• Eochaid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s an even bigger contentious debate. And the fact that there is no one mutually agreed on answer means we either need a formal definition in the rules or the people in this community need to understand that there are people that exist with a broader or narrower definition of technology than they have.

    That said, like it or not, go to any major tech blog, podcast, YouTuber, and they all talking about X / Twitter. The tech communities outside of Lemmy have all agreed that Twitter / X is technology. And Lemmy doesn’t live in a bubble.

    • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The tech communities outside of Lemmy have all agreed that Twitter / X is technology.

      This is an “appeal to authority” logical fallacy.

      Personally I think an argument that “Twitter / X is technology” is a very, very difficult argument to make. It’s a social media company. Is every company that has a website “tech”?

      It’s also a generalisation. Perhaps if twitter invented a new decentralised database that might be “tech”, but marketing decisions are not.

      • steakmeout@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Marketing decisions of a tech company are valid to be discussed. We discuss marketing and other business decisions of many tech companies and will continue to do so. Your argument is invalid - you’re not the arbiter of what are and what aren’t valid discussion subjects.