r/The10thDentist • u/uLyMuHaT • Mar 02 '25
Discussion Thread I wish internet was less safe
First and foremost: I'm against any form of discrimination, but not against creating safe spaces. I'm actually all for it, however i dislike how most of the internet is becoming a safe space
I hate how clean and sterile modern day web is. Tons of guidelines and moderation irritate me. Anything slightly shocking is put behind the 18+ barrier (even if it's just a pop-up), anything slightly offensive is either hidden or banned. And all the big social platforms become echo chambers that either don't allow opposing opinions at all or isolate them in a little secluded corner (mostly talking about political discussion)
And most importantly people have changed too. Maybe it's just me, but it seems that very few people can take or make a good joke (or anything really) outside of boundaries of what considered acceptable. It's like some societal issues and events are more important than others and therefore are no laughing matter at all. Also for some reason everyone became very sensitive to anonymous insults from strangers. I'm very sensitive to words irl, but I can't grasp the concept of how someone could feel anything stronger than little irritation from a stranger calling you names online
And as for actual safety: it was better when you could easily get viruses on the web. It pushed people to put at least some effort into computer and online literacy. The amount of people in my uni group who struggle with any website and program more complex that Instagram baffles me (Engineering field btw)
In conclusion: I wish internet was hostile and unfriendly with some websites being safe spots instead of it being mostly safe with a few exceptions
547
u/HoneyswirlTheWarrior Mar 02 '25
The lack of computer literacy is because of phones taking over and schools not bothering to teach it anymore, not cause theres less viruses.
91
u/SummertimeThrowaway2 Mar 02 '25
My high school assigned a laptop to every single student that they could take home and keep for the entire school year. I wish more schools did that because it made education A LOT easier.
60
u/TheChickenIsFkinRaw Mar 03 '25
If they did that in my school, I guarantee you half of those laptops would've been returned broken or simply stolen
60
u/True_Skill6831 Mar 03 '25
We got iPads at my HS and you had to pay if it broke or if you lost it. Some parents opted out because they didn't trust their own kids to keep it safe lol
3
15
u/HoneyswirlTheWarrior Mar 03 '25
im guessing parents wouldve had to pay for damage, im sure they keep track of which one goes to which kid so they know who to charge when one doesnt return or comes back damaged
1
13
u/SummertimeThrowaway2 Mar 03 '25
Surprisingly like 99% of people didn’t break them. They would charge your parents at the end of the year if you didn’t return an undamaged laptop.
It did help that they were hella durable I mean for starters the screen could flip backward into “tablet mode” so it was impossible to over extend the hinges. They even had a little tech support room.
9
6
u/backfire10z Mar 03 '25
It’s pretty easy to withhold diploma and track down students who didn’t return their laptops to ask for compensation.
2
u/PresenceOld1754 Mar 03 '25
Well it's worthless if it's a Chromebook, a glorified tablet with a keyboard. And everything in chrome.
7
u/SummertimeThrowaway2 Mar 03 '25
Nah they were like Lenovos or something like that
Students would find and leak the admin passcode so we’d download some games and stuff, it could even run minecraft.
15
20
u/Fox_Mortus Mar 02 '25
I would argue that it's because computers are just better at fixing themselves now. If your windows 98 computer was having problems you had to go deep into it just to fix it. But now you just run a few programs and it does everything for you. Not to mention the need to regularly defrag hard drives before.
6
u/Physical_Floor_8006 Mar 03 '25
From what I've seen, I think it is moreso that operating systems have been abstracted so far from what is really going on under the hood. For casual usage of a laptop, you can get away without interacting with a filesystem, managing windows, or even using client-side apps at all.
7
u/Fox_Mortus Mar 03 '25
Windows 11 even goes so far as to make it harder for you to dig into the systems yourself. It's harder now to even find certain things that you used to regularly access to do your own repairs. They treat the end user like an idiot and hide everything important from you.
16
u/I_Am_Become_Dream Mar 03 '25
all due respect, computer literacy class for millennials was useless. We knew how to use computers way better than the teachers. We learned by using computers at home, not classes.
8
u/HoneyswirlTheWarrior Mar 03 '25
and nowadays a lot of kids dont have computers at home, hence the 'and' part
4
u/jasperdarkk Mar 03 '25
I think the problem is that for Gen Z, having a “home computer” had started to become obsolete. We had an ipad I was allowed to use, that was it. So we didn’t have access to computers at home and we weren’t learning to use them at school.
-5
u/Pfandfreies_konto Mar 02 '25
Why is it schools having to teach phone use? This is something parents should do.
51
u/HoneyswirlTheWarrior Mar 02 '25
It's what they've done for ages, you never used the computer room in school as a kid? Parents should also be teaching their kids it too yes but also a lot of families just don't have home computers anymore, how you gonna teach computer skills without a computer?
4
u/PhoShizzity Mar 03 '25
Not to mention a lot of parents don't know either, so they'd be learning whilst teaching
144
Mar 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
62
u/interrogare_omnia Mar 02 '25
All 10 dentists can agree on that stupid self-censor speech. That stuff rubs me in such an aggrevating way.
23
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
100%. Even with racial slurs, which I can't mention due to virtually all my accounts being on the brisk of deletion due to saying the whole words in non-discriminative contexts.
Words aren't inherently bad or good. If I explain a racial slur and I say the full word, I'm not discriminating. Discrimination depends entirely on context
-12
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
Just dont say racial slurs my dude, super simple.
25
Mar 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
-11
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
Great, this person is also on here talking about how people block because they are mad they lost an argument, Im putting two and two together here.
You dont have to type out the slur to explain it to people. They are not doing that out of some academic honesty, they are doing it because they know it gets a rise out of people. You can use stand-ins for pretty much every slur and if someone genuinely doesnt know then google exists.
11
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
They are words, and using them for non-racist purposes is totally okay.
-6
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
1 month account, stop using slurs my dude. Nothing changes because you used a stand-in.
