@r000t 2) Why not RSS or Atom? Not efficient enough? 3) What would be the point in this? 1) Does it already support something like robots.txt that allows instances and users to opt-out?
@galena@blaaablaaaa@ignaloidas@coolboymew@Moon I think the problem is "15-minute city" means different things to different people. The original idea seemed to have been non-coercive. But what happened in Oxford was not.
It's interesting how what many people really want from a social setting is gatekeeping, but they don't bother to actually implement it. They just rely on things like obscurity and perceived difficulty of use.
Also, a legal "right to cognitive liberty" is not enough. It needs to be *impossible*. This technology and it's development need to be *banned*. I don't want to have to trust government and corpos not to invade my privacy and control my thought. Otherwise, this tech might become unavoidable. Then again, it might be developed and implemented in secret, which would be worse.
@xianc78 >Lateral reading is a strategy that enables people to emulate how professional fact checkers establish the credibility of online information. It involves opening up new browser tabs to search for information about the organisation or individual behind a site before diving into its contents. Only after consulting the open web do skilled searchers gauge whether expending attention is worth it. Before critical thinking can begin, the first step is to ignore the lure of the site and check out what others say about its alleged factual reports. Lateral reading thus uses the power of the web to check the web. This is a genetic fallacy.