Skip to content

Reddit in talks to embrace Sam Altman’s iris-scanning Orb to verify users

Technology
154 121 4.0k
  • 18 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    E
    Tired of Google Home not working? This new change will push you one step further into the valley of despair, where a capitalist hellscape leads you to constantly say "Yeah, that seems about right" and to feel a small twang of loss before moving on with your day.
  • Clipping Path Service Provider - Best Photo Editing Services

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • We have installed EASY UPLOAD3R!

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Honda Acty 1.0 to 4.0: The Full Generational Breakdown

    Technology technology
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Palantir partners to develop AI software for nuclear construction

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Using Signal groups for activism

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    204 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    351 Aufrufe
    ulrich@feddit.orgU
    You're using a messaging app that was built with the express intent of being private and encrypted. Yes. You're asking why you can't have a right to privacy when you use your real name as your display handle in order to hide your phone number. I didn't ask anything. I stated it definitively. If you then use personal details as your screen name, you can't get mad at the app for not hiding your personal details. I've already explained this. I am not mad. I am telling you why it's a bad product for activism. Chatting with your friends and clients isn't what this app is for. That's...exactly what it's for. And I don't know where you got the idea that it's not. It's absurd. Certainly Snowden never said anything of the sort. Signal themselves never said anything of the sort. There are other apps for that. Of course there are. They're varying degrees of not private, secure, or easy to use.
  • 461 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.