511–520 of 763 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are on the right side of history - progress always is. People like me are much more trustworthy because we're not motivated by greed, but for the desire for a better world.
Every tyrant and dictator in history thought he was on the side of "progess" and was building a better world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> scarily accurate As the saying goes, Zerohedge has predicted 28 of the last 4 recessions. They have a consistently bearish bias (which rarely seems to play out), and ties to the Russian state, which brings into question the motivations behind their criticisms of the US (not that I'm the biggest fan myself). All of that said, ZH introduced me to a lot of economic literature and concepts I likely wouldn't have been e…
> As the saying goes, Zerohedge has predicted 28 of the last 4 recessions. I wonder if that's actually true.
> I wonder if that's actually true.
Its not, as ZH was founded during the Great Recession, and there's only been one since.
That's at least 10 less than they've predicted, though, so the quote, while not literally true, understates the degree to which ZH overpredicts recessions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly this. Medium that uses censorship for any reason, they think you are too stupid to understand the content in front of you so they take that decision from you to delete something. That should be illegal with few exceptions.
> That should be illegal with few exceptions. And thus the right wing comes around to centralized government control of companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "common person" is honestly pretty depressing. The common person primarily votes based solely on a historical allegiance to a political party (be it individually formed or inherited) with about 75% of America essentially being unmovable D or R safe votes. Censorship is a hard question and I think we do need to have better laws promoting free access to material (even "libelous" material) but this is also an area w…
> The common person primarily votes based solely on a historical allegiance to a political party (be it individually formed or inherited) with about 75% of America essentially being unmovable D or R safe votes. This is one of those statements that sounds bad on the surface but is actually totally reasonable and has nothing to do with some trope about the "uninformed masses" or whatever. Locally the individual matters…
I'm not sure if its objectively "nuts" but almost 25% of LGBT voters supported Romney over Obama. That's accounting for the fact that openly LGBT voters are much younger than other voters: twice as likely to be 18-34 and half as likely to be 55+. Median age is about 35, versus 50 for the overall population. Romney won 37% of folks 18-29 and 51% of folks 45-64. There are too many gay republicans to call them all "nuts."
To the people constantly saying that twitter is a private company and should be allowed to do whatever they want: Would you support the same idea around electrical power? If the power company providing the power to the office at the NyPost decided that they had a political disagreement with them, would it be okay to just cut off their power? NyPost could just make their own power, of course, by purchasing a generator…
To that I say: campaign to get Twitter considered a utility, then you can regulate it as one.
Everyone here is arguing with the analogy and not with the thrust of OPs argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When people say "violating section 230," rather than correcting them it's more instructive to understand what they're trying to communicate. Usually it seems to be they're really saying "this shows section 230 is a bad idea." If we could move past the reflexive "well actually" there's a real issue people feel needs to be addressed.
> When people say "violating section 230," rather than correcting them it's more instructive to understand what they're trying to communicate. I think the first priority is to ensure that the poster's misinformation (i.e., telling people that 230 says/does something it is explicitly designed not to do) does not propagate through this medium. It's a public forum, not a conversation with just the poster. Then, if possi…
From my viewpoint, it's very likely Section 230 will be modified. Once that action is underway, you'll be well behind the curve if you're just starting to grasp what people want. Others will have taken that time and effort and figured out how to mold it to their own ends, and the momentum will be building.
Those of you who think locking the account was a good idea should remember you won’t always be in the majority.
Do you think that fake news websites (websites that intentionally post falsehoods to drive traffic) should be allowed to post on social media with impunity? How is that workable? Many people cannot distinguish fake news from legitimate sources of information. Increasing noise (disinformation) is just as damaging to free speech as decreasing the signal (censorship).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Twitter is an infrastructure on top of which thousands of services are run. It's a notification service, it's a messaging server, it's an authentication/identify verification service, it's a news dissemination and discussion service, etc. It's all of these, except private. It's a privately run notification/messaging/authentication/identity/verification service. Just one that is widely used. That doesn't make it "pu…
Really because many government organizations have taken to twitter/social media to be the official (and in some cases only) method of public alerting and notifications around emergencies, school closing, traffic alerts, and a wide range other topics. So if I am not allowed to access twitter, or banned from the platform then I am being banned from participating in my local government So if it not a public service, the…
The Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven, but more and more often, it seems that they release primary sources of information (especially videos) much earlier than other news outlets will, if the other news outlets do so at all. There have been multiple times when I've seen an insane video of something happening spreading around Twitter or WorldStar or some other "raw video" agg…
> The Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven, but more and more often, it seems that they release primary sources of information (especially videos) much earlier than other news outlets will, if the other news outlets do so at all. Interesting... after reading this, I immediately thought: same as Zero Hedge (also often criticised). But then again, that shouldn't be a surprise - b…
It's definitely got some Russian backing, but there are occasionally some quite good finance-related articles on it too. Just avoid the comment section!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are, but when the FED keeps re-inflating bubbles and manipulating the markets, all conventional economic processes that they were using as sentinels were also getting disrupted.
> They are, but... But nothing. In short, the claim of 'scarily accurate' is not true. There may be underlying reasons that their accuracy has issues, but their track record up to this point has been highly inaccurate.