• 2 Posts
  • 7 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
Cake day: April 13th, 2025
  • considerealization@lemmy.catoUnpopular Opinion@lemmy.world•There is nothing wrong with websites, browsers and search engines using our data to make money.English
    14·
    6 days ago

    That looks very much like a false dichotomy to me. You left out:

    • advertising (which does not require selling data, this is just an invasive additive)
    • donation and volunteer based (Wikipedia does this quite successfully)
    • funded from tax income (as are online government services, crown corporations etc.)
    • companies that sell something thru the internet l, and website is an advertising or pm selling platform. This accounts for most sites, tbh, from brands to retailers, to marketplaces like Amazon, Etsy, and Craigslist.

    These are just off the top of my head. But the point being is that your major premise of obviously false.

    Most companies that are harvesting our data are also requiring or pushing for subscriptions now, so the dichotomy is also false in that respect.

    Finally, it is clear that millions of people are quite happy to pay reasonable fees for valuable services, which is why so many fee based companies are doing fine.

  • considerealization@lemmy.catoMen's Liberation@lemmy.ca•Misandry isn't real because if you have any problems you aren't a man and don't count.
    81·
    1 month ago

    I’d like to understand why this post is being hit with downvotes and dismissal. Isn’t the point of this sub to address these kinds of issues and perspectives, confronting them if they need critique perhaps, but providing a space to talk thru and work towards an equitable liberation for all, inclusive of men?

    The first rule in the sidebar is “assume good faith” but multiple comments are making (afaict) groundless accusations of bating. What gives?

    To be clear, I am not saying I co-sign this post. But what I see is someone voicing hurt and a feeling of not feeling safe or recognized, while I think there is a fair bit of inaccurate generalization being made on the basis of that hurt, the hurt is valid and some of the dynamics identified I think are obviously real too.

    I’m just a bit confused about whether this sub is what I took it to be, or if there is some context I’m missing or something.