Join Reclaim The Net.
  • A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.comEnglish
    221·
    1 year ago

    Note that “Reclaim The Net” is very shady and unlikely to be a legitimate civil rights organisation.

    Firstly, they display bias; they only ever say positive things about Donald Trump, Mike Pence, and Ron DeSantis, and spin most things in whatever way helps the far-right in the US. They are silent on any Internet related civil rights issues that reflect poorly on the US far-right, or reflect well on central or left parties. Contrast this to more authentic organisations, which criticise things from all over the political spectrum.

    Secondly, they prioritise collecting your personally identifiable information over advocating for civil liberties. Some of their articles are behind a registration wall where you have to give at least an email address to see the content.

    Thirdly, however, they don’t tell you who they are, and go to lengths to hide it. Whois privacy, author names are likely pseudonyms, only contact is an email, no information about governance structures. There are legitimate reasons to be pseudonymous, although given how keen they are to collect data on visitors, it is a bit hypocritical!

    I believe there is a network of single-interest sites the far-right use as hooks to try to gather people with a range of different reasons for being dissatisfied, where the next step is to try to radicalise them and line them up behind Trump.

    • masquenox@lemmy.ml
      3·
      1 year ago

      they only ever say positive things about Donald Trump

      Sooo… it’s just another right-wing astroturfing project.

      • snipvoid@lemm.ee
        3·
        1 year ago

        Well gee, next to Norway and NATO, they’re my favourite regulators!

        What a bright future for information.

    • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
      6·
      1 year ago

      Well that’s easy. It just depends on what the population believes. Take a sample of the population. You don’t want extremist outsider opinions, so make sure to only include ID’d citizens. Better yet, just poll your bureaucrats and soldiers so you know you get a good sample. Then use an ML labeling technique to sort them by sentiment. Assign the sentiments on a scale from “the government needs more corporate advisors” to “the government is doing awesome.” We want to hone in on the signal so take the middle 1σ of the bell curve. Save those individual’s comments to an excel file. Send anyone who posts anything that’s not in the database to jail for misinformation.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
      69·
      1 year ago

      Which is some bullshit, because Russiagate was long-ago debunked, as well as the actual efficacy of Cambridge Analytica (it largely wasn’t). But thanks to Rachel Maddow’s daily conspiracy theorizing over the span of years, most liberals still believe that foreign State propaganda is going to Manchurian Candidate the populace and steal their democracy. Which makes them rather accepting of the idea that the government should decide what is mis/dis/malinformation. In other words they’ve been primed to accept censorship.

      • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
        31·
        1 year ago

        The Mueller report did find plenty of evidence of Russian interference, just not enough to charge Trump. It was a damn site better than the British report on the matter, though, which basically just said “we didn’t find anything because we didn’t look”.

        Cambridge Analytica absolutely had a role to play as well. The company was disbanded to try and prevent any fallback, however the same players are acting under different brands. Targeted Facebook ads have proven too effective, you can tell whatever lies you want if you select the right audience, then there will be no one to challenge them - particularly if you do it just before the election.

        Based on your vernacular, it sounds like you’re a hexbear user washed up on our shores and circumventing the defederation, shilling for Russia.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
      5·
      1 year ago

      Not for long: the Global North countries have the fediverse on their radars now.

      Atlantic Council » Collective Security in a Federated World (PDF)

      Many discussions about social media governance and trust and safety are focused on a small number of centralized, corporate-owned platforms that currently dominate the social media landscape: Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, Reddit, and a handful of others. The emergence and growth in popularity of federated social media services, like Mastodon and Bluesky, introduces new opportunities, but also significant new risks and complications. This annex offers an assessment of the trust and safety (T&S) capabilities of federated platforms—with a particular focus on their ability to address collective security risks like coordinated manipulation and disinformation.

        • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago
          • First they came for the lemmygrads, and I did not speak out because I was not a Marxist-Leninist
          • Then they came for the Hexbears, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist
          • Then they came for the lemmy.mls, and I did not speak out because I was not a security nerd
          • Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me