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

Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

techtransparencyproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 969 posts

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#301

Post by Triv888 »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #53
iodiocracynow wrote: post #36

child porno is still there but I haven't seen so much aggressive measure on what was done by private ... only by public officers and law enforcement

Great example of other unwanted content that is more or less impossible to find on mainstream platforms, or even most seedy porn sites, or even the underbelly of the internet that was Parler.

It was apparently easy to find on Pornhub not long ago which is very mainstream? I usually go for the mature category to avoid it...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/04/opinion/sunday/pornhub-ra...

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#302

Post by shmageggy »

wolco5 wrote: post #279
api wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah "we need to break all encryption to catch people planning terrorism in Facebook groups, e-mail, and unencrypted SMS..." Most terrorists are idiots because most people who are not idiots are not terrorists.

Most people who are idiots are not terrorists either. On average a terrorist would be smarter than the average person. Terrorists are highly motiviated individuals, they can deeply understand an ideology and they activity learn/train in specialized skills. Compared to the average person their IQ would be 20 points higher. Being a terrorist isn't easy. It's not a job for everyone.

> they can deeply understand an ideology

Looking at what motivated most of the Capitol insurrectionists does not support this claim. They are seemingly unable to distinguish reality from obvious propaganda or wild conspiracy theories.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#303

Post by whoknew1122 »

_etyf wrote: post #289
whoknew1122 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Far-right terrorism in the US has never really been taken seriously. No one took them seriously. Until the Capitol was attacked. The Feds are starting to roll up high ranking militia members, so hopefully they learned their lesson this time.

Far-right terrorism in the US has never really been taken seriously. No one took them seriously. That's not really true. Far-right terror was taken very seriously in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing. The FBI hired 500 agents specifically to focus on domestic terrorism [0], particularly the then-new militia movement. Virtually every state and federal law enforcement agency established a domestic terror unit. Throu…

I apologize for being imprecise. Far-right terrorism hasn't been taken seriously until a far-right terrorist actually commits violence. Then government is vigilant for a couple of years and goes back to ignoring them.

Far-right terror was taken seriously after the OKC bombing. But the far-right terrorist threat had been steadily increasing for three years at that point. Ruby Ridge and the Waco Siege contributed to a surge in far-right militias and other terrorist groups. It took someone driving a truck bomb and killing hundreds of people (in an attempt to spark a race war) to take far-right terrorism seriously.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#304

Post by ardy42 »

chmod600 wrote: post #239
ardy42 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Moral of story: FB and Twitter can do whatever they want, because they have more baby pictures. Any new social network has fewer baby pictures, and therefore can be held to a higher standard, to the point that it will be obliterated before it has a real chance to compete. Eh, not really. You're forgetting the other half of the equation: Parler's niche was the stuff Facebook and Twitter had either banned or discoura…

That doesn't seem to help your argument: it means that people deplatformed from FB/Twitter should also be deplatformed everywhere else, which doesn't sound like a great policy for freedom of speech or fostering a competitive marketplace. There was a very real chance that Parler could have attracted a lot of mainstream people. Maybe the 70M people who voted for Trump would have gone there, and started posting baby pic…

> it means that people deplatformed from FB/Twitter should also be deplatformed everywhere else, which doesn't sound like a great policy for freedom of speech or fostering a competitive marketplace.

That's actually a great policy, because FB/Twitter aren't super-eager to ban people for their speech, so the ones they systematically de-platform are usually doing something pretty bad. Note: I'm not saying they always make the right call 100% of the time.