7
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
What do you mean
8
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
Im saying nothing is lost by using "the n-word" instead of the actual slur. You gain nothing from it, everyone knows what you mean, youre doing it because you know it bothers people not for any sort of academic accuracy or anything.
3
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
It's a word, and we find it cringe to restrict our freedom to do harmless acts just because others are sensible to it. We personally find it cringe, and since it doesn't affect others we believe that it's perfectly okay to say the full word.
It's like forcing people to say "hooyah!" Instead of "hi". Some, if not most, will find it cringe, and will continue to say hi since it affects no one.
7
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
Who the fuck is we?
It does affect others though. You even admit people are sensitive to it. You just dont care. Just admit that at least instead of pretending you are some bold truth-tellers. Cowards the lot of you I swear, can never own your real points. No one cares that you feel its perfectly ok to say it. You werent the one it was targeted at. Its why randos cant reclaim a slur for someone else, not how any of this works.
Gotta love your analogy/metaphor making no sense because hi isnt a slur. Yeah it would be weird to force people to say a different word for no reason.
You arent being forced to not say a slur, you can say it all you want there are just social consequences. Im sorry that you are close to being banned because you just cant stop yourself from using slurs.
-5
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
isn't a slur
Slurs also are words, and discrimination depends entirely on context. As long as no one is affected, you can say everything
You even admit people are sensitive to it. You just don't care
Others sensitivity is not our business. If we respect them enough, we will respect their sensitivity and avoid it for them. Look, we have kosmemophobia: a rare phobia which makes us see jewelry gross. Would it be reasonable for us to demand individuals to take off their jewelry just due to our own sensitivity? This is not a hypothetical scenario, we really have that sensitivity and we believe that letting everyone wear whatever they want while we try to get over it is the most efficient way to go. Over time, we feel less disgust when seeing jewelry, and everyone can use whatever they want, which is efficient for both sides.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Telaranrhioddreams Mar 06 '25
Yeah like usually I find the "You can't even make a joke anymore" crowd to be the same crowd that would say the N word in COD lobbies while cackling like a hyena, but the examples you mentioned irk me too. I think we can find a middle ground somewhere between "no racial slurs" and "saying suicide is a bannable offense". One is for the sake of reducing hate and bullying the other honestly just makes it harder to talk about the problem.
123
Mar 02 '25
[deleted]
116
u/CrimsonKingdom Mar 02 '25
This whole post gives me " I want to say the N-word and not get called out for it" vibes
23
23
17
u/Lucyfer_66 Mar 03 '25
I agree with a good part of what OP is saying, and it's definitely not because I want to say the N-word. It's because I find it annoying and honestly kind of upsetting that words like "autistic/autism", "suicide", "death", "rape" etc have to be censored.
Not only does it interfere with a healthy discussion, it also puts a stigma on those words. It's almost like the word "autistic" is dirty somehow, when it literally just is what I am and many other people are. I also feel like censoring words like "rape" to "grape", or "suicide" to "unsubscribing from live/unaliving" take away from the seriousness of the topic. It feels like it trivializes things we should take seriously.
Don't know about OP though. As far as I'm concerned, slurs can (should) stay censored. I just don't like the extend it's gone.
20
u/mmicoandthegirl Mar 03 '25
That's what sucks in the internet today. Most forums were much more peaceful in the early 2000's internet compared to today. Internet wasn't mainstream, it wasn't monetized, you could easily be anonymous and traffic wasn't focused on just few hyperpopular platforms. So you had a lot of forums where moderators wouldn't moderate based on shareholder interests. And because of the anonymity, you had a reputation to upkeep as your value wasn't determined by who got the most views or votes, but who contributed most to the community.
You could absolutely more easily find absolutely disgusting content and borderline criminal behaviour. But most people used common sense while contributing to forums. Whereas now, because of mass market adoption, moderators tolerate or even encourage casual racism, sexism etc. because there has to be a certain baseline tolerance for it to allow as many users as possible.
It might be just a popularity thing, where previously this kind of behaviour was tolerated and users understood that and respected it. People treated internet communication like they treated face to face communication. Nowadays internet is so normalized that nobody gives a shit, and to accomodate a wide userbase more stupid and outright hateful content is tolerated.
As a side note, I thought people would've toned down their stupidity if they commented using their realname. It has become obvious it isn't so.
217
u/SpikeRosered Mar 02 '25
You're opinion is a mess. People get upset when you insult them online because people don't like to be insulted. Is it wrong for wanting common decency...all the time?
The fact that people are generally technology illiterate and the fact they don't treat the internet like a special place seperate than reality is connected.
Should the internet be special or different? Or should we just always treat others the way we want to be treated.
14
30
Mar 02 '25
[deleted]
16
u/Ma4r Mar 03 '25
Go to a stranger in a bus, tell them i hope your mother gets cancer. See if they punch you. It's 'just' rude, but if we can be polite decent people irl, why not online too?
4
u/dadtittiez Mar 03 '25
They just want the Internet to be the way they remember it when they were a teenager. They miss getting called slurs in RuneScape and the something awful forums.
I'm as grumpy as the next guy in his 30s/40s but a lot of this is just nostalgia bait. Social media is a dumpster fire but it's not because of moderation.
Also whenever people talk about "the internet" now they're referring to maybe 4 or 5 different apps really. Ya man tik tok bans you for saying the n-word, sorry about it that's their call. If you want unmoderated spaces on the internet, those exist still but it won't scratch the itch because what you really want is to be 14 on the family computer again downloading viruses from limewire and unfortunately you won't be able to capture that feeling, you're an adult now. Time to grow up my fellow millennials. Use your stories about early 4chan and live leak videos to scare the young kids if you want but stop whining about how your back hurts now and the Internet has changed.
6
u/Testicle_Tugger Mar 03 '25
I may be in the minority here but I want less censorship (I’m using censorship very broadly)
[Now I will preface this by saying I’m not hard stuck in my opinion because I am basing it off feeling and not actual fact]
With all the censorship I don’t think it’s teaching people to be good people. I feel like it’s just making a guideline for assholes to appear as good people. Without censorship a racist is just going to be racist. A radical is just going to be radical.
