Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

cabal.chat

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 337 posts

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#311

Post by chiefalchemist »

dragonwriter wrote: post #158
chiefalchemist wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between you saying what you want on the cake (if they had self-service), and the biz having to write what you want written. That said, agreed. Big Tech and Fed Govs working in concert is not a positive. Anyone cheering on FAANG's recent decisions is naive.

> Big Tech and Fed Govs working in concert is not a positive. Anyone cheering on FAANG’s recent decisions is naive. FAANG’s recent decisions are directly against the head of the Federal Government, not taken in concert with “Fed Govs”.

For what, two more weeks? And that head is only 1/3 of the gov. FAANG is siding with the other two.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#312

Post by deeviant »

monoideism wrote: post #301
deeviant wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I specifically said (Trump|QAnon). It's pretty hard to tell the average trump supporter apart from the average QAnon supporter. And you could look at my comments and those who commented in return to find your 3-4 posters. That's pretty easy, right?

QAnon, as malignant as it is, is a relatively small movement even among Trump supporters - probably around 1/4 of his followers. Don't believe me? Go read thedonald.win. After you recover from the shock of realizing that many of them are planning/hoping for another assault on democracy on the 17th, you'll see that the attitude toward QAnon is not one of approval . And I've never seen a QAnon-related or -influenced po…

> QAnon, as malignant as it is, is a relatively small movement even among Trump supporters - probably around 1/4 of his followers.

I have, very much to the destruction of my soul, looked thedonald.win. It's filled to the brim with Q'isms. Donald trump himself has repeated Q'isms, and has retweeted Qanon-based tweets on numerous occasions(https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/12/trump-tweeting-qano...). At this point, you can not separate Trump supporters from the QAnon crowd, they are virtually the same crowd, not with the big T himself retweeting (well not anymore, I give you that) QAnon bunk.

I also have to say, for somebody that was clamoring for me to show the very specific amounts of very specific evidence, you counter claim now has nothing of the sort of rigor you expected of me.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#313

Post by monoideism »

deeviant wrote: post #312
monoideism wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QAnon, as malignant as it is, is a relatively small movement even among Trump supporters - probably around 1/4 of his followers. Don't believe me? Go read thedonald.win. After you recover from the shock of realizing that many of them are planning/hoping for another assault on democracy on the 17th, you'll see that the attitude toward QAnon is not one of approval . And I've never seen a QAnon-related or -influenced po…

> QAnon, as malignant as it is, is a relatively small movement even among Trump supporters - probably around 1/4 of his followers. I have, very much to the destruction of my soul, looked thedonald.win. It's filled to the brim with Q'isms. Donald trump himself has repeated Q'isms, and has retweeted Qanon-based tweets on numerous occasions( https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/12/trump-tweeting-qano... ). At this poin…

And you never showed me one single QAnon post on HN.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#314

Post by albedoa »

khawkins wrote: post #308
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think the fact that some people call everybody nazis should lead us to decide that actual nazis are now OK.

I don't trust that your definition of an "actual nazi" isn't significantly colored by your own prejudices. That we could actually agree on who are the extremists in society who are equally damaging.

The comment you are replying to does not even attempt to make that judgement. Use your own definition if you'd like.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#315

Post by WClayFerguson »

fishtacos wrote: post #305
WClayFerguson wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if big companies get to just set arbitrary rules that discriminate against one set of political beliefs, what does that say about "Civil Rights" then? I guess you're not a big fan of civil rights... Or, more likely, is it only when companies are doing things you agree with that you'll claim they have absolute power and authority? If you understand history, you might see the flaw in this logic.

These companies are not "discriminating" against any particular political view. Calls for political violence and extremism/terrorism have and continue to be moderated on these platforms from both sides. It is unfortunate that you don't understand the distinction between inciting violence via either direct calls for such or indirectly by repeating the same unfounded lies of "a stolen election" VS political speech/civi…

Congress has held numerous hearings about censorship starting way back when the first nose-ring wearing, openly socialist, 20-something overlords in Silicon Valley started censoring heads of state, and government officials for clearly and blatantly partisan political reasons.

I mean after the election a poll showed 68% of voters had never even heard of the Hunter Laptop, because BigTech started banning anyone who dare even mention it. So don't be fooled that the censorship is to stop violence, it's to achieve political goals, and has been ratcheting up for the past 6 years. Twitter was canceling people for life even for daring to say such crazy things as "There's only two sexes."

