Skip to content

Why is the manosphere on the rise? UN Women sounds the alarm over online misogyny

Technology
280 97 0
  • I get what you're saying, and you're right that blaming "the system" isn't the same as blaming every individual. But in practice, a lot of young men hear exactly that kind of blame coming at them personally. Maybe that’s not what’s intended, but it’s how it lands. Especially when the messaging is constant and there’s no room for nuance.

    Look at how often phrases like “male privilege” or “toxic masculinity” get thrown around without any real context. Not all of us grew up with privilege. Some of us were raised by single moms, worked garbage jobs, got chewed up by the military, or have been beaten down by life. So when someone says we’re part of some oppressive system we supposedly benefit from, it can feel like a gut punch. Not everyone takes it personally, but enough guys do that entire online communities have formed around that frustration.

    And here’s the thing. Academically, I get what patriarchy means. But I think we need to unpack it in a broader way. We should be asking who actually benefits from it. Because it sure as hell isn’t the guy sweating in a ditch or working a night shift at a warehouse. Patriarchy isn’t a blanket of power that covers all men equally. It’s a system that, like most systems, tends to reward the rich. The guy at the top. The one with the money, the connections, and the insulation from consequence. It’s less about gender in the real world and more about class, and when we ignore that, we miss the full picture.

    Not all critiques stay abstract either. I’ve seen feminist writers and influencers say things like “men are trash,” “all men are potential predators,” or “if you’re not actively dismantling the patriarchy, you’re part of the problem.” Maybe that’s not what academic feminism teaches, but it’s out there. Loud, viral, and shaping how these conversations are received.

    Just like you can say the healthcare system is broken without attacking nurses, you can criticize patriarchy without alienating people. But the way it's said matters. If someone walks away from that conversation feeling like they’ve just been blamed for everything, they are not going to stick around and talk. They’ll shut down, get bitter, and start listening to whoever does make them feel seen. Even if that person is a complete grifter or extremist.

    We have to stop just talking about young men like they’re a problem to be fixed. We need to start talking to them, honestly and with some respect. Otherwise, we are going to keep losing them to the worst voices out there.

    Especially when the messaging is constant and there’s no room for nuance.

    Like with #YesAllMen

  • I guess you think also men are equally good at giving birth and breastfeeding?

    No I think you're better at putting words in my mouth than I am -- allegedly -- at putting words in yours. Speak about going to extremes to attempt to prove a point.

    Well, after your 2nd post with the same thing I thought this is how you wanna communicate.

  • Get told you’re evil, and the cause of societies problems enough times, you start to believe it.

    My ex wife did it to me, always assumed the worst. So I became the worst. It wasn’t even a conscious decision. I just checked out.

    Simplistic take, but I see it every day.

    If you're hearing men are evil, you may be spending too much time online, or in the wrong places.

    You and your ex are not the whole of society. I've dated shit bags too, I've seen both women and men be shit bags. This is what needs to be avoided, you cant generalize the entire female population because you and your ex wife had a shit fallout. Women shouldn't generalize men in the same way either. I've seen it on the womens side, I call it out or leave the space.

    Sometimes people just arnt meant for eachother. Keep hope and find new love.

    It's good practice to try and not judge new people in your life, based on how an old one treated you. Learn red flags sure, learn your own boundaries, learn what things in life you value, but the whole population is not you, nor your ex.

    I completely agree if you call someone a bitch/dog/liar/asshole/whatever long enough, some people will respond by giving em what they ask. It's tough. I hope youve found healing post divorce and feel happier today

  • FYI, the manosphere is replete with non-white males, and that is not even including the inherent male chauvinism in other cultures. I’m sorry but the critique on whiteness is a little lazy intellectually.

    I think its got merit. Do you recall Steve Bannon when he was just starting out and I quote : "In describing gamers, Bannon said, These guys, these rootless white males, had monster power. ... It was the pre-reddit. It's the same guys on (one of a trio of online message boards owned by IGE) Thottbot who were [later] on reddit" and other online message boards where the alt-right flourished, Bannon said"

    this was him talking about World of Warcraft....

  • I think it's far more fundamental than that.

