I use Lemmy only, no reddit and no Facebook/Instagram/Twitter etc

Thanks for calling me hardcore

It takes more than months to do anything. The civil rights movement you’re referencing took decades.

Just replied on another comment. Search for Erica Chenoweth https://www.ericachenoweth.com/research/wcrw

What I’m familiar with is Erica Chenowith who authored work in this area. Here’s her summarizing it on TEDx:

https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/resource/success-nonviolent-civil-resistance/

Between 1900 and 2006, campaigns of nonviolent resistance were more than twice as effective as their violent counterparts.

https://www.ericachenoweth.com/research/wcrw

https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/advocacy-social-movements/paths-resistance-erica-chenoweths-research

One of the reasons is that nonviolent resistance attracts more supporters, and once there’s enough support for enough time, things are more likely to change.

Chenoweth’s painstaking research, unprecedented in its scope and historical breadth, has shed new light on the understanding of civil resistance, political change, and the surprising effectiveness of nonviolent action.

The key ingredients of a successful nonviolent resistance movement, the researchers found, are:

1. A large and diverse population of participants that can be sustained over time.
2. The ability to create loyalty shifts among key regime-supporting groups such as business elites, state media, and—most important—security elites such as the police and the military.
3. A creative and imaginative variation in methods of resistance beyond mass protest.
4. The organizational discipline to face direct repression without having the movement fall apart or opt for violence.

Is this just your conjecture, or do you base this on something? Because there is research that supports nonviolent protest movements being the more effective path.

Nice try, Hollywood

We’re meant to be together

The fediverse feed isn’t algorithmically ranked, or subject to any of Threads’ rules or moderation; it’s just a reverse-chronological feed of stuff you follow.

'Member when Facebook was like that? You know, the way people want it?

Well I don’t use any Meta apps.
But I have to use SMS for certain people

So all in all, would you say my messages are more likely to be captured by Meta when using WhatsApp, or SMS? I ask in good faith. I am aware SMS isn’t secure, but at least it isn’t literally hosted by Meta… So if Meta was my main concern for my threat model would you still recommend WhatsApp?

It’s a fork of open source software. If only “line go up” didn’t have to be the way things worked they could have stopped developing features no one wants just to squeeze out profit, and sustained without enshittifying. Maybe.

I went in with this being my strategy too, but ended up just sticking with using /all and not bothering with my subs.

Once you’ve got anything undesirable blocked, you’re golden. And always finding new communities.

If you trust Meta not to snoop, which I dont

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/09/whatsapp-end-to-end-encrypted-messages-arent-that-private-after-all/

How private can WhatsApp be if Meta owns it?

Signal for those who have it and SMS for everyone else

Seems logical

They tried

I’ve left gmail and had no real challenges with spam filtering or anything else so far. I lost integration between calendar photos drive etc, which has removed some convenience, but that was also kind of the point.

deleted by creator

Good one. People do still say “hold fast”!