81–90 of 333 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's ridiculous to assume that "I hate my neighbor and am going to kill him" and "there's a Russian army invading my city, we should set up an ambush" should be held to the same standard of speech Yeah, those examples are the easy ones. What about "we should genocide russians"? Where does that lie on your spectrum? Should facebook be allowing such speech?
No
Hate is hate. Morality is absolute, not relative.
Even as a moral absolutist myself that's a laughable oversimplification bordering on deliberate obtuseness. Obviously all hate is not the same. You call for the extermination of covid-19 and nobody will disagree with you. You call for the extermination of mosquitos and most people won't disagree with you. You call for the extermination of destructive invasive species and a majority of people will agree with you. Some…
But the regulations apply to "Russians and Russian soldiers", not just the invaders. Would you be okay with calls of violence against saudi civilians because of their government's involvement in the 9/11 attacks?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a misnomer. And, asserting NATO air dominance in Ukraine is easy and guaranteed to succeed with de minimis cost (in lives and/or military equipment). Whereas creating land dominance with tanks is another matter. A no-fly zone is an easy win for NATO and would make Ukrainian civilians safe from aerial bombardment.
A no fly-zone officially drags NATO into the conflict and WW3 kicks off.
What the actual fuck is wrong with these people? Calling for literal violence against Russians is less dangerous than claiming masks aren't helpful? Is there something here I'm not getting?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"A no-fly zone" is one of the worst misnomers out there. In this case, it means that NATO - and specifically the USA - will start shooting Russian aircrafts. Sending NATO aircraft is not different from sending tanks. I understand why Ukrainians are asking for it but there is a reason NATO can't get involved.
>>A no-fly zone" is one of the worst misnomers out there. Its not a misnomer at all - it is exactly what it says it is - might not be a good idea, but calling it a 'no-fly zone' is completely accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which brakes? Russia's attack on Ukraine? Sure, let's stop or slow that down, but how?
it's unbecoming to willfully misinterpret someone's statement in order to make a point distinct from that which they were making, and then to go on to agree with said willful misinterpretation.
It might be more becoming to say "Many people are dying and I think it's inappropriate to use a generic, vague expression pertaining to this other, much less directly violent thing." Or words to that effect. But I'm not surprised that the GP post was so shocked by the phrasing that they resorted to sarcasm instead.
No matter how much you (as well as I) hate the fact that private platforms can impose or change their moderation rules unfairly on who ever they want, whenever they want and no matter how hypocritical they are, they are still private platforms and can do whatever they want even if it is against their own terms of service. Ultimately, they don't care and they are on no-one's side. Thus, they will never change. Outrage…
If they were truly private platforms they would be liable for what's said on them. You could sue them for hate speech and libel, etc.
And you can still sue people for hate speech and libel if they post such on Facebook. You just can't sue Facebook itself.
Of course, the face was not his, but he'd become accustomed to the responsive animations throughout a lifetime of shaving.
"You should probably nix some of those stray hairs and sharpen the beard shape", said the mirror.
Jake thought he was going to go for something a little different this time, but if that's what the mirror recommended, that's the result it was going to get.
"Make sure you turn on your minute-by-minute version updates in your BrainLink for The New York Times to get the best and unbiased news on Russian Aggression."
This slightly perplexed Jake. Last night he was thinking about increasing the feed parameter in his BrainLink for The Washington Post instead of The New York Times, but maybe BrainLink had a new deal with the latter.
Jake was almost done with his face when the mirror issued another transient directive.
"You want to kill some Russians today. Meet at these coordinates to sync with the rest of your Circle."
Jake took some surprise to this. He had met with his Circle frequently to do Collaborations before, but usually it only involved suppressing the underclasses. It was probably just a bug. Probably.
Still, it couldn't hurt to check it out. Jake followed the voice in his head and met with his Circle that day.
I can't believe this is real. Zuckerberg might not be the brightest guy but I can't believe he could be that stupid. I hope Meta will back down and apologize very soon.
>"They trust me — dumb fucks"
It's going to be really awkward when this is all over and big tech has to pivot back to when nationalism, strong borders, private firearm ownership, and armed neo-nazi militias[0] were all bad things. [0] https://theintercept.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-facebook-azov-ba...
https://www.timesofisrael.com/ukrainian-jews-push-back-again...
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/rights-groups-demand-isr...