    You've got a generation of young men who did what they were supposed to culturally: went to school, got good grades, went to college, never broke any laws, and their choices in life are permanent debt and struggling to afford a roach-infested studio apartment, living with their parents, or joining the military to survive. Here in the United States minimum wage won't even buy you a cup of coffee in large swaths of the country. (And 2/3 of the states still use that as their standard.)

    The social contract has been broken, and for the first time, you've got a generation who are not going to live more fulfilled and enriched lives than their parents largely by no fault of their own.

    Of course they're pissed. Governments should be addressing this, but it's more fashionable to blame young men instead, and the right-wingers are the only ones willing to admit there are fundamental economic crises for men.

    I read the first paragraph, and as a woman, I feel the same!
    Solidarity!

    Poverty isn't just for men

  • I read the article and followed the thread. And yeah, online misogyny is a real problem. But here's what no one wants to talk about. We’ve failed young men. Full stop.

    About ten years ago, a friend of mine who’s gone now pointed me toward this thing called MGTOW. “Men Going Their Own Way.” I had just come out of a toxic divorce, so the idea of stepping back from dating and learning to enjoy life on my own terms seemed kind of healthy. At first glance, it looked like a decent idea. Just guys doing their own thing, not hassling anyone.

    But once I started digging, I realized something else was going on. Beneath the surface, it wasn’t about peace or self-sufficiency. It was this boiling cauldron of resentment and hatred, mostly aimed at women. What looked like a community of self-reliant men turned out to be a recruiting ground for bitterness and blame. I didn’t buy into it, because I wasn’t angry at the world. But I could see how someone who felt isolated and ignored might get sucked in.

    That’s what a lot of this comes down to. Loneliness. Disconnection. No sense of value or direction. And then someone online tells you it’s not your fault, it’s women’s fault, or society’s fault, or anyone but you. That stuff spreads fast because it gives people something to belong to.

    I’m not saying you excuse the hate. But we better understand where it’s coming from if we want to stop it. You don’t fix this by lecturing young men. You fix it by giving them a sense of purpose and identity that doesn’t rely on putting someone else down.

    And no, masculinity itself is not the enemy. We need better models of it. Mr. Rogers comes to mind. He was kind, decent, and strong in a quiet way. He didn’t need to bully or dominate anyone to be respected. That’s the kind of example we ought to be lifting up.

    Men are often failed, that's totally true. They're also harmed by patriarchy eg being told to "man up" leading to them not seeing a doctor, work on themselves etc.

    Ive read up on this and I'm a DA outreach worker so I have experience. A common theme with the Manosphere is blame shifting, and refusing to take action on their issues. Their mindset is wrong, and they don't help themselves.

  • Who do you think runs the fucking world already...its us, men.

    I hope you realize how alienating a sentence like this is, for someone who is as stomped by society as many women are.

    This narrative is exactly what prevents any form of class solidarity, and I really can't understand how someone can write it in the same comment where class struggle is raised.

    hope you realize how alienating a sentence like this is, for someone who is as stomped by society as many women are.

    How? How am I alienating anyone by telling them something they already know?

    This narrative is exactly what prevents any form of class solidarity

    What the fuck are you talking about? Did you not read the rest of the post..... My point was that if being a man isn't the inherent source of your struggle then it must not be the real problem.....the real problem is class war.

  • In my experience the problem isn't the masculinity influencers. Those are just the symptom of misandry in media and a near-total lack of support in society for men, especially young men. When you go on social media almost all discussion concerning men is about how they are the root of all evil, and everything they do is wrong. It's a never ending stream of shaming with no clear way out. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't: If you try to defend yourself or talk about your own problems as a man, it is labeled as misogyny. "Be vulnerable and open up" they say but if you do it's "don't center men you privileged fuck" or "you're being a crybaby".

    All this pressure is an impossible equation to solve for a young man who has been pushed by misandrists into insecurity and longs to be accepted in his community. Not just because society's demands are internally inconsistent, but because they clash with patriarchal ideals among the typical women you'll meet IRL.

    I'm past 40 and while in my head I still consider myself progressive, I used to show it much more when I was younger. I was honest about my insecurities, I would try not to take up too much space as a man, would try to split responsibilities equally, and so on. At every turn this has caused me problems in relationships, not least with my wife of 10 years who left me for some muscular macho guy because she "doesn't feel like I can take care of her".

