This is part three of an ongoing, five-part series. Part one, the introduction, is here. Part two, about breaking up ad-tech companies, is here. Part four, about opening up app stores, is here.The ad-tech industry is incredibly profitable, raking in hundreds of billions of dollars every year by...
on r/privacy
You must log in or register to comment.
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 :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.97K Posts
- 74.6K Comments
- Modlog
The economist should arguably free given the ideological heavy lifting it performs.
I found this interesting: https://citationsneeded.medium.com/episode-98-the-refined-sociopathy-of-the-economist-4966767e1688
Yeah, I’m aware of its history and biases.
Nothing should be really uncritically and without a skeptical eye. But to suggest it isn’t informative despite its ideological leanings, when you can directly compare it to examples that are ideological trash, is stretching things. There’s no such thing as an unbiased point of view, but there are less prejudiced points of view.