41–50 of 216 posts
What is going on with the DNS name resolution here? Can somebody please share the resolved IP address?
$ dig www.hackingbutlegal.com @1.1.1.1
...
www.hackingbutlegal.com. 1730 IN CNAME target.substack-custom-domains.com.
...Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. At this point Twitter (I refuse to call it "X" and I will die on this hill) is little more than Elon's personal agitprop and trolling platform, and he would absolutely be petty enough to pull something like that.
ExTwitter
> The omission of her predicament by the media isn't just an oversight—it's a signal suggesting that a significant portion of western media may be increasingly compromised by Beijing's influence, finding themselves unable to criticize foreign policy, lest they rile the tiger and negatively impact their business. Compromised because they didn't provide coverage of a Youtuber in China getting silenced? You make sound a…
Well, we got no coverage on Wu getting deplatformed, and a bit of coverage on Uyghur matters. Instead, we should have gotten a bit of coverage on the former, and a lot of coverage on the latter.
It's depressing how many Americans and Europeans seem utterly allergic to any kind of nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of China. I think the same applies to the former USSR. I'm not sure why this is.
It's depressing how many Americans and Europeans seem utterly allergic to any kind of nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of China. I think the same applies to the former USSR. I'm not sure why this is.
Why do you think it's easy for most to have nuanced, dispassionate discussions about the ancient Assyrians but not the Nazis? Spacial/temporal/ideological proximity. We're not likely to become anything like the former, but we fear ourselves (or at least our leadership) becoming more like the latter. Obviously it would be ideal to learn from the good aspects of even the most evil totalitarian regimes, but in practice…
She speaks the truth often, but I never really got how she portrays herself. Not a huge fan... regardless, she should be able to say whatever she wants and use the platform she built.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, censorship can totally be the answer to getting people to stop saying things you don’t want them to say if you don’t have any commitment to free speech. See how Tucker Max or Milo Yiannopolous are no longer culturally relevant. Censorship works.
I don't know about Milo, but after looking at Wikipedia, it looks like Tucker grew up and so did his former audience.
Latest book sold 3k copies: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/aug/15/tucker-carlson...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, censorship can totally be the answer to getting people to stop saying things you don’t want them to say if you don’t have any commitment to free speech. See how Tucker Max or Milo Yiannopolous are no longer culturally relevant. Censorship works.
If I can find it again there's a really great video explaining how, to have free speech, you must restrict some speech. Because bad actors use speech and claims om they are "defending free speech!" in bad faith as a weapon to further their ends, and once they're in a position of power will shameless drop the pretenses and restrict any speech that doesn't entrench their position.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, we got no coverage on Wu getting deplatformed, and a bit of coverage on Uyghur matters. Instead, we should have gotten a bit of coverage on the former, and a lot of coverage on the latter.
Isn't it fairly common to be not especially interested in what those other people over there are doing amongst themselves - even if it's genocide or censuring dissidents or whatever - and to care a lot more about important local news like which faction gets to impose their values on the public school curriculum and what color suit the president wore left week?