I’m talking about this sort of thing. Like clearly I wouldn’t want someone to see that on my phone in the office or when I’m sat on a bus.

However there seems be a lot of these that aren’t filtered out by nsfw settings, when a similar picture of a woman would be, so it seems this is a deliberate feature I might not be understanding.

Discuss.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    86 months ago

    Maybe the miscommunication in this whole concept is the word “work”. What about at a restaurant or near family?

    I think the “work” bit is a verbal crutch, what people want is a way to better scope their experience to content more appropriate for their current situation whatever it may be.

    • @leftzero
      link
      96 months ago

      Sure, but that’s the user’s responsibility, not the content providers’.

      It’s extremely simple: could this site contain something that would be unsuitable for your current environment…?

      — Definitely not. — Great, browse away (as long as doing so isn’t unsuitable for some other reason, e.g. working, paying attention to your family, driving the car).

      — Possibly, maybe, I don’t know. — Ok, now, pay attention, here’s the trick: DON’T FUCKING BROWSE IT. Wait until you’re in an environment where you’re sure it’ll be suitable. Browse something else. Have some fucking self control, for fuck’s sake.

      You are the only one who can tell what is suitable for your current circumstances and what is not. Lemmy has no way of knowing that, the moderators have no way of knowing that, the posters have no way of knowing that.

      It’s your responsibility, not ours.

      NSFW tags would only make sense if they were set by the user, and then they’d be useless because they could only work once the user (and their company’s firewall) has already seen the content they didn’t want to see. By definition, they can’t work, unless everything is tagged.

      You know what does work, though? Not browsing shit in circumstances where it might contain potentially unsuitable content. So do that, and let the admins, moderators, and posters be.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        What you’re saying is that you don’t want to give users tools to curate their feeds, and your answer to them wanting those tools is for them not to view those feeds at all if they feel the content is unsafe. An interesting take. Where on the internet does that work?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          Dude clearly doesn’t know he can tick “Show NSFW content” and untick “Blur NSFW content” and suddenly he has exactly the website he’s asking for. Very cross over other people’s use of the site for no reason.

          • @leftzero
            link
            26 months ago

            I’ve had those disabled since the minute I got on lemmy, I just can’t abide censorship or, more importantly, wilful stupidly.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              36 months ago

              Censorship is where the government bans books and libraries etc because they disagree with the ideas in them. There’s real censorship going on in the USA just now. This isn’t censorship, it’s feed curation - just some folks wanting to not have scantily clad figures show up on their phone in their lunch break.

              It’s not wilful stupidity, it’s wanting some good old random entertainment on a break at work without some colleague harassing you for an inappropriate image which you could have had filtered out if people who didn’t use the feature at all didn’t spend so much time arguing that the inappropriate image should be viewed by those who do.

              Calm down a bit and let other people use lemmy how they like. It’s a free country. (apart from all the real life censorship, of course, and the lack of bodily autonomy women have in the USA), all that kind of stuff.

              Summary: other people are different to you and live in a different context. Try not to be cross about this.

        • @leftzero
          link
          26 months ago

          NSFW tags aren’t a way to curate one’s feed, they’re a waste of time.

          What you consider suitable will vary depending on where you are and what time it is, and might be completely different than what other users consider suitable.

          You want to curate your feeds?

          You can have multiple accounts, in multiple instances.

          You can subscribe to suitable communities and only browse ones you’re subscribed to.

          You can block users, communities, and instances.

          Most importantly, you can decide what to browse and when, and wait to browse feeds which might contain something unsuitable for your current circumstances until those circumstances have changed.

          Can these tools be improved…? Sure!

          Give me a way to choose between different sets of subscribed and I won’t need to have multiple accounts, for instance.

          Hell, this might be one of the few situations in which current “AI” models could actually be useful… just have one trained on what you don’t want to see at specific times and places and use it as a browser extension to prevent you from seeing that content.

          But tags aren’t going to help with that, because they’re entirely subjective, and only you know what you want tagged or not, and if you have to tag it yourself it’s already too late, you’ve already seen it (and so has your company’s firewall).