Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Look, this whole thing is absurd like a Monty Python sketch, but much less funny.
Is this picture not safe for work..?
How about this one..?
And what about this photograph of an actual naked beaver I posted the other day..?
For me, all three could get me in trouble at work (because they clearly have nothing to do with the work I should be doing), and none of them would get me in trouble at the bus (though there's plenty of other pictures in Lemmy I wouldn't want to be caught watching in the bus to avoid embarrassing myself or others), but that's me, and that's why I don't use lemmy at work and if I use it on the bus I use a different account and only on communities I'm subscribed to.
But deciding whether to watch these pictures or risk watching others like them at work or the bus is my responsibility, not lemmy's, or the community moderators', or their posters'.
If I'm worried about “not suitable for work” I should be old enough to work, which means I should have a minimum of self control and be responsible for my own actions.
If I'm caught at work or on the bus with an “unsuitable” image on my phone because I was browsing some site that might contain images of that kind I'm not going to blame that site, or whoever posted that image, and I'm not going to demand of them to adapt to my particular circumstances and mark, censor, or remove any content I might find unsuitable.
That's my job, not theirs. They're not my fucking nanny, and I shouldn't need one.
Attempting to shift the blame for my own actions to the people providing me with this content (and for free, no less!) would be childish, petty, and disingenuous, to say the least.
Maybe the miscommunication in this whole concept is the word "work". What about at a restaurant or near family?
I think the "work" bit is a verbal crutch, what people want is a way to better scope their experience to content more appropriate for their current situation whatever it may be.
Sure, but that's the user's responsibility, not the content providers'.
It's extremely simple: could this site contain something that would be unsuitable for your current environment..?
— Definitely not. — Great, browse away (as long as doing so isn't unsuitable for some other reason, e.g. working, paying attention to your family, driving the car).
— Possibly, maybe, I don't know. — Ok, now, pay attention, here's the trick: DON'T FUCKING BROWSE IT. Wait until you're in an environment where you're sure it'll be suitable. Browse something else. Have some fucking self control, for fuck's sake.
You are the only one who can tell what is suitable for your current circumstances and what is not. Lemmy has no way of knowing that, the moderators have no way of knowing that, the posters have no way of knowing that.
It's your responsibility, not ours.
NSFW tags would only make sense if they were set by the user, and then they'd be useless because they could only work once the user (and their company's firewall) has already seen the content they didn't want to see. By definition, they can't work, unless everything is tagged.
You know what does work, though? Not browsing shit in circumstances where it might contain potentially unsuitable content. So do that, and let the admins, moderators, and posters be.
What you're saying is that you don't want to give users tools to curate their feeds, and your answer to them wanting those tools is for them not to view those feeds at all if they feel the content is unsafe. An interesting take. Where on the internet does that work?
NSFW tags aren't a way to curate one's feed, they're a waste of time.
What you consider suitable will vary depending on where you are and what time it is, and might be completely different than what other users consider suitable.
You want to curate your feeds?
You can have multiple accounts, in multiple instances.
You can subscribe to suitable communities and only browse ones you're subscribed to.
You can block users, communities, and instances.
Most importantly, you can decide what to browse and when, and wait to browse feeds which might contain something unsuitable for your current circumstances until those circumstances have changed.
Can these tools be improved..? Sure!
Give me a way to choose between different sets of subscribed and I won't need to have multiple accounts, for instance.
Hell, this might be one of the few situations in which current “AI” models could actually be useful... just have one trained on what you don't want to see at specific times and places and use it as a browser extension to prevent you from seeing that content.
But tags aren't going to help with that, because they're entirely subjective, and only you know what you want tagged or not, and if you have to tag it yourself it's already too late, you've already seen it (and so has your company's firewall).
You're a waste of time. Good day sir, ma'am, or theydy.
Dude clearly doesn't know he can tick "Show NSFW content" and untick "Blur NSFW content" and suddenly he has exactly the website he's asking for. Very cross over other people's use of the site for no reason.
I've had those disabled since the minute I got on lemmy, I just can't abide censorship or, more importantly, wilful stupidly.
Censorship is where the government bans books and libraries etc because they disagree with the ideas in them. There's real censorship going on in the USA just now. This isn't censorship, it's feed curation - just some folks wanting to not have scantily clad figures show up on their phone in their lunch break.
It's not wilful stupidity, it's wanting some good old random entertainment on a break at work without some colleague harassing you for an inappropriate image which you could have had filtered out if people who didn't use the feature at all didn't spend so much time arguing that the inappropriate image should be viewed by those who do.
Calm down a bit and let other people use lemmy how they like. It's a free country. (apart from all the real life censorship, of course, and the lack of bodily autonomy women have in the USA), all that kind of stuff.
Summary: other people are different to you and live in a different context. Try not to be cross about this.