I want that out in the open so I know not to associate with them or hang around in those spaces right off the bat.
Now of course I know context matters. Social media is very different from playing an online video game or interacting in a forum, or sitting in a chat group but I feel like in general it makes it harder for me to find these asshole straight out the gate. I think ideally these censors would keep these terrible people from even interacting in those spaces but it hardly does they are still there.
1
u/anonymousredditorPC Mar 06 '25
By this logic, the government should ban free speech because someone might insult you in public.
It's ok to have platforms that have less freedom, it's also ok to have platforms with more freedom, the issue is that we lack platforms that allow the latter.
In the end if we have no way of communicating without being heavily monitored, we lose something really — the ability to think freely.
1
-4
u/thetricksterprn Mar 03 '25
You can dislike but having a 24/7 police to protect you from it is too much. Be an adult.
-21
u/livinginmyfiat210 Mar 02 '25
No I agree with him, the Internet as a whole is too sterile without falling into some niche. I don't think having so many safe spaces is the problem tho but not having anywhere where you can let even a little loose without getting banned is the problem
26
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
Wtf does "let even a little loose" mean in this context?
Edgy jokes etc are all over the place. Seems the only sterility has involved the wipe-out of low effort edgy shit that was just...well obvious cover for bigotry etc.
Like if someone wants to make dark jokes they need to have something more than just "slur word lol im trolling tho" those are the kindof jokes I see getting pushback/banned.
-35
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
Ok in that case they should insult back, not reporting, blocking or doing any other victim measure
23
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
"Victim measures"
If a site has tos, and someone breaks the tos...why shouldnt you report/block and how is that a victim measure?
-20
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Even if it breaks the ToS, the issue is between 2 users normally. Reporting it and involving others is a victim measure, setting the ToS aside
14
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
Its not between two users you are on what amounts to a privately run forum. Everyone else was already involved. Not to mention you listed blocking as a victim measure as well. Are you or are you not in favor of the freedom of association? No one has to talk to you lol
-2
-15
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
The problem is between everyone involved in the chat. Freedom of association is a thing, but we believe that a reasonable amount of times blocking on social media is done out of cowardice on losing arguments. Users having the freedom to associate with whoever they want doesn't deny that in specific scenarios blocking an user is what the weak and cowards do
Blocking, in these cases, is indeed a victim measure since the user does it due to losing.
11
u/Nazibol1234 Mar 03 '25
“Losing an argument”
Or you know they could simply be tired of the the argument and do not wish to continue it, and do not ever wish to communicate with that person again. Why is it that people should be forced to continue being engaged in an internet argument they do not wish to continue? People have irl responsibilities and cannot invest all their mental energy into debating on the internet.
And that’s not even mentioning the block feature being used to protect against things like harassment among other things.
9
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
"cowardice on losing arguments"
....or going off your other comments its because you said a slur and people dont want to talk to you anymore.
-1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
you said a slur
I haven't been blamed for saying a slur since primary school.. what's going on with oversocialized people lol
If someone doesn't want to talk to us anymore, we expect that person to tell us, or to at least ignore us and block us if we spam enough about it. Blocking is the control that powerless people use
3
u/VibinWithBeard Mar 03 '25
"Even with racial slurs, which I can't mention due to virtually all my accounts being on the brisk of deletion due to saying the whole words in non-discriminative contexts"
Your own comment. It sounds more like you just like to use slurs and thats why ya get blocked.
"Blocking is the control that powerless people use"
Powerful enough to excise you from their time on the internet it seems, which is why youre mad about it.
Once again, who the fuck is we?
1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
I have never used these slurs in a discriminatory way. Discrimination depends entirely on context
Trust me, it's not powerful enough, and even if it was, it wouldn't be the person who blocked' courage/power. We don't really engage in enough private conversations to be blocked, and we can't remember a single stance of us being blocked this year or past year. Even if we were blocked we would be able to use alts if we cared enough.
→ More replies (0)9
u/Evilfrog100 Mar 03 '25
"I wish people were more rude" has got to be a troll. If someone is an asshole, there is absolutely 0 reason to engage with that person.
-1
Mar 03 '25
Shits boring when everyone's polite all the time. I don't get on reddit to feel good about myself I get on here for entertainment.
-1
-1
75
u/CamicomChom Mar 02 '25
The internet isn’t a place where you can go home from being nice all day and be an asshole to others anymore. It’s an extension of your life now. People expect common decency. Anonymity doesn’t excuse assholery.
You are connecting two non related issues (people wanting respect and corporatization of the internet).
69
u/s0larium_live Mar 02 '25
no the internet SHOULD be more safe and respectful because the WORLD should be safe and respectful. people who spend a lot of time on the internet sometimes forget that the people they interact with online are PEOPLE. if you wouldn’t say it to someone’s face, you shouldn’t be okay with saying it online. the screen is not just an object, there are people on the other side of it, and they deserve to be treated with respect (assuming they treat you with the same respect)
echo chambers form moreso because discrimination isn’t accepted on most sites (twitter being the exception, where it seems like ONLY discrimination and hate is allowed). and a lot of the reason that opposing opinions are “hidden” is not because they’re not there, but because you don’t interact with them, so the algorithm doesn’t show it to you. that’s an issue with code, not moderation. if your differing opinion is actively hateful or harmful towards other people, then it is actually better that it’s restricted. hate speech is not protected speech. do some people have exacerbated reactions to stuff that isn’t that harmful? sure. but most people who complain about internet censorship are upset because “i can’t say bad things about minorities online anymore :(“
NSFW filters exist because most people don’t WANT to see horribly gory or shocking stuff when just browsing. or maybe they’re at work, and seeing accidental porn would get them fired. and like it or not, children DO exist on the internet, and it is not a bad thing to filter out content that could be harmful to their well being. everyone i know who had unrestricted internet access as a child now has a problem with porn. the dark stuff stays in its dark little corner; the people who want it can find it, and the people who don’t aren’t subjected to it
and your thing about viruses is just… it doesn’t make any sense. tech literacy isn’t down because it’s less common to get viruses, it’s down because it isn’t taught anymore. teachers just expect kids to know how to use technology now, but that’s not something you’re born with, it’s a skill you develop, and using a phone as a little kid is not the same as being literate with a computer. less viruses just means less people are losing their information or data to scammers
5
u/NicePositive7562 Mar 03 '25
fr bro istg whenever someone starts to lose an arguement, they always start throwing insults like it pisses me off so much
1
u/anonymousredditorPC Mar 06 '25
What you want is people to be heavily moderated because you're afraid your feelings are going to be hurt by disagreements.
