331–340 of 600 posts
This is playbook of scumbag tyrants, doesn't matter if Putin, Erdogan or similar. I for sure hope EU politicians are taking a note too, there are 2 existential threats to democratic free Europe long term - Russia and Turkey. Both have same ambitions, are on completely opposite side of all crucial values free world holds dear. Luckily their competence severely lags behind their ambitions, to think Turkey was for some…
Just like in China with the anti-lockdown protests. The people who are recognisable on social media posts from the protests have all been arrested by now. They waited just long enough to make people forget about it before they picked them up one by one.
Not to defend China, as the scale and the penalties are not comparable, however, some western governments also took a relatively hard stance against some anti-lockdown protests and we're learning government was involved in muting dissenting opinions on social media which in some western countries crosses the line into censorship. The government had embeds in social media orgs. Just imagine if during the Johnson or Ni…
That’s pretty much what journalist Carl Bernstein claimed in 1977, followed much later by historian Hugh Wilford in 2008.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not into US politics so just a glance at Wikipedia. You compare anti-lock down protests with someone stealing land? Or was is it just comparing the way the police worked in general? I can't follow your argument.
> Or was is it just comparing the way the police worked in general? This one. When the local odds aren't in their favor, they go home and arrest people later at their leisure.
The tool is good. Ensuring it's used for good reasons it's a separate problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would only be the solution if the problem was bad speech. The problem is that algorithms optimise for engagement and therefore amplify increasingly extremist views. You cannot talk your way out of that position, it surely must include intervention?
It sounds like the problem implicit in your framing then is "algorithms", not extremists--a stance I agree with--which would imply the disinformation isn't coming from big tech's users, it is caused by big tech itself, and maybe it is the algorithms that should be limited and regulated instead of the discussions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's your hill, add Turkey, India and Russia to the list. Brazil we'll know in few days.
I cannot think of any product that I have purchased in the past 50 years that was made in Turkey or India. I once bought a replacement carburetor for a woodchipper, and it was made in Russia, but that's all I've seen from there. These are not exactly manufacturing and exporting powerhouses, it's pretty trivial to avoid them if you want to, compared to China.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Almost like whether or not they choose to support a policy depends not on what it does but instead on who it’s being done to. Well, or they have a more nuanced view than "censorship no" or "censorship yes" For example, I support laws preventing stores from selling 3 watt LED bulbs in packages claiming they're 5 watt LED bulbs; or selling generic LED bulbs in packages claiming they're Phillips bulbs. Even though the…
Exactly this. Censorship should be a nuanced topic if anyone gives it any serious thought. Not all censorship is at the same level, and there is obviously a difference between shutting down Twitter and not letting folks criticize the government and, say, not telling folks misinformation that can lead to another's harm or death (fake cures, for example).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look, I'm not trying to get into a whole culture war thing, but you do realize that the constitution literally had to be amended to give non-whites and women the right to vote? It seems like the constitution did a perfectly good job at doing that.
No disagreement there. What I disagree with is the insinuation that the right to free speech is tainted and thus somehow unjust because the constitution had to be amended. It's a devilish argument.
So, imo, and apologies for the controversial political example, but when people ask "where is the right to abortion in the constitution?" they completely miss the point that the actual question must be "where is the right for the government to regulate abortions in the constitution?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup. I’m (trying) to do the same. Every little mindless purchase I used to make to fix some minor inconvenience slowly adds up to real harm for someone else at the hands of the CCP. Please stop buying from China. In fact, in recent times Lithuania has been a force for good against China, I’d suggest seeking out their goods if applicable to your needs.
Stop buying from China means essentially buying nothing with a semiconductor. Unless you mean something else.
No need to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want to, but it's tough. How have you been filtering things?
https://old.reddit.com/r/avoidchineseproducts/
I saw so many cool, affordable products that didn't have any alternatives (or the alternatives were too expensive) I ended up buying even more things!
This is playbook of scumbag tyrants, doesn't matter if Putin, Erdogan or similar. I for sure hope EU politicians are taking a note too, there are 2 existential threats to democratic free Europe long term - Russia and Turkey. Both have same ambitions, are on completely opposite side of all crucial values free world holds dear. Luckily their competence severely lags behind their ambitions, to think Turkey was for some…
Maybe if EU hadn't been so reluctant to let them in that would've put them on another path than the one they are going now.