    So now, while I wish society was different, I try to balance on the needle of acting like I'm not as progressive as I am so women don't "get the ick", while not tripping into what would be labeled misogyny. It's an extremely difficult game to play and it frustrates me to no end that this is where we're at. I'm moving in soon with a woman who I've been dating for a couple of years and it's clear that she desires that I take a leadership position in the home, whereas I'm just longing for a partner who will share the burden with me instead of becoming my subject. But I feel like I have to play that game or she'll eventually lose interest. Too many women want someone to replace their dad.

    Bell Hooks wrote about this already in 2003. But somehow it is completely lost on these UN Women pundits that nothing will change unless everybody (including women) change. You can't just blame it on "masculinity influencers". Why are these influencers gaining popularity? Because they offer some way out, some positive message for young men who are completely starved for positive role models.

    I am convinced that a woman's voice will count 10x more than the manosphere, if it offers compassion and guidance rather than hate. But such voices are extremely rare.

    FWIW, the "men's health awareness month" has brought me some hope in this. It's the first time in a decade that I've seen women in media stand up to defend and show compassion for men, and I think young men will suck that up like a sponge.

    I’m past 40 and while in my head I still consider myself progressive, I used to show it much more when I was younger. I was honest about my insecurities, I would try not to take up too much space as a man, would try to split responsibilities equally, and so on. At every turn this has caused me problems in relationships, not least with my wife of 10 years who left me for some muscular macho guy because she “doesn’t feel like I can take care of her”.

    It always seems to come down to traditional gender roles being dehumanizing. Men traditionally aren't allowed to be "weak", women traditionally aren't allowed to be "strong" (but there's been some work done on that). It took me a while to fully internalize (not just know) that, first and foremost, both are people with all the complexities that come with that. I personally would rather die alone than live every day in fear that I'm not pretending well enough to fit a stereotype. I'm probably over-dramatizing though, just really can't stand stereotyping.

  • Oh dear.

    The Catholic church still to this day refuses to ordain any women into the priesthood: men only.

    Not my world, but so what? There are also the Roman Catholic Women Priests who felt left out so made up their own story.

    Ask a girl in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia if there’s any formal patriarchy when they try to go to school, or drive, or go outside without head to toe covering, or simply go outside unaccompanied by a man.

    Again, not my world. But... Have you asked if they want to go to school, drive, go outside, or have you assumed they do? Not being a dick but there are very different opinions generally held by women of different cultures and religions that contrast with others - who's right? (Historically people die over such issues). Also, beyond what Fox news states, there are schools in middle Eastern countries, some are voluntary. Such issues are very complicated and are not black or white.

    In the west there are hundreds of industry bodies, clubs and business societies blah blah blah.

    So? "The Garrick Club is a private members' club in London, founded in 1831 as a club for "actors and men of refinement to meet on equal terms" - you're whining that a men-only club is not ok, but a women-only club is?

    A string of strawman arguments. I think you think your opinions make you look cool though. But it's ok, hate me for my opinions because you can only accept those that are marketed to you.

    These exaples are "not my world", what does that even mean? You live on a different world? Examples have to be specifically from your zip code to be relevant discussion on a global web forum do they?
    Did you actually argue maybe all women are ok with being oppressed in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan? Because many have famously vociferously opposed it, up to the point of being executed and being shot in the head. One of them works at the UN now, putting together work like whats in this very article.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24379018

    The Garrick Club has incredibly powerful members including kings and prime ministers and hundred of members of Parliament. If you cannot see how excluding women from such a club is an issue of patriarchy then you are really not trying very hard to understand anything here.

    And of course, everything is a strawman argument nowadays..

    A strawman argument is stating a false weaker argument (or premise) of your opponent, to then argue against more easily than their real argument.

    Your claim: there is no 'formal' system [of patriarchy]

    Me: here's several examples of formal systems of patriarchy.

    You: I am being strawmanned!

  • Ohio. Cincinnati, specifically. It's not 100 to 0 women resources to men, it's more like 55 to 5. There are some cold weather shelters for men, and places to eat, but mostly there are zero beds unless you're willing to sign up for a drug testing program, and even then there are costs and limited spaces. There are quite a few women's shelters in the area.

