Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#441

Post by _-david-_ » Mon, Apr 04, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

bee_rider wrote: post #421

_-david-_ wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't 4chan also create the OK hand sign racist as well? Now there are people who genuinely believe the OK sign is racist.

It is essentially the same prank, I believe the milk one is the even more absurd followup. They spread the rumor that the OK symbol is racist. Some people go to racist rallies and make the gesture. Is it now a racist gesture? A gesture can't really be racist I don't think, it is the intent behind it. In the case of OK, it doesn't provide much extra information, right? If somebody is making it at a racist rally I gues…

While intent should be what matters, that isn't the case for many people. There was a man who was cracking his knuckles and somebody took a picture of him. Apparently his hand was close to the OK sign and he was fired. It is getting to the point where intention does not matter.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-ove...

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#442

Post by candiodari » Mon, Apr 04, 2022, 10:22 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #68

candiodari wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that that is never, ever, where it stops. There's always people that society suddenly decides are "really important", usually the most dumb-witted, cruel abusers you can come up with. And of course, the rules don't apply to them. Just look at the president of France, if you want to see a particularly bad fuckup. He, and his wife, have confessed, publicly, on TV, repeatedly to having a paedophilic relat…

a whole bunch of people were sued for stating this during the campaign The burden of proof for libel action is very different to the burden of proof for criminal liability. It's the difference between civil and criminal law - they're worlds apart. You can't really compare the two, despite them both being based around the act of writing something on the internet. Posting something potentially libellous on Twitter won'…

They both said on TV they fucked when he was 15/16, and while she was in a power relationship over him (as his French teacher). Pointing out there might be a problem with that doesn't violate libel laws for a whole host of reasons.

Likewise, public confessions satisfy the standard of proof for criminal liability. If you say "I'm glad I killed this guy" next to what looks like a corpse with 100 people watching, you can be convicted of murder without the police so much as checking it's indeed a corpse, based on testimony (does not even need to be direct testimony, done in court, it can be a police officer saying one of the hundred confirmed this to them) of one person. If you say it on TV, well the laws on this predate TVs, I'm sure it will work the same.

And, technically, since he was a minor, French law says the public prosecutor HAS to sue the adult (ie. her), no choice. Don't you love "someone think of the children" laws? Needless to say, this didn't happen.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#443

Post by mlindner » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 7:27 PM UTC

colinmhayes wrote: post #262

mlindner wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of having been discriminated against is by definition not a "privilege". What's wrong isn't the lack of discrimination, but the idea that lack of discrimination should be called a "privledge" rather than a "norm". It attacks people for not having hardship, namely turning something that's good int o something that's bad. The use of the term "white privledge" fundamentally applies that to make things "equal" w…

> the idea that lack of discrimination should be called a "privledge" rather than a "norm". But the lack of discrimination isn't the norm. It would definitely be nice if it was, but that's not the case. White people experiencing better general overall treatment by society compared to those in the same situation who are black is just a fact. Complaining that it causes reverse discrimination doesn't make that untrue.

My point is it SHOULD be a norm, and trying to push the other direction, as the phrase does, is doing things backwards. We should be "norming" the idea that discrimination is bad. Rather than saying that discrimination is normal and thus everyone should be equally (which isn't really possible) discriminated against.