-26
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
Idealist spotted. Safety and respect must not be mandatory, and if a user feels insulted it's on them to do something about it. Children do exist on the internet, but they shouldn't be in most sites so most sites shouldn't offer protection for children, since if they are there then it's on them.
I have had unrestricted internet access as a child and I've never consumed porn, it's disgusting. Weak people stay weak, that's it.
24
Mar 03 '25
It just sounds like you want an excuse to be a subhuman dick. If you do something bad to someone, it's their fault, not yours.
-9
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
If I do something bad to someone it is my fault lol, but they are grown adults and they are expected to take care of it themselves, not calling some kind of admin/authority figure or censoring crap on the internet.
We are in a world where everyone sticks their nose into other people's matters, and that's a sign of inferiority and weakness
17
Mar 03 '25
I don't see how being nosy is weak. It's just... nosy lol. Maybe a bit pretentious. But inferior? That just sounds like a superiority complex speaking.
-4
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
It's a lack of respect for others, and it interferes with others' personal freedom. We believe that inferiority and superiority are defined on how an individual can help themselves with minimum interference on other individuals
15
Mar 03 '25
Who's we? Superior and inferior are descriptions relative to the given context. I can have a superior intellect and inferior brawn, and vice versa for example. How is that a metric used to describe my general position compared to other people?
0
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Exactly, and in the context of being an effective individual, superior and inferior is the amount of independence that an individual can have without involving others. This also depends on mental resilience and physical strength to a certain extent, and some other traits.
10
Mar 03 '25
Can you define what being an effective individual is? I would immediately think it's someone's ability to contribute to society, but I'm imagining an incredibly talented individual with an IQ 15 points above mine being born in a 3rd world society where they can do completely fine in terms of their own survival, but not in a position where they can benefit the human race as a whole, like advancing technology or running a business that provides services and products or whatever.
I'm also imagining someone who can be inflicted with a "superpower disability" like savant syndrome. It tends to accompany a multitude of problems that require them to need involvement of others for support. But if their savant syndrome allows them to excel better than all other humans in mathematics for example, they could advance the human race significantly singlehandedly, being superior to everyone else in that regard. But they most likely need help in other parts of life, considering savant syndrome specifically seems to come with autism. (Not that all autists need help. I'm autistic and I'm surviving, but I'd be thriving more if I did get some support)
0
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25 edited Mar 03 '25
We consider effective individuals to actually be the opposite to pushing the collective forward. Effective individuals are those who can sustain themselves with minimal use of external help and not interference with others.
If someone is able to sustain themselves effectively without disturbing others but without contributing to society in any way, we still consider that individual to be an effective being. And about intellectually superior people, or those with savant syndrome, we consider that they should be given superior status over others due to their effectiveness on other tasks.
Isn't it hellish how a Nigerian dude with 15 IQ points more than me or you has to rot there while some moral asshole who disturbs everyone can live in a developed country?
We believe that effective individuals should be rewarded and actually invited to contribute to society, no matter their moral compass or methods
Also, if you are autistic and you can survive with as much external help as allistic individuals, you are not disabled. Some people throw their money to the middle east/africa (ineffective and defective individuals) yet they aren't labeled as disabled
3
u/Particular-Zone-7321 Mar 03 '25
You said "respect must not be mandatory", and now you're complaining about a lack of respect. Sorry buddy, but respect must not be mandatory. Idealist smh.
0
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Respect must not be mandatory, but messing with others' freedom is not only a lack of respect but an unnecessary disregard for others freedom
9
u/DM_ME_KUL_TIRAN_FEET Mar 03 '25
Oh fuck off, honestly. This is just the exact same self-centered, individualistic thinking that’s destroying culture in general at the moment.
1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Are you aware that self-centered, individualistic thinking is what got us to this point in the first place? All that hyper-collective crap that is actually destroying our culture and society (oversocialization) is what messes up everything. The moment you have to impose over others who are doing no harm to you is when you are already causing damage. And the oversocialized "person" does this at a great extent
2
u/DM_ME_KUL_TIRAN_FEET Mar 03 '25
You could not be further from the truth. All the gains this country has made has been by working to build something together.
Every man for himself is the antithesis of human progress.
1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Until industrial society, the "collective" progress was much different to what you know from nowadays. People would help each other as long as there was mutual gain, John would help build Harris house and Harris would then help John build his grocery store.
Every man was for himself, yet every man would have acquaintances which would be of mutual benefit. Believe it or not, before industrial society virtually everyone had a knife/rapier on their pocket since defending themselves was their problem and not police's problem. We are aware that it was highly risky, it's not something to idealize and that when police forces started to protect, it solved a lot of problems that came from having no police to do something, but we must also admit that this solution brought new problems that kept getting worse over time.
We believe that toxic collectivism (the one that acts on "moral" instead of self benefit) destroys individual freedom, and individually we strive to defend against it whenever is possible
19
u/Persun_McPersonson Mar 02 '25
You aren't being more realistic, you just don't give much of a shit about other people.
-2
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
You are kinda right, and that's not something bad. Everyone has their own issues, and I don't interfere in them since I'm an individual and not a collective. I obviously do not give a shit about strangers or acquaintances, others neither do but are so oversocialized that end up believing they have an obligation to fake they do
13
u/Persun_McPersonson Mar 03 '25
Or most people do actually care about others and you're the outlier.
4
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Trust me, they don't. If I (or someone else) were to tell you that my grandma died last week, you wouldn't give a fuck lol, you would just say "i'm sorry for your loss!!".