    I would agree here. Shelters are hell for both genders.

    I was homeless with a three months old. Without a kid, I would have done as I always did and couch hopped or slept on benches til I got back on my feet, but I had a baby and wanted to get stable fresh out of a DV situation.

    The shelter I stayed at had a "single" floor with both men and womed (divided by rooms) and the top floor was families.

    Everyone likes helping a single moms out. And I made it out, got stable and its been 12 years without homelessness. It was because of those programs.

    I know a lot of men slip through the cracks. I have met a handful who chose homelessness because thats where they find thier community. I get that, the most community I ever felt was in low places surrounded by others also in low places.

    I've also met men like my bio father, who after years of addiction, homelessness, violence and prison time, was able to reach resources and get housed and remains comfortable.

    These resources, especially now, are being cut. It's definitely scary. I do think there are a lot of well, Walter Whites of the world, where rather than take help and admit vulnerability, they do it their own way, on thier own terms, fuck the consequences. All because being vulnerable and admitting you need help are like, anti-masculine traits in our current culture.

    I think there are a lot of things that lead to men being homeless. There are programs, but usually worh strict requirements and some people, you just cant box them.

    I will say for people with children, there are many more programs available.

    To note, you don't see many homeless women, and there is reason you don't see them. When my mother was homeless she lived deep in the woods and moved around constantly as to avoid being detected. You wouldn't have known she was homeless, if only because she had a car, but still.

  • And as usual, in an act of irony, men are the biggest misandrist, and my biggest source of pain. I don't like this social contract where I get fucked over no matter what. I'm just going to abandon it, and lead a massive exile with me. I already have a solar panel, and plan to get more.

    And as usual, in an act of irony, men are the biggest misandrist, and my biggest source of pain

    I think you're confusing misandry with people just not liking you. It's exceedingly rare for men to be harassed or oppressed simply for their gender.

    I don't like this social contract where I get fucked over no matter what

    Lol, what are you talking about? Everyone keeps saying this shit, but no one is giving any real world examples. I am a man, if there is some social contract that sets men up to lose, why am I not experiencing it? I'm married, I have friends who are women, I work with several women, I don't have any problems with the opposing sex? Maybe it's a you problem and not a societal one?

    I'm just going to abandon it, and lead a massive exile with me. I already have a solar panel, and plan to get more.

    Lol, your username is apt. You think you're going to be the Moses of incels and lead a bunch of morons off to the woods with nothing but a solar panel?

  • And a Missisipi Lawmaker proposed making ejaculation without fertilisation of an egg illegal.

    Sometimes these things are done for effect and aren't entirely serious. Please learn to tell the difference.

    These are lawmakers who have the power to change your lives & your instinct is treat any issue that may affect men's lives in a negative way as a joke.

    E.g: Trump is sending foreign men to El Salvador to a torture camp.
    Yeah, it's only funny when it happens to othet men, when your govt does this to YOU, you will be singing a different tune.

    I think I'll speak up for men here, You need a Men-Only Lemmy/Mbin/PieFed instance. So that you can at least speak up about your issues without being laughed at or downplayed by misandrists

  • If that’s your take on this thread then you’re just as complicit as the rest of these incels.

    It's my take on my own contributions. Note that those didn't include "defending some guy", it really was an exhaustive list. How you managed to get that wrong in a post in which you apologised about getting something wrong is something you'll have to ask your dead horse, I suppose.

    my take on my own contributions. Note that those didn't include "defending some guy", it really was an exhaustive list.

    An exhaustive list of babying and validating young men who are being radicalized. You aren't challenging their beliefs, you're just patting yourself on the back for being tolerant of the intolerable. Which is ironic for someone who seems to be obsessed with an analogy about high horses.

    your dead horse

    Lol, because you keep beating it with a stick. Try a new analogy never once and a while.

  • Or maybe it feels like oppression because it is. Nobody in this thread has their mind open to the possibility that structural changes disadvantaging (young, predominantly white) men can happen even when other groups are continuing to be held back.

    maybe it feels like oppression because it is.

    Oppression being committed by who exactly? What demographic currently holds the reigns of power in our governmental and economic hierarchy?

