Earlier quoted context omitted.
Non user-generated content?
So any site with a comment section is social media? You would consider pornhub and HN to be social media?
Yes. HN is a discussion forum. Pornhub allows users to upload videos.
Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
31–40 of 43 posts
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#32> ”The platform is playing host to, and is an important vector for, spreading false claims of election victory and attempts to delegitimize Biden’s win.” This whole debate seems extremely disingenuous to me. What does it matter if people say Biden didn’t win? It changes nothing. People say all kinds of nonsense, a lot of it way more harmful than arguing over who won an election. I can’t believe the left are advocatin…
[flagged]
Define "leftist." There are plenty of Western European democracies that have been governed by center-left coalitions at various times without descending into whatever you're describing. You're clearly begging the question by making censorship a defining characteristic of "leftist" government. I'm not surprised nobody else has bothered responding to such an obviously bad faith comment.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wikipedia itself is a social media site too I guess. To me, these definitions seem way too broad, I don't think comments and profiles are sufficient to make something social media, and I think if social media includes sites like pornhub and HN then we need a more meaningful classification.
It's not that the definitions are broad, it's that many sites have been incrementally integration social media features over the years in the belief that doing so drives engagement, so the lines between what is and isn't social media (or what should and shouldn't be) have been intentionally blurred. Just as with literary or media genres, "social media" as a classification mostly exists as a marketing term, not scienc…
> Just as with literary or media genres, "social media" as a classification mostly exists as a marketing term, not science.
I agree there. I disagree with the idea that the incremental integration of "social media features" necessarily makes something a "social media" platform, and I think the semantic distinctions are important because there is a lot of discussion about the societal harms of "social media" and the types of laws that should apply to "social media", but I don't think a site like e.g. HN or pornhub are the types of sites people are talking about when they refer to those problems.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
>a lot of it way more harmful than arguing over who won an election. there's not much that is more harmful than questioning the legitimate outcome of a democratic election. It can, and is very likely to be a precursor for violence and destabilisation of fundamental institutions. This is not a matter of left and right, it's a matter of truthfulness and peaceful transition of power, which is the most fundamental mechan…
You have it backwards. You don't think that dictators don't meddle with their election results and then silence anyone who questions the integrity of it? Being able to question the system is what supports democracy. Else you'll get a hundred years more of DNC screwing over candidates like Bernie or Tulsi in favor of candidates like Hillary or Joe. (This claim is disputed. Learn more about how DNC upholds integrity)
>Being able to question the system is what supports democracy
Questing processes when there is legitimate doubt supports democracy, "Questioning" the system when there is no evidence of wrong-doing undermines trust in a functioning system and improves democracy about as much as creationism or Flat-Eartherism improves science.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Define "leftist." There are plenty of Western European democracies that have been governed by center-left coalitions at various times without descending into whatever you're describing. You're clearly begging the question by making censorship a defining characteristic of "leftist" government. I'm not surprised nobody else has bothered responding to such an obviously bad faith comment.
How is that any more bad faith than opposing the opposite?
Its an honest observation.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#36> ”The platform is playing host to, and is an important vector for, spreading false claims of election victory and attempts to delegitimize Biden’s win.” This whole debate seems extremely disingenuous to me. What does it matter if people say Biden didn’t win? It changes nothing. People say all kinds of nonsense, a lot of it way more harmful than arguing over who won an election. I can’t believe the left are advocatin…
>a lot of it way more harmful than arguing over who won an election. there's not much that is more harmful than questioning the legitimate outcome of a democratic election. It can, and is very likely to be a precursor for violence and destabilisation of fundamental institutions. This is not a matter of left and right, it's a matter of truthfulness and peaceful transition of power, which is the most fundamental mechan…
Great, but none of that describes the current situation.
There is no legitimate outcome yet. We have a process. Parties are entitled to have their case heard. There’s not much more harmful than denying due process. This obviously isn’t a precursor for violence, just like it wasn’t in the 2000 presidential election. Just like it wasn’t with Abrams in Georgia. Keep those in mind when you say it’s not about left and right.
I don’t know what you’re referring to with respect to truthfulness, and there has been no failure to peacefully transition power, so maybe reserve that complaint for when January 20th if Biden is certified the winner and Trump goes into the Whitehouse bathroom and locks the door. I’m quite confident that you will find that the concern was unfounded, but I might be wrong.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have it backwards. You don't think that dictators don't meddle with their election results and then silence anyone who questions the integrity of it? Being able to question the system is what supports democracy. Else you'll get a hundred years more of DNC screwing over candidates like Bernie or Tulsi in favor of candidates like Hillary or Joe. (This claim is disputed. Learn more about how DNC upholds integrity)
>Being able to question the system is what supports democracy Questing processes when there is legitimate doubt supports democracy, "Questioning" the system when there is no evidence of wrong-doing undermines trust in a functioning system and improves democracy about as much as creationism or Flat-Eartherism improves science.
Nobody can say that there is no legitimate doubt in any outcome that was this close. It doesn’t matter what your party is.
It’s also demonstrably false that there is no evidence of wrongdoing. Wrongdoing of various kinds has already been confirmed. It also doesn’t require wrongdoing to have doubt, which had also already been proven. That’s not even an open question. The open question is whether or not there may have been enough of it to affect the result. And there is room for reasonable doubt there.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#38> ”The platform is playing host to, and is an important vector for, spreading false claims of election victory and attempts to delegitimize Biden’s win.” This whole debate seems extremely disingenuous to me. What does it matter if people say Biden didn’t win? It changes nothing. People say all kinds of nonsense, a lot of it way more harmful than arguing over who won an election. I can’t believe the left are advocatin…
> What does it matter if people say Biden didn’t win? You're asking if rejecting the result of free and democratic elections and pushing for the subversion of a democratic regime by arguing in favour of installing an illegitimate ruler at the highest position in government matters. Well, it does matter if you intend in continue living in a democracy. In the past it didn't matter to those who pushed to overthrow democ…
>You're asking if rejecting the result of free and democratic elections and pushing for the subversion of a democratic regime by arguing in favour of installing an illegitimate ruler at the highest position in government matters.
No, I’m not, and neither is anybody else. If you want a response, you’ll have to try to summarize my argument in terms that I agree with, because you are just making shit up and arguing with yourself here.
Re: Why Isn't Susan Wojcicki Getting Grilled by Congress?
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty much everybody agrees with you: "rejecting the result of free and democratic elections and pushing for the subversion of a democratic regime by arguing in favour of installing an illegitimate ruler at the highest position in government matters" That's kind of the problem really. Each side believes that the other is "arguing in favour of installing an illegitimate ruler".
As an outsider, what I'm seeing is one side arguing that the election results are clear, and another side which is generating a constant stream of propaganda based on falsehoods and misrepresentations and theatrics to try to circumvent and ignore election results and push for the installment of an illegitimate ruler at the very top of the political system. I mean, we're talking about a group of people who, for some r…
You have only properly looked at one side if that is your conclusion. You realize that the court cases haven’t completed yet, right? And we haven’t even seen the audit results? And the recount is in progress?