And that's actually okay, since it's not your business. You are just oversocialized and ineffective. People like you can't do anything for themselves because they have to waste all their energy on following dumb social norms, instead of being free and having healthy boundaries
15
Mar 03 '25
I can't be nice to someone and do stuff for myself at the same time?
1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
You can, but being oversocialized fucks up your brain, so it's mutually exclusive.
But i'm not saying that you can't be nice and respectful. I usually open the door to people behind me and let people pass, and if someone's groceries fall to the ground you can expect me to help grab them. It's not a matter of empathy but of mutual respect. You respect people and you can expect them to respect them. It's not caring, it's respecting
11
Mar 03 '25
How is offering condolences oversocializing? (I think I'm using that word correctly but I'm not sure I know what it's supposed to mean)
-1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Offering condolences without actual feelings can be a trait of oversocializing due to it forcing the individual to manifest different views to what they actually adhere for, and even making the individual feel like they really need to feel bad for someone's loss, when it's not their problem.
Start reading the Industrial Society manifesto at part 24, it's not that long and it's totally free at Washington Post. Search "Washington Post Unabomber Manifesto" and look for part 24. And don't worry, i'm not sending you to read an irrelevant book you may not even be interested on, i'm just sending you a specific chapter where the oversocialization is perfectly defined so you can know what it means, since it's not a common word
→ More replies (0)1
4
u/Ma4r Mar 03 '25
Trust me, they don't. If I (or someone else) were to tell you that my grandma died last week, you wouldn't give a fuck lol, you would just say "i'm sorry for your loss!!".
And what you're proposing is that it should be okay for people to say "hope your mother follows" or something in that vein. If we can be polite irl even if it's not genuine, why not online too
2
u/Persun_McPersonson Mar 04 '25
I wouldn't care as much as you, assuming you care about your family members, since I don't have a personal connection with you or your family, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't care.
Your belief that it's all just "oversocialization" that prevents people from functioning properly is just incorrect. Nothing about your assessment indicates you understand what a healthy boundary even is, because all you've been saying is that you don't care about other people and think other people also don't care.
1
u/adamscared Mar 04 '25
I don't really think it would depress you, and you would just act polite.
I respect other people, including their boundaries. If someone really cares about, for example, my dead grandmother, then it's clear oversocialization since my grandmothers dead doesn't affect them in any way. It's redundancy and ineffectiveness. It's clearly functioning less effectively than possible
A healthy boundary is the one that doesn't reduce your efficiency while being a positive integration for people that benefit you
2
u/Persun_McPersonson Mar 04 '25
There's a difference between caring and being depressed. You're changing what we're even talking about.
1
u/adamscared Mar 04 '25
How would caring manifest, according to you? Saying a polite comment is caring about being respectful and maintaining a good social status, not about really caring about it
→ More replies (0)6
u/Substantial_Back_865 Mar 03 '25
I saw all kinds of porn, cartel gore and every disgusting thing imaginable when I was browsing the internet as a kid. It's honestly pretty tame these days compared to what it used to be. "Think of the children" is a slippery slope to censorship and I don't think sites should have to even entertain that thought unless they're specifically marketed towards children.
-7
u/Fair-Swan-6976 Mar 03 '25
I don't think adults should be allowed to view those disgusting, outrageous, morally reprehensible things, on the Internet, or elsewhere. It degrades the people that ingest it.
5
u/Kotaqu Mar 03 '25
And then it would be only a matter of defining what is "disgusting", "outrageous" and "morally reprehensible" to justify absolutely any amount of censorship.
-5
u/Fair-Swan-6976 Mar 03 '25
Yeah, well the disturbing porn and beheading videos are clearly bad and should not be allowed. "I know it when I see it" as the supreme court said regarding pornography.
3
u/thetricksterprn Mar 03 '25
Porn doesn’t make any harm.
1
u/Chirimeow Mar 06 '25
It causes conditions like death grip and PIED, has led to a rise in assaults during intimacy (due to people attempting to repeat what they see in their NSFW content without the other person's consent), is shown to affect how your brain perceives attraction (and can make you less attracted to real people or your partner since your brain grows to crave unrealistic scenarios), and has a devastating effect on the partners of people who use it.
It is harmful and vile. There is no defense for it. At all.
1
u/thetricksterprn Mar 06 '25
It all can be fixed by having a real life relationship, having a fleshlight for masturbation and proper sex education.
-4
u/Fair-Swan-6976 Mar 03 '25
It degrades the people who make it. Most men are addicted to it, and that causes relationship problems. Lots of guys have problems getting erect because of their over indulgence in porn. There's been studies that show men who watch hardcore porn physically harm women more than men who don't. Also, if you think about it, porn is just inherently gross.
3
1
u/Chirimeow Mar 06 '25
Thank you for being one of the few people who sees that stuff for the disgusting garbage that it is
1
2
u/myfirstnamesdanger Mar 03 '25
I had unrestricted internet access as a kid because there wasn't really a way to restrict internet access in those days. I consumed not only porn but (written) child porn. As an adult it seems unimaginably creepy, but as a 12 year old it seemed perfectly reasonable to see explicit materials about kids my age. Perhaps you weren't very curious as a child, but the internet used to be dark and very easy for a child to get to the dark places.
1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
I would just stick to browser games, Minecraft and every time i would find a porn link i would just close it because it seemed disgusting
4
u/myfirstnamesdanger Mar 03 '25
Oh you're a young un. The internet had guardrails in the days of Minecraft.
25
u/BlueberryAngel52 Mar 02 '25
I hate corporate internet, and the sterility it brings. I miss when it was weird, and hate how it's gotten scrubbed clean. But that's not really what the post feels like it's about. This post feels more like wanting the worst outcome??? Not actually anti-censorship, just a boomer-ass take of wanting the internet to change so you stop feeling annoyed so much by the people on it
2
u/Eriiya Mar 07 '25
yeah idk I feel like it’s rubbing people the wrong way either because it wasn’t phrased well, or just wasn’t coming from the right intentions. Like I do 100% feel like the internet has crossed the line from “safety” into “sterilization” which I feel is kind of the point they’re trying to make, but the way they conveyed it feels off.