Cancel culture has been getting out of hand for a long long time now, and people have had all they're going to take of it.

Now the left has gotten so brazen they're conspiring to shut down entire internet companies under these same false pretenses. And you have the audacity to call this "alarmist". Wow.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#316

Post by klyrs »

torstenvl wrote: post #226
t0astbread wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without getting into JK Rowling, a site that has the technical means to but willfully ignores transphobia or homophobia certainly is not "cool".

It isn't transphobia to object to female erasure. Not every women's issue is also a trans women's issue, and it's sexist to insist otherwise.

The existence of trans men is not female erasure, and JK Rowling's insistence on that point is transphobia.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#317

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

wernercd wrote: post #279
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to understand how to channel what you said. Are you saying that being extremely against Nazis is bad because being extremely anything is bad and we should only have non-extreme feelings?

My problem is with those who stand against "extremists" (ZOMG Those silly Nazi's) while supporting "extremists" (AntiFA/BLM groups responsible for dozens of riots, hundreds of millions in damage, many dead and federal buildings ransacked/burned, etc...)... Why is it hard to understand how hypocritical it is of most groups screaming about the DC riots when those same groups are tactly supportive of worse over longer p…

> My problem is with those who stand against "extremists" while supporting "extremists"

It sounds like you see an equivalence between "rioting" and "rioting". I get what you're saying, but I'm also pretty sure that the people you're calling hypocrites have a more nuanced view than that and differentiate based on context and cause and don't consider "white supremacist Q-conspiracy-lie-believers rioting" (which this was) to be equal to "people rioting because police officers keep killing in circumstances that don't warrant it without serious repercussion" (which the BLM riots were).

We can also note that many of the BLM riots only turned violent _after_ local police started shooting gas, pepper balls, and rubber bullets at crowds. But even if that weren't the case, the causes and contexts would still be different.

It seems to me like the people you're talking about are in fact neither anti-extremist nor pro-extremist. They're anti-white-supremacists and anti-police-getting-away-with-murder. Those are not contradictory positions.

> groups screaming about the DC riots

I haven't seen anyone screaming about context-free "DC riots". I see people screaming about "white supremacist Q-anon-lie-conspiracy-believers rioting in DC trying to capture or kill congresspersons and overthrow a (mostly-if-you-ignore-voter-suppression) fair democratic election" and I think that makes a big difference.

It's not the riots that these people are worried about. It's the reason for the riots, and the reasons are not equal.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#318

Post by deeviant »

monoideism wrote: post #313
deeviant wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> QAnon, as malignant as it is, is a relatively small movement even among Trump supporters - probably around 1/4 of his followers. I have, very much to the destruction of my soul, looked thedonald.win. It's filled to the brim with Q'isms. Donald trump himself has repeated Q'isms, and has retweeted Qanon-based tweets on numerous occasions( https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/12/trump-tweeting-qano... ). At this poin…

And you never showed me one single QAnon post on HN.

I feel that you are either unwilling or unable to respond to or absorb a single point I make.

Sorry I couldn't connect, but this discussion is moot.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#319

Post by korla »

coldtea wrote: post #284
korla wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting it is not in a society's interest to limit hate speech against minorities? Because that is what is being discussed.

Parent is probably suggesting that: (a) what is "hate speech" is a vague term to be filled by whoever yields the power to define it (could be anything from talk against religion, to conservative worldviews, to class-war ideas, to racist beliefs, to complaints against politicians, and so on). (b) what is a minority can also be vague and politically determined as opposed through raw numbers, and the power of a minority…

I believe you are conflating the definition of minority in this context. It means a disenfranchised portion of the population.

Re: Cabal: A peer-to-peer, off-grid, community-first, hackable chat platform

#320

Post by korla »

fatsdomino001 wrote: post #277
korla wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting it is not in a society's interest to limit hate speech against minorities? Because that is what is being discussed.

Incorrect. You're discussing censoring people with a different opinion than you, but using minorities as political cover, which is morally dubious.

That is not what I am discussing. I am making a statement about how to design a stable society with humane values. From the perspective of the society. Instead you went to make judgements about my personal beliefs.
Post reply on HN