At some point they may need a new target, and we could be one. We are known by the general public while we are neither too much nor too powerful. And nobody would defend us beside those already targeted.
Certainly, but we’re not there (yet). Fretting about all the possible negative possibilities might feel like preparation, but your time would be better spent finding ways to protect our digital sovereignty/privacy, which is a good thing regardless of the market or political conditions.
I would love to find good ideas for protecting digital freedom, and freedom in general. May we can assume that those who do not care about privacy aren’t using Lemmy… But I don’t know how to protect ours except by defending it as a principle that should be universal.
And so a rule to restrict freedom except for us is not a good news to me. It is not as bad as if we were concerned directly, but it is still a step backward. Isn’t it?
At some point they may need a new target, and we could be one. We are known by the general public while we are neither too much nor too powerful. And nobody would defend us beside those already targeted.
Certainly, but we’re not there (yet). Fretting about all the possible negative possibilities might feel like preparation, but your time would be better spent finding ways to protect our digital sovereignty/privacy, which is a good thing regardless of the market or political conditions.
I would love to find good ideas for protecting digital freedom, and freedom in general. May we can assume that those who do not care about privacy aren’t using Lemmy… But I don’t know how to protect ours except by defending it as a principle that should be universal.
And so a rule to restrict freedom except for us is not a good news to me. It is not as bad as if we were concerned directly, but it is still a step backward. Isn’t it?
It certainly is. Rights for some and not others aren’t rights, they’re privileges, which we all know can be easily taken away.