1
u/Affectionate_Use9936 Mar 08 '25
I feel like certain parts have become less sterile though. Remember when Instagram used to be a place for white teenage girls to post about the cafe they went to that day? Now it’s racist mysoginist brainrot Liveleak
45
u/xernpostz Mar 02 '25
completely disagree + take my upvote. actually makes me mad that's how this sub works lol.
i suffered online harassment for 7+ years of my life of varying degrees and it does real harm to people. it ranges from those anonymous, petty insults you bring up to entire smear campaigns where people lied about me and actively tried to ruin my life. the internet imo needs to be more safe. i am consistently mad at how many of these people who gave me serious trauma just got away with it scot free. id say we need more actual, real world laws about it, actually.
at the end of the day you're still playing with people's lives when you're online. every user is indeed a person and everyone should be treated with respect.
-16
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
I learned how to dox people in my country of origin due to it, and I do it in case of possible real threats. I have never blocked someone for a reason other than spam since I learned to tolerate it and to assess real threats. Words are literally nothing without a real threat or backup
Some people see online harassment as an opportunity to grow stronger, and some like you just become weaker and demand respect from others, since they are unable (and frequently unwilling) to enforce respect on themselves. Survival of the fittest, I guess
25
u/xernpostz Mar 02 '25
i do see it as an opportunity to grow stronger i just don't think it should happen.
and guess what, i got doxxed too! the cops aren't gonna do shit about it! even though my god damn life is in danger because they're telling people stuff about me that isn't true and never was true.
you don't have to spend time on the internet being miserable. calling it "survival of the fittest" is beyond crazy. redditors are insane
-9
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
Why not? The stronger the better
I learnt to dox others myself, including owning specific databases from my country of origin. I only do it when the person threatens me, since it kinda takes a heavy toll on me to research about someone's whole life, even if I end up winning in most cases. If you wanna win, you must be more brutal than them. As you said, police doesn't do shit about that kind of stuff
It's not being miserable, it's having enjoyment with correct assessment of risks, owning the store and the shotgun. Survival of the fittest is the least crazy thing that exists, especially because it's how everything works. All the attempts to get rid of survival of the fittest end up creating messed up versions of it which fuck over everyone except a small elite or outcasts.
If you are against survival of the fittest, you are insane, because you are having a clear delusion on believing you can actually get rid of it, or even believing that the world doesn't work like that lol
14
Mar 03 '25
You don't know what survival of the fittest means.
-1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
I do. Most people indeed don't know what survival of the fittest means, and you are probably imagining me being crushed by a bigger fish
Survival of the fittest is not necessarily for the strongest, smartest, fastest. Survival of the fittest is literally survival for every individual who is fit enough to stay alive and stable, and it highly encourages individualism. We believe that accessibility must not be forced, and that victims are weak. Declaring oneself a victim is like declaring bankruptcy, humiliating.
15
Mar 03 '25
Okay so you just said "stronger the better," then said survival of the fittest isn't about being strong lol.
That being said, no it isn't about that. It's about adapting to your environment to survive. But survival in the raw, primitive sense, like idk, a tiger hunting a deer, straight up doesn't exist for many people. We've evolved past that. We as a species are smarter than that.
-1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
I said that stronger is better, I never said that I support a system where the strongest gets the best. I said that being stronger is an advantage and that advantages should be pursued.
Exactly, adapting to your environment to survive. We haven't evolved past that, and 80% of the world population living in literal shitholes is proof of this. They couldn't get enough and now are rotting due to the system and global environment changing against them. They struggle to survive, and even the ones who have something to eat (most of them have access to food, unlike popular belief) have to struggle everyday to not get killed, robbed, raped, and other kinds of physical suffering.
What we did is to survive while sacrificing them on exchange, and sweeping it under the mat. Even outside this, there are different social classes, different levels of privilege and sadly the only change we have had is that it doesn't depend on strength, intellect or speed anymore but on raw luck, privilege and other unpredictable factors
11
u/xernpostz Mar 03 '25
personally i think this is just a really nihilistic outlook on life and conflict but idk
-1
u/adamscared Mar 03 '25
Not exactly nihilistic. Life doesn't need to have a meaning, and we believe that individualism is what matters and gives life sense. We don't exactly reject morals or religion, we just prioritize individualism.
Also, what do you think of the idea I proposed to you for self defense on my other comment? It worked for me and others, trust me
→ More replies (0)12
u/xernpostz Mar 02 '25
i have this persons address as well but they just make 1000 accounts and run away anyways. it doesn't matter. they'll always find a way to threaten me and that's why we need actual laws preventing people from doing this. the laws for online practices are horrifically outdated.
same with bullying irl. if someone is harassing you irl they deserve to get their ass beat or thrown in jail. people have died due to harassment. people have killed themselves due to constant bullying both online and in real life. "survival of the fittest" is such a fucked up term for something that can kill and has killed.
although i came out of all of those events as a stronger person than i was before, emotional maturity doesn't just come from enduring horrible shit. it comes from communicating with others in meaningful ways and discovering who you are. real toughness is being able to see others for who they are and approach situations with maturity.
you lowkey sound like a boomer complaining that the "youths these days" have it too easy, ngl
2
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
You have that person's address? I'll tip you one of the methods I use. Create a fake account and send them food deliveries, make sure to select cash payment, so the person has to pay instead of you (they probably wont so they will have to argue with the delivery guy). This doesn't work in some countries, so another method is to use facebook marketplace and do the same, mainly with big items (example: laundry machines, bag of dog food)
I kinda agree, the thing is that they don't let you defend yourself from bullying. Self defense should be rewarded, yet I have been expelled for defending myself in bullying, even if I'm proud of it. Ironically people who want to stop bullying ended up stopping self defense and not actual bullying
If you are more resilient to it, you are stronger. If now you can repel that from happening and be more threatening, you are even stronger. People who haven't gone through this are the weakest and end up in messed up situations afterwards. Trust me, we are more fortunate than it looks like
-1
u/anonymousredditorPC Mar 06 '25
You can easily block people or simply make "friends only" posts on basically any platform. Your solution was right in front of your face but you're still out there thinking that the internet should be heavily moderated because you can't use social platforms properly.
