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

Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

841–850 of 868 posts

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#841

Post by monoideism »

Schiendelman wrote: post #650
monoideism wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These ideas are the QAnon of the left. The GOP is without question stuck in a cult of personality, but that was not a Nazi symbol.

It's not clear that's the case. CPAC hasn't been willing to deny it. And the Charlottesville protestors did use that symbol: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/08/12/flags-and-oth...

> CPAC hasn't been willing to deny it.

That's not true: they denied it almost immediately. Like QAnon, it's a hard question on whether to even acknowledge these kinds of conspiracies[0], since denying them can even help to spread them.

The Trump wing is without question populist, nativist, often conspiratorial, and caught in a cult of personality. But they're not Nazis, and by trying to conflate these things, you do a disservice to the victims of actual Nazism (note the publication I linked to, from a country of founded by Nazi survivors that has quite a few supporters of Trump).

Charlottesville Nazis likely did use it, but they're far from being Trump supporters. They deeply distrust him because of Jared and Ivanka. And they're a tiny, tiny percentage of our population - all extreme right-wing groups combined (neoconfederates, Nazis, militia, etc) are well under 1%. You'll see SPLC trumpet things like "30% rise!" without mentioning how tiny these groups are (and they have a good idea about how small they are, it's just harder to fundraise when you discuss these things).

0. https://www.timesofisrael.com/cpac-denies-stage-was-intentio...

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#842

Post by AnthonyMouse »

notahacker wrote: post #321
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is responsible for cancel culture? Tech censorship? "Believe All Women"? Who is calling for a new War on Terror targeting the domestic population?

> Who is responsible for cancel culture? This depends on is being cancelled. It's not the left that cancelled Kapaernick or the artists formerly known as the Dixie Chicks or howled with rage that the Supreme Court - with the exception of three conservative justices - ruled their longstanding practice of cancelling gay people unconstitutional.

"Whatabout Kaepernick" is not a denial that the left is doing this, or even that they're not the primary offenders.

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#843

Post by throwaway19937 »

dublin wrote: post #840
throwaway19937 wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://i.redd.it/om90nwadqca61.png is a Parler post with a racial slur and 25k upvotes. The court documents ( https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/29095511/parler-llc-v-a... ) from their case against Amazon contain other examples of hate speech.

"Hate Speech" as you call it, no matter how distasteful you may find it, is protected speech under the US Constitution, and thus (if also not a threat of violence, doxxing, or similar) is permitted on Gab. I have no problem with platforms allowing any and all speech, since it actually just allows stupid speakers to beclown themselves. Free speech is the most liberal idea there is - as Voltaire famously said, "I may d…

Gab's policies are their business; my goal was to provide examples of such content on Parler.

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#844

Post by leereeves »

scrose wrote: post #838
leereeves wrote: post #767

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. Some socialists, like Gregor Strasser, weren't merely supporters, they were full members and even leaders of the Nazi party. Their brand of Nazism survives to this day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism So I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were.

> Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. I never said that. > I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were. I never claimed that none of them were. Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time.

> Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time.

I joined this discussion because you said "The Nazis were socialist only in name."

Only.

That sounds fairly absolute to me.

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#845

Post by scrose »

leereeves wrote: post #844
scrose wrote: post #838

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. I never said that. > I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were. I never claimed that none of them were. Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time.

> Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time. I joined this discussion because you said "The Nazis were socialist only in name." Only. That sounds fairly absolute to me.

Do you not see the irony in the fact that you had to grab a tiny snippet of a response several posts prior to 'prove' your counterpoint to a criticism made towards you in regards to practically every response you've had in this thread thus far?

I'm going to give this thread a break since it seems as though you're simply looking for arguments where none exist.

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#846

Post by leereeves »

scrose wrote: post #845
leereeves wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time. I joined this discussion because you said "The Nazis were socialist only in name." Only. That sounds fairly absolute to me.

Do you not see the irony in the fact that you had to grab a tiny snippet of a response several posts prior to 'prove' your counterpoint to a criticism made towards you in regards to practically every response you've had in this thread thus far? I'm going to give this thread a break since it seems as though you're simply looking for arguments where none exist.

That was your first statement in this discussion, and I consider it the central claim I'm arguing against.

But if you don't consider it an important claim, then let's move on. I'm satisfied that I've shown a fair amount of evidence that it's untrue.

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#847

Post by jki275 »

Schiendelman wrote: post #748
jki275 wrote: post #736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, some jackasses who are not "a part of the party" might use some image on some flag that I've never even seen with a rune nobody of any importance had ever heard of since WWII until yesterday. That's the fact of thing. If you want to talk about imagery, let's talk about the Bolshevik imagery incorporated purposely into the groups who ran the recent "summer of love" who were pandered to and supported by people like…

If "nobody" had heard of that rune "since WWII", how did it get on that flag at Charlottesville, or in a separate guide to symbols used by neo-Nazis? I'm sorry that you have a political axe to grind, but you're not doing yourself any good by pretending things.

hahahahahahahaha

https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/cpac-nazi-rune-stage-l...

Is it still a nazi symbol if a leftist company created it? Or should we apply logic and not call them nazis either?

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#848

Post by edmundsauto »

Proziam wrote: post #810
edmundsauto wrote: post #809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Points 2 and 3 don't seem to be things we can modify. Are they barriers to an effective implementation, or will the increased size + diversity be more friction but not a blocker? For points 1 and 4, those sound like symptoms to a more rudimentary problem. I don't know what that problem is, but my guess is its something systemic and structural.

Points 1 & 4 could be solved either via elimination of the party system (unlikely) or if one of the several initiatives to break up California succeed (also unlikely). Simply put, the problem is that when you have one party in control there's very little incentive for them to work cooperatively with the people. Points 2&3 are could also be solved by dividing the state up so that each region could self-govern. Given t…

Isn’t it generally accepted that increased diversity in a decision group leads to better decisions? Splitting the state up would draw territory lines where there are only cultural lines currently.

Eliminating unions and splitting the state don’t seem to be feasible options. What else can we do, is there something less radical that can chip away to close this gap?

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#849

Post by notahacker »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #842
notahacker wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who is responsible for cancel culture? This depends on is being cancelled. It's not the left that cancelled Kapaernick or the artists formerly known as the Dixie Chicks or howled with rage that the Supreme Court - with the exception of three conservative justices - ruled their longstanding practice of cancelling gay people unconstitutional.

"Whatabout Kaepernick" is not a denial that the left is doing this, or even that they're not the primary offenders.

No, but the juxtaposition of "footballers' antiracist gestures must be silenced" with "We must intervene to prevent Big Tech from declining to broadcast racism" in the rhetoric of prominent mainstream US conservatives is a pretty good indication that the longstanding tradition they are actually defending isn't "free speech"...

Re: Gab has been hacked and 70GB of data leaked

#850

Post by [deleted] »

pii wrote: post #839
flipcoder wrote: post #825

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> forcible suppression of opposition You mean like... censorship?

Yes, censorship. The kind like every conservative space I've ever known, online or offline, engages in. Also no not exclusively censorship, there are many parts to that definition.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN