Remember, if you donate to the WMF, they will use that money to enforce "WMF global bans" against users trying to make useful contributions but who once looked at the wrong people funny.
schnurrito
joined 1 year ago
Pretty sure that is Java, not C#
We had these kinds of debates when I myself was a minor (in the late 2000s). I would have thought it would be over by now and people would have realized that allowing teenagers to watch porn isn't actually very harmful to them at all. Seems not, humanity doesn't get smarter over time.
The reality is that in the grand scheme of things, the world does get better over time. Most of human history consists of wars, plagues, famines, power struggles, authoritarian rule.
But occasionally some aspects of the world get worse, too. For example, the widespread introduction of cars was "human progress" in the sense of enabling everyone to be mobile; it led to environmental problems and degradation of quality of life for many people.
Without expressing an opinion on it: some people believe that it is meant to say that America was greater during times when women and minorities were more oppressed than they are now.
My own interpretation at least in 2016 was always that it was meant to say that Obama was a weak leader in terms of foreign policy and that Trump would restore America's place in the world to be stronger. This may have been my interpretation because I am not from the US and so mainly care about it because of its foreign, not domestic, policy.
Number of German-language posts? I'm somehow not seeing those. I am however a native speaker of German already, so no need anymore to learn it.
funny thing is I, and probably most people, had never even heard that there was something called "CrowdStrike" until Friday of last week
Did you reply to the wrong comment? Where did I defend censorship?
2004: The Internet will lead to a utopian society without gatekeepers, without censorship, where we get our information from each other and primary sources, not media companies!
2024: The Internet is based on algorithmic attention. Those who control the algorithms control what parts of the immeasurably large pile of data will get attention and which not. Yet they are protected by the same intermediary liability laws as if they were traditional web forums, blog hosters, wikis with no personalized algorithm (for which those laws are very good and necessary).
ITT: proof of the statement that on the Internet, censorship happens not by having too little information, but too much information not all of which reaches all people who might want to know it
One of the earliest global bans was against user "russavia" - research him and you'll know what I'm talking about. After that I stopped following Wikimedia internals because it was 100% clear that they were now just completely arbitrarily banning people.