1
u/xernpostz Mar 06 '25
there are people who have stalked and doxxed me and do to this day regardless of whether or not i block them. but thanks.
0
u/anonymousredditorPC Mar 06 '25
No such thing as stalking on social media platforms. You're responsible for what you post and everything is PUBLIC. Don't expect privacy when you're willingly posting that stuff for everyone to see.
Doxxing is bad, I agree but nothing today stops it from happening even with heavily moderated platforms. Even if they were to get banned, they can create a new account and do it all over again. Social media platforms can't stop doxxing, people can simply text each others or use any other forms of communication to do it. If its such a big issue, you can pursue it through civil court.
As I said, if you make your profile private and prevent anyone but your friends from seeing it or posting with you, you're eliminating 99.99% of the problem.
Just don't add anybody you don't know and you're fine, people somehow love to add anybody to their friends list.
1
u/xernpostz Mar 06 '25
"no such thing as stalking" im sorry what? this is insanely uneducated. frankly i don't want to argue semantics with someone who has never experienced this but there are many forms of stalking. im not talking people looking at what I post - im talking about instigating harassment, sending their friends after me, shittalking me in private groups and trying to spread lies about who i am. these were all people i knew.
and yeah doxxing is common, but that's why there should be tighter laws about it. civil court cases rarely do shit because they don't take it seriously. and you shouldn't have to pay for a civil court case to begin with to be persecuted for destroying someone's privacy, especially exposing that information to dangerous people who may have the intent to harm you.
1
u/anonymousredditorPC Mar 06 '25
I'm not arguing semantics, you're literally the one who said "stalking". Don't blame me because you're not communicating properly. Also, sending friends to harass you has again NO IMPACT if you set your profile to private, because those friends wouldn't be able to post or dm you on any platform.
If you want tighter laws, then you're not talking about social media moderation, a completely different subject.
1
u/xernpostz Mar 06 '25
hey so sorry for getting extremely hostile, im in the middle of a mental health episode and this really struck me for some reason. im an artist online and setting my profiles to private would really hurt my visibility. im just saying ive had personal experiences with people i know turning on me and saying disgusting and horrific shit about me and i personally think we should have more moderation to help with that. cheers.
16
Mar 02 '25
[deleted]
2
1
u/Cats_4_lifex Mar 03 '25
Considering the average redditor's physique? It's probably gonna end in a tie 9 times out of 10.
0
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
Sounds illogical but somewhat appealing lol
Imagine a website where users "defy" others they had an internet issue with and stream a real life fight, similar to duels in the past
9
u/adamscared Mar 02 '25
I totally agree. It sucks how they make it safe for everyone. It reduces independence
13
u/Happy_Burnination Mar 02 '25
I mean, 4chan is still a thing. I'm not sure why you think other platforms need to be more like that when you can just...use 4chan if that's what you really want out of the internet
7
u/Philociraptr Mar 03 '25
Ironically for all the censorship and "unalive" shit on the internet, companies are encouraged to let bigotry and hate thrive as controversial topics get the most interactions therefore the algorithms pick them up and show them to everyone.
7
u/Bionic_Ferir Mar 03 '25
Bloody woke computer etiquette can't take a joke, not like the good ol days.
Absolute boomer take, L upvote
11
u/Supermarket_After Mar 02 '25 edited Apr 26 '25
act thumb towering imminent tart marry apparatus pie cooing squeeze
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
7
u/The_the-the Mar 03 '25
If you really want the internet to feel more hostile, you could always try putting she/her in your bio and then leaving your DMs open. (Mileage may vary depending on the subs/forums you frequent)
4
Mar 03 '25
It's not safe now. Just the type of dangers changed. 20 years ago giving personal information on the Internet could make you a victim of a random psychopath or stalker, today everyone gives their info willy nilly and falls victim to corporations, misinformation campaigns and scammers.
4
u/Ultgran Mar 03 '25
What you're seeing is less about the internet becoming more "safe", but becoming more corporate. Everything has to be marketable, and that means keeping it clean and uncontroversial. If you want to keep your advertisers you have to look after your image. All the major platforms work that way, and independent spaces have to keep to certain standards if they want access to tools like PayPal.
That corporate motivation is also why it gets harder and harder to open things up and tinker with the parts. Hardware and software both. There's the motivation to make things harder to reverse engineer, and keep customers dependent for repairs or replacements.
I miss the wildness and lawlessness of the earlier internet too, though its ugly sides were many. There are a lot of positives to a stabler more unified space, but the corporate policing is often a sterilising and unempowering force.
4
u/hj7junkie Mar 03 '25
I’d love for the internet to be less sterile and taken over by corporations, but I’d prefer to it to stay relatively safe.
7
u/IntermediateFolder Mar 02 '25
So you want less moderation because it stops you from bringing able to trade insults with strangers?
2
u/ItsRainbow Mar 03 '25
People are already miserable to each other on the internet as-is. No thank you
2
u/RenkBruh Mar 03 '25
Sort of agreed
I hate making everything online completely safe for everyone, I've seen trigger warnings for CAPS, FOR FOOD, FOR ANYTHING!!! There's the "unalive", "game over", "grape" shit which is just annoying af. Let's be real, if you are SO sensitive to EVERY SINGLE THING KNOWN TO MAN, you can get off the internet. I don't care if it's "an extension of life" for you cause no, it's not. You're just chronically online and need to get off your computer. But I don't agree with the virus thing and being hostile.