Freedom of speech is not freedom of reach. Society is not obligated to give bad ideas an audience. In fact, it's doing its job if it filters those ideas out.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#305

Post by throwaway_6142 »

Pfhreak wrote: post #229
loveistheanswer wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Which government buildings? The police just left the east precinct Isn't the east precinct a government building? >And who were the armed protestors, what were they armed with? Raz the Warlord of CHAZ giving out assault rifles: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/raz-simone-guns/ >And keep in mind that the SPD did considerably more violence to a larger group over that time. How many people were shot within the protest…

> Isn't the east precinct a government building? Yes, but your framing isn't genuine. Some protestors did wander into an abandoned building. I'm not sure whether any of them were armed. That's a far cry from "Armed protestors took over a government building." > Raz the Warlord of CHAZ giving out assault rifles: Again, your framing is clearly flamebait. I obviously don't deny that Raz was there, and that there appears…

> But calling Raz "the Warlord of CHAZ" is needlessly biased and inflammatory. Just say Raz Simone, or if you feel you need to clarify, add some factual clarification.

Yeah, show some respect!

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#306

Post by refurb »

_r0fz wrote: post #121
Red_Tarsius wrote: post #112

>The Capitol Attack Where was this rhetoric when Antifa and BLM burned and looted for months with the blessings of all corporations and the mainstream media? Surely the Capitol Hill has an insurance policy? Or does that moronic point only apply to the common folk? Susan Rosenberg literally bombed the Capitol in 1983 and now serves as vice chair of the board of directors of Thousand Currents, a " non-profit foundation…

idk how to tell you this in a way you'll listen to but doing things for good reasons is good and doing them for bad reasons is bad.

“The ends justify the means”?

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#307

Post by redisman »

cccc4all wrote: post #55

The unequal treatment is the primary issue with the Parler deplatforming. Facebook and Twitter and Google has hosted much more and much worse content, from all sides. Yet, they are protected by the central authorities and mainstream popular media. Facebook, Twitter and Google should all be deplatformed for equal treatment under mob rules.

I don’t think that’s enough or the right move for the 3 biggest companies by market cap. There are a plethora of issues with these companies and the perceived “anti-conservative bias” is not one of the more serious ones (just look at the most popular FB posts on any given day, it’s all Shapiro and Bingino etc). Antitrust lawsuits should be the mechanism.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#308

Post by refurb »

deepspace wrote: post #234
prions wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice to see Trump/Russia talking points being copied almost word-for-word on hackernews.

And getting up-voted too. I thought the BLM=Looters talking point was debunked a long time ago, given that BLM protests took place mainly in the daytime, while the looting was done by thugs, at night, after the protesters went home. So it is very strange to see that narrative being taken at face value here.

So you’re able to clearly separate out the bad actors from BLM, but apparently not with Trump supporters?

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#309

Post by sanderjd »

alwaysdoit wrote: post #138
stretchcat wrote: post #78

It was planned for months, openly on Facebook in plain view of everybody. Remember that when politicians call for more intrusive surveillance in response.

Yeah, it's weird that the discussion has centered around censorship, rather than like... why didn't law enforcement shut this down sooner? Or at least properly prepare for it?

There are different conversations in different places. The conversation here is obsessed with "censorship" for fairly clear reasons; more of our livelihoods depend on how these rules work. But there is a very active conversation about the law enforcement breakdown on multiple levels. I expect there will be a 9/11 style commission. I expect its findings to be very depressing (along the lines of the people in charge going easier on people they viewed more as "us" rather than "them").

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#310

Post by bananabreakfast »

beaner wrote: post #224
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you give some concrete examples? I think the scale of events resulting from a statement are taken into consideration. Terrorists have sprung up after being radicalized by what they heard from one politician or another, but we typically won't consider the politician responsible for those actions. This probably starts going into whataboutism territory, but doesn't this stuff tend to go both ways? I'd postulate we…

Examples are everywhere, you just have to not be in a bubble and be open to seeing it. I could keep going but you tell me, do you need more? AOC: "The whole point of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable." [-1] Slate: "Non-violence is an important tool for protests, but so is violence" [0] Vox: "Riots are destructive, dangerous, and scary — but can lead to serious social reforms" [1] Pelosi: "we welcome the presenc…

Notice how none of these entirely out of context quotes are encouraging crowds to overthrow the government to overturn an election.

Also, note that when these people use forceful language, they are talking about fighting for their rights to not be murdered by police. When Trump uses violent rhetoric, he is talking entirely about keeping himself in power.

Context matters.

Post reply on HN