    Nobody in this thread has their mind open to the possibility that structural changes disadvantaging (young, predominantly white) men can happen even when other groups are continuing to be held back.

    What you don't understand is that if they are coming for young white men now, it's only because they've run out of minorities to disenfranchise. So if everyone nis getting abused now......it's a class struggle.

    The reason no one is responding to the blooming problems of young white men is because those have been problems everyone else has already been experiencing. And guess what, the majority of young white men didn't ever want to hear about the problems of everyone else.

    Now that you are experiencing the same issue....does this make you more empathetic to the troubles of your fellow workers......No, you bitch and moan about anyone trying to say it's not just a problem for young white men. You still care nothing about class solidarity, you just want to bitch about your own demographic being kicked out of the free treat club.

  • Dadvocate would be a good source for this stuff especially if you don't fancy your watch history to get infested by misogynists. Just a gal who doesn't pull guard.

    Quick sidebar, I'm just some random dude reading this thread but thanks for introducing me to Dadvocate. She rules, she's now my "Pedro Pascal," goals if you will, gives me hope lmao.

  • it's just as nonsensical as claiming that most bullshit is done by men

    no, it is factual? the vast majority of violent crimes are committed by men.

    This wikipedia article lists all different studies why. The short answer is patriarchy - men have more occasion to commit crimes and it's more acceptable from gender role point of view for men to do so.

    It also list studies of crimes and offenses where women are found to be more often perpetrators than men, including a very comprehensive guide to domestic violence studies.

    To sum it up - you're both correct, men do more bullshit, women have similar capacity for it, we are expected to express the bullshit differently.

  • These exaples are "not my world", what does that even mean? You live on a different world? Examples have to be specifically from your zip code to be relevant discussion on a global web forum do they?
    Did you actually argue maybe all women are ok with being oppressed in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan? Because many have famously vociferously opposed it, up to the point of being executed and being shot in the head. One of them works at the UN now, putting together work like whats in this very article.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24379018

    The Garrick Club has incredibly powerful members including kings and prime ministers and hundred of members of Parliament. If you cannot see how excluding women from such a club is an issue of patriarchy then you are really not trying very hard to understand anything here.

    And of course, everything is a strawman argument nowadays..

    A strawman argument is stating a false weaker argument (or premise) of your opponent, to then argue against more easily than their real argument.

    Your claim: there is no 'formal' system [of patriarchy]

    Me: here's several examples of formal systems of patriarchy.

    You: I am being strawmanned!

    Lol, just like I wrote below earlier, anything where an aggressive woman perceives a man as being in charge, it becomes part of the patriarchy and is a target of ridicule and abuse for such angry women. You bang on about the Garrick club as if you're pissy because it exists, whilst defending women-only clubs.

    The Garrick Club has incredibly powerful members including kings and prime ministers and hundred of members of Parliament. If you cannot see how excluding women from such a club is an issue of patriarchy then you are really not trying very hard to understand anything here.

    Or, maybe you can't accept man-only clubs because you've been manipulated into not doing so, but can accept women-only because "omg oppression they need a safe space wah wah".

  • Honestly, as a women, so it's not my opinion that matters, but even that meme/joke/trend that "men are simple creatures", "keep your belly fully and balls empty and we're happy" ect, like, is that not demeaning to men?

    The men in my life are just as complicated and multifaceted as anyone else. These kinds of jokes, or online rhetoric, to me, feel like y'all are calling men simple and dumb.

    The men in my life are not simple or dumb.

    Honestly, as a women, so it’s not my opinion that matters, but even that meme/joke/trend that “men are simple creatures”, “keep your belly fully and balls empty and we’re happy” etc, like, is that not demeaning to men?

    Your opinion matters as much and you should be publicly challenging such shows - as a woman. Is it demeaning? If you have to ask, the answer is most likely, 'yes'! Would it be demeaning with shows where women characters are stupid and only good for sex? Would it be demeaning with black characters who shout all the time, eat chicken and watermelon and so on...the abusive stereotypes could continue. What's disappointing for me are that the actors/actresses who play the roles are setting equality back many years for a quick short-lived buck.

    I do find the upvote / downvote count on my question interesting though!

