Live data from Hacker News

Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

nytimes.com

241–250 of 270 posts

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For godsakes the Republican party freed the slaves and voted for the civil rights act. It's the democrat party that should have to denounce it's history... except they let people like Ralph Northam continue to govern despite being photographed in a KKK hood. And before you start say "Oh the great switch" the part that's never explained by that bs theory is how one day people who had been fighting for civil right woke…

It's precisely because there was 100 years in between that no Reconstruction Republican woke up and voted for Goldwater. You think things can't change over that time frame you haven't been paying attention to the last fifty years, or even twenty.

So they started voting for the people responsible for the KKK and Jim Crow laws thinking they were going to making things better? Honest question, are you high or just incredibly naive? Secondly, in 1860s republicans freed the slaves and in 1960s they passed civil rights despite democrats voting against it. Thats 100 years of progress so what are you talking about? What did the democrats do other than burn crosses?

Edit: I love downvotes without a rebuttal because I know Ive won.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#242
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surprising it’s the Dems in Congress that want to break up tech then. I guess money isn’t everything.

I thought it was more being driven/pushed by conservatives? Edit. Wow, this conversation is seriously devolved when a simple question gets downvoted.

And as you can see below I was silenced for speaking ill of the overlords. They get off on making an imaginary number go down...

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My sense of what you are saying is that because I have awareness of racist tendencies in Trump's model, then therefore I should reject him (as opposed to considering his racism as just one dimension among millions of others). No, but you did get what I'm saying with this next quote: > I interpret this to mean that you are unable to see how someone could possibly evaluate the multidimensional nature of Donald Trump…

> The concept of attacking the details of problem itself is beyond him. Donald Trump's full capabilities are unknown to you. At best, you can form a model of them based on observations, but this also has a dependency on the comprehensiveness and accuracy (unintentional bias due to interpretation) of your observations. > So the fundamental isn't merely that Trump has racist tendencies, but rather than it's the only le…

> I wonder if my general impression of the entire system, is similar to your impression of Donald Trump: ~a complete joke, no respect whatsoever. I can easily appreciate how people disrespect Trump, but I cannot appreciate when those same people respect the general state of politics in the US.

That's my general impression of the entire system too, but I still think Trump represents a radical departure from even that. The status quo serving entrenched bureaucracy ("deep state") had at least been performing basic non-partisan functions such as pandemic response. Disrupting that with no replacement waiting is a short path to a completely failed state.

If I were the type of libertarian that thought moving to the middle of nowhere represented the pinnacle of freedom, the thought might appeal to be. But IMO the true measure of freedom is how it scales with society, and collapses have a terrible track record for freedom.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#244
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Daily Caller is one of Facebook’s official fact checker partners That doesn't tell you how much they weight it compared to the others. > And the top performing content on Facebook is dominated by right wing media figures This is misleading for the same reason as Fox News being the most popular cable news network. There is only one right-leaning cable news network, whereas CNN and MSNBC split the left-leaning vi…

The Facebook top 10 is dominated by a large set of right wing media figures, with it varying quite a bit which subset appears during any given period. Your splitting theory does not work.

The number of right wing media figures is smaller than the number of left wing media figures, which means they each get a larger proportion of their base. It's the same thing.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The concept of attacking the details of problem itself is beyond him. Donald Trump's full capabilities are unknown to you. At best, you can form a model of them based on observations, but this also has a dependency on the comprehensiveness and accuracy (unintentional bias due to interpretation) of your observations. > So the fundamental isn't merely that Trump has racist tendencies, but rather than it's the only le…

> I wonder if my general impression of the entire system, is similar to your impression of Donald Trump: ~a complete joke, no respect whatsoever. I can easily appreciate how people disrespect Trump, but I cannot appreciate when those same people respect the general state of politics in the US. That's my general impression of the entire system too, but I still think Trump represents a radical departure from even that.…

> Disrupting that with no replacement waiting is a short path to a completely failed state.

