Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
Devil's advocate:
You can either protect everyone's privacy, or you can protect no one's.
Doxxing is a privacy issue. It's not "okay if it's someone you don't like". I'm sure if the tables were reversed and people on the right had doxxed a bunch of left-leaning people, the left would be up-in-arms about it, demanding that it be removed and for the people who posted it to be suspended. But because they're far-right, it's suddenly okay?
I hate the far-right, don't get me wrong. But get off the high-horse. Companies can either protect everyone from doxxing, or they can protect no one from doxxing. There's no in-between just because the people being doxxed are people you find repugnant.
The problem playing devil's advocate is you're defending the devil. Running to the all or nothing edge is simply an attempt to end the discussion. "If Nazis can't have privacy, nobody can." There is an in-between, and conveniently it's called moderation.
Are we equally of the opinion that hate speech should not be moderated? Are threats without action to be defended unilaterally? It's not important what the answers are, it's that there is a world in between absolutist ideals. There are alternatives. We can discuss them.
Companies are also capable of navigating this space, and should be responsible for doing so if they are entitled to their platform. The idea that their hands are tied to all or nothing is ignorant if not apologist. If the best you can do with 10's of millions of dollars is helplessness, perhaps you deserve all the criticism. The devil needs better attorneys.
Moderation and discussion are 100% the way to go. For companies to decide who they can and cant dox though seems hard. We all have something about us that others don't agree with and someone could justify you being doxed. Nazis went through the Nuremberg trials to decide their levels of Nazism and there aren't many that agree with the results. I'm not saying it's right to protect Nazi's (most deserve a punch in the fafe) but when anyone can label anyone else as a nazi, policing this is difficult.