BTW, when you “fave” a toot in 🐘, you’re not teaching an algorithm more about yourself, strengthening your signal for targeted advertisements, or increasing your data’s market value. And faved toots aren’t “leaked” to other members’ timelines.
The ⭐ icon functions more like a 👏, 👍, 👌, or 🙌 shared with the toot’s author.
@scott I was literally wondering about the nature of the star tool as I was heading over to try the web interface just now. 🤔
I've starred a few toots and thought, ~Is that annoying anybody? Should I do an in-toot emoticon instead?~.
@scott @coffeesalve visibility is an important point. My understanding is that it's open to any member to scrape or monitor these things, so wouldn't the only difference from facebook be that here *everyone* have permissions to do what cambridge analytica did?
I'm all for openness, but I'm having a hard time seeing the privacy argument for mastodon
@RFon @coffeesalve wellllll yes or at least a qualified yes for a publicly accessible instance like this one. Though supposedly as a random user I couldn't access your private toots. And also 🐘 doesn't collect the graphs of other highly personalized info that FB asks for. Of course, all of that is voluntarily given. But this week's questions from senators have me thinking people don't realize it's totally voluntary (yes, despite social pressure to participate, FOMO, etc.).