Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was a lot of pearl clutching about chaz and other BLM violence as well. So were they terrorists?
The certainly got called terrorists by some people on the right.
Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
361–370 of 451 posts
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know how Facebook's shadowban mechanism works? Has it been reverse-engineered? My search-fu us failing me.
Either he's personally familiar with the system or he has taken a theory and extrapolated upwards. I'm leaning towards the latter.
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#363These are surreal times, to put it mildly. These headlines of banning/deplatforming would be ordinary if you substitute "CCP" for "Facebook", "Twitter", and "Amazon". Facebook has even blocked Ron Paul?!? ( https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1348704640486014982 ) FAANG is the bakery, and Trump and everything associated with him is the same-sex wedding cake.
2. Political beliefs are not a protected class like sexual orientation (should they be?)
Given that, this seems like even more of an open and shut case: businesses have a right to decide who they serve.
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is well known that an educated, free people are necessary for the functioning of democracy. It's part of the justification for the 1st Amendment. We have new technologies which are being leveraged to intentionally misinform people, in a society that has degraded public education and raised the cost of higher education to levels prohibitive for the majority of the population, and as a result, the society (as a whol…
Prior to 1950, the median adult American did not have a high school education.[1] If your thesis is that modern-day Americans are too uneducated for democracy, then you'd have to conclude the same about nearly any point in our history. (Or any other democracy prior to a couple decades ago.) [1] https://nces.ed.gov/pubs93/93442.pdf
So, yes.
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook is not a country, it's a website, trying to characterize Facebook's business decisions as U.S policy is a dishonest rhetorical tactic.
This is why I said "de facto". I'm not implying the US government was behind this. I'm suggesting that the end results in US and China are similar in some ways, though implemented by different actors.
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't follow your reasoning. Should we treat every billion dollar company as a country or just websites?
If you are such a juggernaut maybe you cannot hide anymore behind the "we are a private company so we can do whatever we want" defense. At 70 billion revenue your impact in society is huge, you are effectively affecting millions of humans.
No such defense exists. Should we treat every billion dollar company as a country?
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
You neglect to mention the people that tried to raid the corridors where high level politicians were. One of those people was shot and killed instantly, point blank, after ignoring repeated warnings from officers. Not exactly peaceful
Yes, one of the "terrorists" (an unarmed woman) was shot to death by a cop. Yes she was trespassing but he used excessive force. I've watched the videos. Try again.
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but as someone not from the US it looks like that education ain't worth much in the US as you deliberately undermine peoples ability to learn critical thinking by teaching creationism in schools.
This is a really funny accusation since: 1) We don’t teach any religion in schools. 2) Many highly advanced EU countries are required to teach religion in schools e.g. many German states: https://eftre.weebly.com/deutschland-germany.html
I know that religion is taught in the EU, I went to school in Denmark. And no one pushed it as reality, it was more of a learn this fiction because it has historically been important and some people still believe it. Not once was it presented as reality or something we should believe in.
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally, and then you have unfettered capitalism and corporatism, kakistocracies, oligarchies and lawn darts. Unfortunately, unlike all of those things, the FBI, Homeland Security[1] and Congress [2] actually found that white supremacists and other far-right-wing extremists are the most significant domestic terrorism threat facing the United States. So, when social networks' legal/liability or moderation teams take a…
StopTheSteal is not a slogan of white supremacists. In fact, it has nothing to do with white supremacism. Are you saying that 60 million or so people in the US are white supremacists?
Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'
#370These are surreal times, to put it mildly. These headlines of banning/deplatforming would be ordinary if you substitute "CCP" for "Facebook", "Twitter", and "Amazon". Facebook has even blocked Ron Paul?!? ( https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1348704640486014982 ) FAANG is the bakery, and Trump and everything associated with him is the same-sex wedding cake.
1. That case ended with the conclusion that the bakery could deny service because it would otherwise be “compelled speech” 2. Political beliefs are not a protected class like sexual orientation (should they be?) Given that, this seems like even more of an open and shut case: businesses have a right to decide who they serve.
No, it ended with the conclusion that the particular state panel that rules against the baker did so with impermissible religious animus against his beliefs, and therefore the ruling against him was unconstitutional. “Compelled speech" was what a broad political group wanted the Court to rule on, but it's not what it did rule on, instead issuing a much more limited decision that dodged the broad issue almost entirely.