I’d read that story.

So there’s a big whole complex of online harassment, offline harassment, misogynistic attitudes, beliefs about dating, “strategies” for “getting” women to date or have sex with you, weird money related ideas about all of this, ideas about strategies to turn a no into a yes, etc etc, that is in the background whenever normal low stakes human interactions are happening. So it’s not the act of saying “hi, you seem cool, let’s get coffee” that is the problem. It’s the context. Tinder is making the context so, so much worse. It’s creating creating conditions that make an otherwise normal ‘hi’ seem more likely to be in bad faith, and sending a signal to malicious people that a new option for being malicious has opened up. So, even if the vast majority of people looking to meet humans this way are totally kind and earnest, it brings a certain vibe to the entire thing that will make many people, especially women who have had scary or unpleasant experiences in that vein, very uncomfortable, and cause them to think twice about that “hi”, because they know that access to their inbox has been sold, when that was never allowed before, to people who may be more likely to have bought into the aforementioned complex of bad ideas. It makes the “hi” not normal anymore.

Thanks for linking this.

The incredible horror of tying self worth to romantic “success” and then charging people money for it, is awful on its face, but it leads to much worse things too. This is, in effect, charging money for people to have “access” to people who haven’t consented to being contacted, furthering the idea that money=access to people who can’t say no to you. Tinder is monetizing peoples’ emotional need for connection at best, which is horrible, but at worst it’s also propping up a whole complex of ideas that erode respect and consent toward potential romantic or sexual partners, and that the far end eventually leads to like, Andrew Tate shit. And why wouldn’t it work? People have had their self worth obliterated by the commodification of human beings that is mainstream heteronormative dating culture. Tech companies making themselves the mediator of human connection, romantic or platonic or in terms of activism, hobbies, groups, etc - and then charging money for us to know each other and meet each other - horrifies me daily.

That, I can’t tell you - I tend to move to pen and paper for anything too sensitive, so I haven’t looked too deeply into that feature

Joplin!

Yeah! I think there’s a big difference between checking out from the interaction emotionally and just saying some plausible nonsense, and finding easier ways to communicate what you do want to say. Those are really different things. I think only the people within that relationship can really tell the difference. It depends on the dynamic. If someone is dismissive or distant in general, this would bother me, but if they were just using it to more easily converse with me, it wouldn’t.

deleted by creator

Bless you

Yeah…I was hoping by now that maybe they made mp3 players by now that could sync to phones or tablets. I’m not above transferring files slowly and a few at a time - I used to type in the song names manually haha so it can’t be much worse. CDs are trickier. But I’m glad to know it was annoying but feasible. They really have made owning media such a high effort thing. Sigh.

I hadn’t looked into it, as I’d gotten used to assuming that my phones won’t have the memory space for music - but that’s a smart idea. I’ll have to look into that.

Thanks for the context! I was responding more to how loosely diagnosis words are used to describe people we don’t know, in not always accurate ways - word drift I guess? So someone with a clinical diagnosis and someone who seems like they could from the outside are two different things, in the popular imagination, even if in both cases people use the same word. I know people have different experiences and I didn’t mean to seem nitpicky. But, I have to believe there are plenty of diagnosed psychopaths out there who do not make the choice to do evil hypercapitalism, and there are plenty of people without any kind of disorder who do. That’s why I’m a bit reticent about generalized statements, even if there may be grain of truth in some cases.

I think people with psychosis or mental illnesses are actually the least likely to want to fuck over others. But if you mean that she probably wouldn’t have taken the job without already being a giant asshole who doesn’t care about others, I would say you are very likely to be right. Twitter under musk is absolutely not a force for good in the world, and working there is a tacit endorsement of checks notes oh my god so many bad things.

I know little about her and I definitely don’t want to excuse her actions in defending twitter, but this is such a glass cliff situation. (Hiring a woman or other marginalized person to take the heat after basically destroying the company by himself)

I imagine cnn doesn’t want to encourage people to visit the hate account in question by posting a link or screenshot. It doesn’t mean they don’t have proof, it just means they don’t want to drive traffic to hate content. Printing that would be kind of irresponsible. But CNN is known as a pretty reputable news source. I can’t see why they’d lie about it.

If you aren’t seeing any white supremacy on your own timeline, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, it just means the algorithm isn’t showing it to you, which is a good thing. It might seem surprising, but people do actually search for and deliberately seek out that shit. Hate groups use social media to network, I imagine that’s why CNN didn’t post a screenshot of the account name, or its content.

The slippers are so cute though!

This is fantastic.