145
What's a low stakes conspiracy theory you believe?
(hexbear.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
145 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8407 readers
84 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
"Smart" consumer products are intentionally spying on you. Full stop.
That's why it's so hard to find a not "smart" anything. The added material cost is well worth the additional surveillance, be it for the sake of ruling class parasites buying and selling the surveillance data, or for their buddies
this isn't a conspiracy theory. they literally do this and cooperate with the feds
It's low stakes because I believe it isn't just done but it's done at such a staggeringly wide scale and not many people notice or even care.
I've gotten into arguments about this with the cryptofash over at programming.dev lmao. literally had one of them tell me to "get over it".
The version I hear the most is "everyone does it" as if that makes it somehow acceptable, and its associated cliche "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" from so-called "hackers" that get their takes from so called "Hacker News."
From another recent comment of yours, for context.
HMMM.
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.
Sure is a bad thing that "canceling" happens that way to you, huh?
It wasn't fine then, you piece of shit.
It was definitely not a medically accepted term when social media as we know was created. Nice of you to tell on yourself, though. ”All I did was use a wholesome slurerino and I got CANCELLED for it!”
I also don't know why you think
is less tolerant towards writing out ableist slurs than us.
Bigot, possible sex pest/creep too, judging by hatred of those evil lying accusers and the unasked for and off-topic rant about "cancel culture." Almost a chud bingo!
Clearly what you're so worked up about is something that is pretty sexy pesty to downright creepy if you're doing the hit-dog-hollering routine here, unasked and unprovoked.
What other context have you provided but complaining about the concept of canceling the way a lot of chuds do?
You just voluntarily provided that context just now.
And you're upset about the accusations, not that it indeed does actually happen. Again, like a chud.
Because there are. That isn't new; only the reporting frequency is of what was already happening.
Okay, I'm pretty sure you're trolling, but I'll say this. The more UNJUSTIFIED cancelings I'm talking about aren't things like pedophilia and grooming, but more like gossip and rumors that got out of hand or people digging up tweets from 12 years ago.
Of course I'm a little upset, who wouldn't be upset about strangers playing mind games to accuse them of enjoying one of the worst crimes imaginable?
No.
As the old saying goes, you doth protest too much. You yourself revealed that your big concern against "cancel culture" is that more people seem to be reporting sexual violence against children than before, and you see that as wrong because you refuse to believe it's possible that it was under-reported before.
It seems like a typical pet issue of western libertarians.
Yeah if your big hangup is that it's "going too far" rather than how weakly the so-called "canceling" that do happen really are (if you think Kevin Spacey's prosecution was "UNJUSTIFIED" there's no hope for you, and if you think it "went too far" that's chuddy to say the least).
This is getting downright Reddity to me. People are allowed to be on their guard and to call out creeping; what is your solution? Some Reddit-style "punish anyone who doesn't get a successful court conviction of a rapist" retaliation?
I don't even know what you're talking about anymore, so I'm just gonna back out of this conversation.
Believe whatever the hell you wanna believe buddy.
If you're going to huff and puff about the scary horrors of "cancel culture" when pretty much every big name rich predator that got "canceled" is both not in jail and in many cases still getting paid just like before, you sound like a chud no matter how much you cry about it.
Again, you're assuming that the accusations are false from the start and are directing your outrage against people that you already assume are lying and out to get you.
That's a chud take. Monsters deserve fitting punishments, not sexually violent chud revenge fantasies.
Your shirt about missing a time when you could get away with sex pestery/bigotry is getting so many questions asked about the shirt you're wearing that implies that you used to get away with sex pestery/bigotry.
Yeah fuck that im still mad over horse armor.
NEVER FORGIVE. NEVER FORGET. Todd Howard will pay for his crimes.
This is a big reason that high quality TVs are getting so much more affordable. The revenue from selling data subsidizes the cost to bring the price way down. "Telly" is one such company taking this to the extreme and offering the device to consumers free of charge.
When something is free (or cheap) the consumer is often the product. :sus:
always the product
If someone raids a dumpster successfully, that stuff is technically free.
There's a lot of reasons like improved technology and efficiency but yeah, the ability to play such targeted ads based off what you're doing is pretty insane and they have a vested interest to sell at less profit.
And at the end of the day the amount of people who are willing to just not connect their TV to the internet in the first place or find a way to circumvent them is low. Like it still shocks me every time I see a YouTuber not have adblock on.
is there a way to remove the offending programs from tv sets?
You can start by taking it off the internet completely, I suppose.
If it's an android TV you may be able to use a custom ROM on it, otherwise it's unlikely.
Run local DNS server and configure it to block the domains. Pihole is easy one to do this. Can also block advertisement.
Not a conspiracy theory. It's basically how modern marketing works since...2012 or so, and why it's in a death spiral (you can either afford the data sets or not and that's what determines if your advertising is effective)
I call it a conspiracy theory by way of the deliberate absence/omission of non "smart" choices. It's unspoken but it's there, and it's systemic.
Well, if you make and sell a non-"smart" TV or whatever, you're leaving money on the table. It's hardly any more expensive to add, and you get the extra recurring revenue stream from selling surveillance data, and maybe subscriptions or service upsells.
I don't think that's a conspiracy they're pretty up-front about that. The bigger not-a-conspiracy is that they can remotely brick all that shit when they decide to stop supporting it, meaning that your expensive smart-house set up might end up being worthless overnight.
Doctorow's "Unauthorized Bread" short story lays it out in a humorous short-fiction format.