Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
The nuanced soft ban you're talking about is just the topic of the community.
When musk does something tech related that's tech. When he does something that's not tech related that's off topic.
Twitter is a social media website it's not tech.
Honestly I think it's weird that people think social media is tech.
The product itself (the code) may be considered tech but the company's/employee's/executive's business/personal/anything outside of the product dealings shouldn't be. If running a website makes any information related to you tech related then literally every company is a tech company. Meta's stock price dropping because Zuckerbot farted in a kindergarten classroom isn't anything tech related. Subscription fees being added or increased isn't tech related.
How would you define tech with regards to social media and how does that definition not include any other company running a website that you can interact with?
I said the code is the tech and then gave examples of what isn't tech. What else do you want? The dictionary definition is
which points even further away from social media being tech IMO.
The irony here. You've made zero argument other than "not uh!" and expect me to keep repeating what I've already stated in good faith. I focused on social media companies because that's what you had an issue with. Nobody disputes whether companies like Microsoft, SpaceX, Intel, and Apple are tech companies. The dispute here is whether Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc are really tech companies and more specifically whether any news surrounding these companies should be considered tech news (which you've already been given examples of) rather than just news about their actual tech products.
Nobody stated that.
Once again I'll ask you to define what you think social media companies are and how that definition doesn't include every other company with a web presence. Are you or are you not able to do that?
Still can't form an actual argument? What seems to be the issue here? You seemed to have such strong convictions in your point of view earlier.
I got about the same out of this guy. He acts so cocksure when dismissing others opinions but can't even seem to formulate his own counterpoint. It's just a one-sided discussion and this person has zero to offer to the conversation other than nitpicking and Socratic questions that lead nowhere.
To exclude social
News about a tech company is usually just business news and not news about tech though. Just like most Twitter news that gets posted on here.
Anything about the daily runnings of a company, it's personnel and other business decisions is not news about tech, no matter what the company is. Tech news should be about the technology. New breakthroughs, new coding language releases, new hardware etc.
Edit: and to be a tech company is a company that creates tech, not always just one that uses it. I could be on the side of social media companies being tech companies, but that doesn't mean all news about said companies are tech news, because they are not.