This is one potential outcome, and in a banana republic I may even agree that it is the most likely outcome. But the USA is a lot more robust than it appears, and I feel highly certain that the (largely manufactured) polarization that we observe is actually quite shallow. My concern is that if we throw Trump out and elect yet another insider, we will immediately resume the former status quo...lip service towards the genuine problems in the world, and plenty of catering to powerful corporations and the military industrial complex (I have the feeling way are waaaaaaaaay overdue for an "existential threat" from some tinpot middle eastern dictator). And then before too long: War with China.

It's not a good choice, and it is risky, but I continue to believe that the chaos Trump sows acts as sand in the gears of the powerful, and exposes the media and other politicians for the propagandists they are. Most people seem to be still fully under their spell (many to immediately fall into another trap: conspiracy theory, which is fixable, being mostly a symptom), but many have woken up.

What's missing is, the people that have woken up don't know what to believe, or believe in. The West has no vision for the future, other than the same old bullshit story politicians of both sides of the aisle have been selling people for decades (as our military lays waste to 3rd world countries over completely manufactured pretenses, while the media runs cover for them). We need a new story, and it has to be at least fairly true, and plausible, and acknowledge the real barriers to achievement, rather than making up a whole bunch of fantasy land fake problems.

That's my take on it anyways.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's precisely because there was 100 years in between that no Reconstruction Republican woke up and voted for Goldwater. You think things can't change over that time frame you haven't been paying attention to the last fifty years, or even twenty.

So they started voting for the people responsible for the KKK and Jim Crow laws thinking they were going to making things better? Honest question, are you high or just incredibly naive? Secondly, in 1860s republicans freed the slaves and in 1960s they passed civil rights despite democrats voting against it. Thats 100 years of progress so what are you talking about? What did the democrats do other than burn crosses? E…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For godsakes the Republican party freed the slaves and voted for the civil rights act. It's the democrat party that should have to denounce it's history... except they let people like Ralph Northam continue to govern despite being photographed in a KKK hood. And before you start say "Oh the great switch" the part that's never explained by that bs theory is how one day people who had been fighting for civil right woke…

It's precisely because there was 100 years in between that no Reconstruction Republican woke up and voted for Goldwater. You think things can't change over that time frame you haven't been paying attention to the last fifty years, or even twenty.

MLK was a Republican BTW.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#248
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just a button for 'this is fake news' or some such. Once say 10 people click that they stop it spreading. Bit like the flagging system on HN.

> Once say 10 people click that they stop it spreading. What will actually happen is that 10 people who do not share your political or societal views will flag that news item irrespective of its true or false status, and we're back to step one. That's why FB tried that "internal commissions of truth"-thingie (or whatever it's called), but obviously that cannot scale and, also obviously, they also have their own biase…

In which case it'd stop after say 30 shares which would reduce the spread of controversial stuff in general I figure.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#249

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

I think the 'too little too late' you mean is the American education system. If things like critical thinking, personal finance, ethics, philosophy were emphasized in K-12 you think it would play out this way. Heck Facebook might not even exist now, but sheep need their shepherds supposedly.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But he doesn't actually condemn neo-Nazis and white supremacists! He makes the offhand comment that they should be condemned, but doesn't shut them down when he knows he has their ear. It's the same with the Proud Boys comment at the debate. He tells them to stand by and stand down, then the next day says he doesn't know who they are. We all know he's lying - and most of all the Proud Boys, who see the wink and the n…

He didn't even know who the Proud Boys were during the debate. It's even disputable that they're white supremacists, their leader is Hispanic and they proclaim the superiority of western culture not the white race. The next day Trump said something like "I don't know who they are, but I condemn them", you can't get more clear than that but of course this doesn't get coverage in the media. Nevermind the numerous times…

It doesn't matter what he does or says. If he says nothing - apparently he condones it. If he says something condemning it, they pretend it's not genuine, ignore it and look at the other vague terms he uses as if they're dog-whistles condoning it. This tells me they've pre-decided their stance on him and will push that no matter what he says or does. You can't argue or reason with insanity.

What makes it worse is there are a lot of very smart, articulate and well-meaning people that are coming to the defense of such an incoherent point of view. They will verbally and with "facts" stomp down on anything but the most perfect of criticisms, essentially making criticism of any left-wing action next to impossible.

Post reply on HN