145
What's a low stakes conspiracy theory you believe? (hexbear.net)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/chat@hexbear.net
412 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

We've got a bunch of new people now so let's bring back a classic post. What low stakes conspiracy theory do you believe that you cannot prove but feels right to you?

I'll start: I believe that dating apps have made a concerted effort to smear in person meeting people and tie it to being "creepy" through social media so you are forced to meet people online(which was the creepy option just 15 years ago)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 55 points 3 years ago (36 children)

"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 fedposting

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 36 child comments
    •
  • [–] 38 points 3 years ago (22 children)

    this isn't a conspiracy theory. they literally do this and cooperate with the feds

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago (21 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (20 children)

    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".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago* (17 children)

    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."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 3 years ago (16 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (14 children)

    I had "nothing to hide" back when cancel culture wasn't a thing and the "rules" weren't in constant flux

    From another recent comment of yours, for context.

    (When really Milo was just outed as a pedo, which is how most people get canceled these days)

    HMMM.

    HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

    Sure is a bad thing that "canceling" happens that way to you, huh? libertarian-alert

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 3 years ago (13 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    some word that was fine then, but is a slur now

    It wasn't fine then, you piece of shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 3 years ago (3 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    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 reddit-logo is less tolerant towards writing out ableist slurs than us.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago

    I had "nothing to hide" back when cancel culture wasn't a thing and the "rules" weren't in constant flux

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    You're taking shit out of context

    What other context have you provided but complaining about the concept of canceling the way a lot of chuds do?

    lot of people getting accused of grooming nowadays

    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.

    there's so many pedos out there these days

    Because there are. That isn't new; only the reporting frequency is of what was already happening.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (6 children)

    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?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Okay, I'm pretty sure you're trolling

    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.

    UNJUSTIFIED cancelings

    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).

    who wouldn't be upset about strangers playing mind games

    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?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (4 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 14 points 3 years ago*

    It's when it happens to John Q. Public and he's ostracized by his peers and immediately a target of the internet that it's an issue.

    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.

    with the worst grip on the soap possible

    That's a chud take. Monsters deserve fitting punishments, not sexually violent chud revenge fantasies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    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. scared-fash

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 3 years ago (8 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    When something is free (or cheap) the consumer is often the product. :sus:

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago*

    This is a big reason that high quality TVs are getting so much more affordable.

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    is there a way to remove the offending programs from tv sets?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    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)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent