this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
311 points (86.6% liked)
Privacy
31886 readers
679 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nah, no /s needed when there are actual ample examples of enshittification via nickel and diming ads and ad-like bwhavior.
But in this case, the meaning stays the same even without the /s, because the key message is factually true and the sentence still functions as a contra to the previous comment.
I thnkI wrote /s, because "just cosmetic" is already a lie.
It doesn't change the intended meaning but it can change the interpreted one.
For example when I write "I love to give my data to Google /s" you can be sure that I actually do not love to give my data to Google, whereas leaving out the '/s' I could have meant it sincerely (for example, because I want targeted ads, perfectly tailored to my needs).
This example clearly illustrates the totally opposite interpreted meaning.
But in the case of the comment we are discussing, disclosing the sarcasm makes no difference to either side of the conversation (the sender and the readers)