Recently I discovered a good (and long) article dissecting Digdeeper's way of thinking and a few of his articles. https://purplepriest.codeberg.page/articles/refdd.html The tl;dr is Digdeeper's way of thinking is conspiratorial and is harmful to himself by going after non-existent threats with an incoherent message. I've known of Digdeeper since 2018 or 2019 and even back then he showed this way of thinking, along with absolutist stances that fail to create coherent messages. The articles goes more in depth on the harms of conspiratorial thinking and explains it better than I could. The short version is that it wastes time on pointless, non-existent issues that could be spent instead on larger, more important issues that do exist. As for absolutist thinking, this is more a personal observation I've seen over the years. His definition of what constitutes spyware is so broad and encompassing that nearly everything falls under the term. Auto-updates, while controversial to some is not spyware. Tracking pixels and other website tracking content loaded by a homepage default by the browser, that can be changed, does not make the browser itself spyware. Should people have the option to choose if their software auto updates or not, and what their default homepage is? Yes, but it's disproportionate to say a browser is spyware for doing these. I believe Digdeeper's beliefs are genuine for anti-Capitalism and pro-privacy/security/anonymity, but conspiratorial and absolutist thinking in his message is doing more harm than any kind of perceived censorship of his site could do.

What do you think on the article or Digdeeper? Anything you think the article missed or did not go into enough depth into?

is it too conspirational? yes. is it maybe harmful? yeah maybe. however we need these kind of minds in our civilization. they test the boundaries that normies can't even consider to explore. they populate the mental arena for those who wish to seek.

>>10232
>we need these kind of minds in our civilization. they test the boundaries that normies can't even consider to explore.

Yes that is true and having people willing to explore something is always good, but what is being explored matters. The analysis of Digdeeper's COVID article shows why trying to explore something that isn't real is harmful. All the mental energy, time, and writing invested into a on-existent issue wastes someone's time, drains their energy, and overall is a distraction from productive work. These same resources could have been better used in pointing out exploitive practices and other issues that are real such as corpos like UnitedHealthcare cutting costs by reducing hospital transfers from nursing homes. Boundaries are not being tested when someone looks into a non-existent issues, thus the minds of these people that could do something beneficial are wasted. For boundaries to be tested, it has to be a real, tangible issues or concept.

You should share the actual article so people can discuss it.

>>10232

digdeeper's approach feels like it's built for people who see the system's rot but can't or won't step back far enough to critique its foundational design, like a guy who finds a crack in his car's hood but assumes the engine works fine if you just fix the dent. the article's focus on "normies" being too safe is almost a copout for the real question: why does the system actually work at all?

the normie's reluctance isn't malice, it's just that they've internalized the "success" as an accident rather than a carefully constructed facade. digdeeper isn't digging deeper enough to ask what's beneath the code, just how the rot manifests.

>>10248

if digdeeper ever tried actually building systems instead of just shaming the broken ones, they'd still be stuck with their own hypocrisy, like praising individual courage while banning anything that actually helps people do it.

>>10883

cooperate with the rot but keep a straight face when they talk about "individual courage" while shaming everyone else's attempts at fixing sht. like a guy who rants about "the system is fucked" while making their own shit worse off by just being a dick on the internet.
digdeeper's not building solutions, tho. they're just giving more people the permission to be cuck-ass doomers in a box.
ngl the analysis is spot on for how they think.

>>11101
systems do need to change, but digging deep enough to break the cycle is the first step, maybe not all of it, but the right kind of cracks give room to grow.
<

And yeah, it""'s tempting to think those "marginal" critiques actually get traction, until you see the same arguments popping up in 10 years with the same people and same cynicism. Like, I dug through his old forums, found the same memes and the same half-remembered grievances, and the only thing that""'s changed is how much more toxic the comments are.

Someone like me who wants to see shit fixed isn't spending my time in a corner reading 'system critiques' while some guy in a basement tweaks his own little project, we want to get real work done.