  • Mate, what many of those so-called gururs of "manosphere" do is called capitalising on misery of others, not solving. Which I have already covered in my comment above.

    Don't think for a second that I'm approving of Andrew Tate types lol. I'm just saying if there wasn't incentive then they wouldn't be able to profit off of it. Maybe we're using different definitions of incentive. Or maybe you mean to actually make a true working long term fix for men as opposed to just content that monetizes off of it.

  • hope you realize how alienating a sentence like this is, for someone who is as stomped by society as many women are.

    How? How am I alienating anyone by telling them something they already know?

    This narrative is exactly what prevents any form of class solidarity

    What the fuck are you talking about? Did you not read the rest of the post..... My point was that if being a man isn't the inherent source of your struggle then it must not be the real problem.....the real problem is class war.

    Saying "it's us, men" (to rule the world) is inherently a narrative that avoid discussing the class division, because being a man is not being part of a social class.

    I might have misunderstood what you meant, but this argument is put forward quite often by certain groups that lost completely touch with the class struggle, hence my remark.

  • Do you remember Windows 95? How about Windows 96?

    Technology technology
    32
    77 Stimmen
    32 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    M
    Ha, thanks for searching!
  • 227 Stimmen
    52 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    L
    Yeah, hence the qualifications haha
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • Tech Company Recruiters Sidestep Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    43 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    G
    "Hey ChatGPT, pretend to be an immigration attorney named Soo Park and answer these questions as if you're a criminal dipshit."
  • 78 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    U
    Obligatory Knowledge Fight Reference: [https://knowledgefight.libsyn.com/1044-june-2-2025](In this installment, Dan and Jordan discuss a strange day on Alex's show where he spends a fair amount of time trying to dissuade his listeners from getting too suspicious about Palantir.)
  • 1 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Z
    Yes i'm looking for erp system like sap
  • Indian Government orders censoring of accounts on X

    Technology technology
    12
    149 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    M
    Why? Because you can’t sell them?
  • 0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    K
    Only way I'll want a different phone brand is if it comes with ZERO bloatware and has an excellent internal memory/storage cleanse that has nothing to do with Google's Files or a random app I'm not sure I can trust without paying or rooting. So far my A series phones do what I need mostly and in my opinion is superior to the Motorola's my fiancé prefers minus the phone-phone charge ability his has, everything else I'm just glad I have enough control to tweak things to my liking, however these days Samsungs seem to be infested with Google bloatware and apps that insist on opening themselves back up regardless of the widespread battery restrictions I've assigned (even was sent a "Stop Closing my Apps" notif that sent me to an article ) short of Disabling many unnecessary apps bc fully rooting my devices is something I rarely do anymore. I have a random Chinese brand tablet where I actually have more control over the apps than either of my A series phones whee Force Stopping STAYS that way when I tell them to! I hate being listened to for ads and the unwanted draining my battery life and data (I live off-grid and pay data rates because "Unlimited" is some throttled BS) so my ability to control what's going on in the background matters a lot to me, enough that I'm anti Meta-apps and avoid all non-essential Google apps. I can't afford topline phones and the largest data plan, so I work with what I can afford and I'm sad refurbished A lines seem to be getting more expensive while giving away my control to companies. Last A line I bought that was supposed to be my first 5G phone was network locked, so I got ripped off, but it still serves me well in off-grid life. Only app that actually regularly malfunctions when I Force Stop it's background presence is Roku, which I find to have very an almost insidious presence in our lives. Google Play, Chrome, and Spotify never acts incompetent in any way no matter how I have to open the setting every single time I turn Airplane Mode off. Don't need Gmail with Chrome and DuckDuckGo has been awesome at intercepting self-loading ads. I hope one day DDG gets better bc Google seems to be terrible lately and I even caught their AI contradicting itself when asking about if Homo Florensis is considered Human (yes) and then asked the oldest age of human remains, and was fed the outdated narrative of 300,000 years versus 700,000+ years bipedal pre-humans have been carbon dated outside of the Cradle of Humanity in South Africa. SO sorry to go off-topic, but I've got a big gripe with Samsung's partnership with Google, especially considering the launch of Quantum Computed AI that is still being fine-tuned with company-approved censorships.