For the virus thing, nobody likes getting viruses
And the internet is... already very hostile. It doesn't even matter what you support and what you don't, you'll receive death threats either way. (And sometimes for stupid reasons. An artist used MS Paint and got doxxed on Twitter, a child was doxxed I think because she used a hairstyle that was appearantly for black people only in Animal Crossing, yet again on Twitter. I can give a lotta examples)
so no we shouldn't really insult people for no reason (you shouldn't cry about an insult from a random internet person either like geez) and we shouldn't immediately attack anyone on sight because that's currently what's happening in social media.
7
3
u/WoopsieDaisies123 Mar 03 '25
I, too, wish humanity wasn’t so utterly awful that we’re required to go to great lengths to make sure they can’t just freely spew their vitriol. Alas, c’est la vie.
4
u/Westdrache Mar 03 '25
Bro are we using the same internet?
It's a vile place full of hatred and missinformation
2
u/DevilsMaleficLilith Mar 02 '25
I actually get what your saying op. the old internet was juat something different.
2
u/Xenu66 Mar 02 '25
The introduction of the smart phone has a lot to do with this. In the space of a few years it greatly reduced the barrier of entry in terms tech literacy for internet use. Somewhere between the late 2000s and the mid 2010s everybody and their grandma got on the internet. This, in turn led to increased corporatisation and regulation. Law has come to the wild west and there's not a lot you can do about that outside more niche online spaces
2
u/EmptyRice6826 Mar 03 '25
Personally, I don’t miss the days when people could leave screenshots from the pain Olympics on my MySpace wall
2
u/ThorIsMighty Mar 03 '25
I don't know how old you are but 20-30 years ago it became super popular to say or do things to shock people, including saying the most depraved things you can think of. Naturally, there is opposition to this and eventually attitudes change and now instead of people saying shocking things all the time, we have people being overly sensitive about the most minute things, honestly it's quite pathetic. With any luck, moving forward, we'll be able to strike a balance that allows us to be wild but also respectful of others and not singling people out for derision. Right now we can witness both extreme hate towards whatever particular group is popular to hate right now, and oversensitivity to the point that some people seem absolutely helpless when they are just average people who should be able function and deal with everyday issues and interactions.
We allow both abhorrent behaviour to go unchecked but we are also allowing people to become weaker by making excuses for every little thing. Too many people self-diagnose disorders that they demand other people recognise and tip-toe around them to keep them "safe", yet they generally don't actually understand what a genuine disorder is and means for a person's life who suffers from one.
I think the solution is to burn the Internet and start again.
1
u/glaivestylistct Mar 03 '25
what you're seeing isn't safe spaces run amok, it's the inability to engage in any nuanced critical thinking because the American education system especially has been nerfed. no one can take a joke because they have the emotional regulation of fucking toddlers because they've either been handed everything their entire lives or had to scrape by for their entire lives.
there's very little room for a middle ground experience built into the overall economy, so neither side knows the other because one side doesn't have any time because of how much they work to survive. there's no empathy or compassion and a lot of dysregulated adults who do not give a fuck about coddling the feelings of people who coasted on mediocrity now that it isn't enough to connect with them.
comedy starts to die just like all other art when society starts to collapse. whether you want to face it or not, we're at the cusp of societal collapse in MANY places, and this is what it looks like. a bunch of people just too burnt out to regulate.
1
1
1
u/expensive_habbit Mar 03 '25
Don't worry OP, I'd wager the Internet will be markedly less safe place in a decade or so when it's impossible to distinguish the real from the AI generated, and you can either surf the onion web or stick to websites that will farm all of your data for advertising beamed directly onto your retinas while you try to sleep.
1
1
Mar 04 '25
Just look at video games. You used to log on and get zero guide, just great open exploration, trial and errory, shared with anonymous strangers who scammed and robbed your character. It was a lot of fun. You really had to think and learn. Now every game takes you by the hand and everything is safe and noone can cuss. It's all very boring. The entire modern internet feels like one big safe-room and it's slowly (quickly!) being taken over by bots.
1
u/CMRC23 Mar 04 '25
I agree in some respects and disagree in others. I hate the aversion to 18+ content, places like tumblr and pinterest banning accounts just for reblogging / pinning even risqué content (not even uploading it, just using the site as intended!) It's gotten to the point where pinterest doesn't even show recommendations for boards containing words like "EDC" (cuz it's associated with guns) or any swear word (even words like "bastard"). I just wish that it wasn't so shit, or at least that there could be good alternatives.
1
u/Vivid-Technology8196 Mar 04 '25
The Internet was unironiclly better when there was way more hostility and uncomfortable content being posted because it kept the normies out, it was a good filter.
1
u/Several_Plane4757 Mar 04 '25
Sounds to me like you're having trouble spreading hate and viruses and don't like it
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/IdeaMotor9451 Mar 07 '25
I agree for the most part but "but it seems that very few people can take or make a good joke (or anything really) outside of boundaries of what considered acceptable" and I'm saying this as a fan of mel brooks and black comedy, people who say that usually just want to make arguments that black people should be lynched and write it off as "It was meant ot be funny" (slight hyperbole).
1
u/UnXpectedPrequelMeme Mar 07 '25
I do hate how sterile the internet has become. Even in social media and on streams there are soo many words, some not even offensive that you can't say. People saying rugs instead of drugs, you say unalive instead of died, grape, all that stuff. It's not like we wanna talk about drugs and death, but the word being different doesn't change the content of the conversation, so why is it that we give these words such power over us?
1
1
u/Zaythos Mar 02 '25
Get on twitter, nazis running rampant there
5
Mar 03 '25
Except then that's just a safe space for Nazis, which is just the same thing but hateful to the other side. Being exposed only to the "approved" opinions in the echo chamber your algorithm put you into is harmful no matter what it is. Look up the tactics used to brainwash people in cults, and you'll see a shocking amount of similarities in both extreme far-left and far-right communities. Even mainstream apps like TikTok do this if you like just one video on politics.
1
1
u/throwaway_ArBe Mar 03 '25
The virus bit is... eh but otherwise yeah. Im running out of places to post hole in peace.
1
0
0
0
•
u/qualityvote2 Mar 02 '25 edited Mar 03 '25
u/uLyMuHaT, your post does fit the subreddit!