311–320 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To an extent they are, in that they elected him hoping to get something out of it, and he didn’t deliver much of anything useful. He conned them. Such is the way of politics sometimes.
Well, they saw that over the past 4 years and then voted for him again, so, I have no sympathy, and neither should anyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Research actually backs up that deplatforming does reduce audience sizes for an outlet. Which makes sense of you believe that some listeners will simply not have the interest in jumping over to a new platform. Repeat several times and with every platform shift the audience reduces.
I can see the benefit of deplatforming, but I don't see what the benefit of the AWS ban would be. There are plenty of cloud service providers out there, so little more than a temporary inconvenience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe there isnt. You could be right, but I was speaking in broad strokes. You cant say there arent bad faith actors on the left. I honestly dont care if there is someone on the left that is equivalently 'bad'. And trying to find those people illustrates my point. Again, I think Rudy G and Steve B are generally wrong and myopic. The point Im trying to make is that just because we differ in political leaning/opinion w…
There are bad-faith actors on the left. This isn't just kids disagreeing though, this is one of your boys helping push the mom out of the house so the boys get preferential treatment. It is acceptable in times like these for people to make an ethical stand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So because some people at the entire rally were armed means everyone storming the capitol was also armed? I’ve heard that very same bad statistics argument used as to why trump lost the election. Causation != correlation. I did not see any overt firearms or weapons on the people storming the capitol building. It will be hard, because it goes against your beliefs.. but I challenge you to find those armed people in the…
I don’t have any beliefs about this. A violent mob invaded the capital. Some of them carried weapons. I’m not claiming they were all armed or that they were filmed using the weapons. Although they certainly did attack police officers. With flag poles, ladders, fire extinguishers, pepper spray. I’ll leave it there.
My point is the narrative. Take a step back and observe and claim the wrong done by both parties instead of saying one is right and one is wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So then a government telling companies how to moderate their platforms would stifle free speech?
I don't think companies would save us from a fascist government; if the government falls, everything falls. So, in the meantime, trust the government more than companies (which gives you a higher stake in seeing it and Constitutional protections don't fall) by tax-funding public platforms/news delivery networks that have to abide by the First Amendment. That seems like the only way to cut this knot. Besides federated…
The only reason tech companies are doing this is because the democrats have a trifecta and they want to be in their good graces in order to avoid regulation. It's not about decency, it's about power.
Throughout Trump's presidency they have been constantly fighting Trump since, rather than trying to stay in his good graces. So I don't buy that it's about power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As Chomsky[0] I think rightly points out, the suffering and grievances of trump supporters is real, but unfortunately they are unable to correctly identify the cause of their suffering. Evidence seems to support this as deaths of despair have been climbing over the past few decades[1]. This is something I rarely see mentioned in left news outlets, instead we are told trump supporters are only motivated by racial hatr…
Yes, very few people are motivated BY racial hatred, far more can be motivated TO racial hatred.
Explaining everything by race is also a dead end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They really aren't. Look at the alternative narratives pushed recently about how all the Founders were raging slavers. Many, in fact, were not, even if some participation in the practice at the time. Look at the pushing of anti-Western intellectualism and rejection of the basic tools of logical reasoning, which trace their roots far back to the Ancient Greeks, for being the "Master's Tools" to ensure supremacy. At th…
They may or may not have a point about whether or not some academic pursuits are fact based. But their leap to "if X is banned and Y is similar to X and Y isn't banned then X can't be banned" is still wrong because it is not the similarities between X and Y that is causing X to be banned. It is the fact that X is being used to inspire violent opposition to the government that is the source of the banning. Or to make…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[Note: Trying to present this as factually as possible.] According to what the companies say: - The President incited some people last week to engage in violent behavior at and towards Congress. - There is evidence that further violence is being planned via a variety of platforms. - The platforms are attempting to limit their exposure to facilitating such actions. Some people think that the companies have ulterior mo…
"The platforms are attempting to limit their exposure to facilitating such actions" By "exposure", perhaps the commenter means possible sedition charges. To me, this is further evidence that these websites are neither common carrier nor public forum. The telephone company is not going to cut off anyone's service because of seditious communications. Nor is any public place going to ban people from committing seditious…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These are opinions though Help me out here, Hacker News. This guy thinks: "Democrats attacked the capital", is an opinion. How do we even talk to this person?
"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. "They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seri…
[1] The Alt-Right Playbook: Control the Conversation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaPgDQkmqqM