Rottcodd

Would you refuse to visit websites that force registration even if the account is free?

I already generally do.

What’s all the fuss about, you don’t care?

I honestly don't much care, but that's because western civilization is circling the drain, warped and undermined at every turn by wealthy and powerful psychopaths, and it's just not worth it to care, since there's absolutely nothing I can do to stop them

Is advertising a necessary evil in fair trade for content?

Some sort of revenue stream is potentially necessary, but that's the extent of it. Advertising is just one revenue stream, and even if we limit the choices to that, there are still many different ways it could be implemented.

The specific forms of advertising to which we're subjected on the internet are very much not necessary. And they don't exist as they do because the costs of serving content require that much revenue - they exist as they do to pay for corporate bloat - ludicrously expensive real estate and facilities and grotesquely inflated salaries for mostly useless executive shitheads.

Would this limit your visiting of websites to only a narrow few you are willing to trade personal details for?

Again, that's what I already do, so it would just add more sites to those I won't visit.

Is this a bad thing for the internet experience as whole, or just another progression of technology?

At this point, the two are almost always one and the same. Internet technology is primarily harnessed to the goal of maximizing income for the well-positioned few, and all other considerations are secondary.

Is this no different from using any other technology platform that’s free (If it’s free, you’re the product)?

This is cynically amusing on Lemmy.

Should website owners just accept a lower revenue model and adapt their business, rather than seeking higher / unfair revenues from privacy invasive practices of the past?

Of course they should, but they won't, because they're psychopaths. They'll never give up any of their grotesque and destructive privilege, even if that means that they ultimately destroy the host on which they're parasites.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

A Supreme Court justice, on the other hand, costs as much as a luxury motor home.

Exactly as much as a luxury motor home in fact...

Or you could just not care so much.

If you post memes that are likely to offend someone somewhere, then there's a risk that one of those someones is going to be a mod, and they're going to delete it. And really, that's just the way it goes.

Certainly you might prefer that they have explicit, precise and closely followed rules so you can accurately predict what they'll do, but there's really no requirement that they do so - if they want vague rules arbitrarily enforced, that's their prerogative.

And really, what are you out if they do delete a post? It's not like you paid for it or you have some sort of quota you have to meet. You just toss things out into the internet, and some of them float and others sink.

For me it's "v".

IfvI'mvnotvcarefulvIvgetvthis.

I've suspected it's largely performative. I still don't really get it though.

And I have the same reaction I have to most of these types of things - I wonder what it tastes like, and wish I could try it.

I've never understood why these things trigger such uproar. It's not like it's poison or some sort of bodily secretion or something - it's just a somewhat unusual but entirely edible ingredient. And it could be good. So what's the problem?

Most people seem to miss the fact that it's a paradox, even though it's right there in the name.

And I dream of a world in which, instead of merely wishing to oppress and murder this group of people instead of that one, people don't wish to oppress and murder anyone.

It's as if the people who talk about it the most don't actually have the foggiest idea what a "ruling class" actually is or how it comes to be.

There is a lot of backwards ideas that get accepted as “leftist,” when they’re really statist.

This is my objection too.

All too many people here don't seem to even begin to understand the inherent threats of institutionalized authority, so in their rush to head off the recreation of the Third Reich, they're basically advocating for the recreation of the Khmer Rouge instead.

The thing I really can't understand, and a likely consequence of the ubiquity of apps, is all of the people who can't seem to function without them.

Like when the Reddit exodus to the threadiverse happened, people started immediately crying for Lemmy apps. And it doesn't seem to matter that much how bare-bones or unstable one might be - the important thing is that it's an app. That's all that seems to matter to them.

It's as if they aren't even aware of the fact that these are all websites, so they all work in a browser - as if to them, an app is a necessity and they can't figure out how to accomplish anything otherwise.