Live data from Hacker News

Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

bsky.social

101–110 of 123 posts

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted to play devil's advocate here, but unfortunately did find an example of a "politically disapproved position" in frumple's post history: "The deportations will continue regardless of the tantrums of the hysterical and mentally ill." Which ironically is similar to some "1939 Germany" views.

Are you claiming that enforcing existing 2026 U.S. immigration law -- developed through decades of bipartisan agreement and consistent with policies in other liberal democracies -- is in any way comparable to 1939 Germany and their systematic murder of millions? That comparison is precisely the problem: it distorts history, inflates moral claims, and shuts down serious discussion. This is also largely the standard le…

Even if the current state of immigration policy was forged in a bipartisan agreement(it wasn't), it would be inhumane and I would condemn it.

Fortunately the Republicans, specifically Tom Homan and Stephen Miller, can be shown to have a record of dehumanizing people to the point of cruelty.

As far as anyone could tell they were behind the effort to separate children from their families, and the decision to intentionally destroy records, and prevent the recording of data, which ultimately left over a thousand children orphaned to this very day.

I know someone in CBP who volunteered to try help sort that situation out, ready to get on a plane, paying out of pocket, and they were told to stand down by leadership.

The republican-led executive branch wanted to inflict pain despite the law, and despite "policy".

And now those same people (Homan and Miller) are behind the door-to-door raids, asking people for their papers, building detention centers(even though we're supposed to be sending them back home...), and targeting political enemies.

Obama managed to deport 3 million people without this excess use of cruelty, civil rights violations, manpower, or money.

This is something else.

This level of hatred towards the other is the type of seed that may or may not grow into a holocaust. It's understandable if some people want to kill it before it sprouts by drawing obvious parallels.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you claiming that enforcing existing 2026 U.S. immigration law -- developed through decades of bipartisan agreement and consistent with policies in other liberal democracies -- is in any way comparable to 1939 Germany and their systematic murder of millions? That comparison is precisely the problem: it distorts history, inflates moral claims, and shuts down serious discussion. This is also largely the standard le…

Even if the current state of immigration policy was forged in a bipartisan agreement(it wasn't), it would be inhumane and I would condemn it. Fortunately the Republicans, specifically Tom Homan and Stephen Miller, can be shown to have a record of dehumanizing people to the point of cruelty. As far as anyone could tell they were behind the effort to separate children from their families, and the decision to intentiona…

This is a category error. Immigration enforcement -- even when abusive or unlawful, which is not a concession I make -- is not genocide. Invoking 1939 Germany collapses distinctions that matter.

Holocaust analogies based on unsupported anecdote and asserted intent aren’t analysis; they’re unfalsifiable rhetorical escalations designed to end debate. If every disliked policy is treated as a "seed" of genocide, as is now common, the term loses meaning and becomes an empty rhetorical weapon. Argue specific actions with evidence and standards, or don’t -- but stop inflating unfalsifiable moral claims to the point where serious critique is impossible.

> Even if the current state of immigration policy was forged in a bipartisan agreement(it wasn't), it would be inhumane and I would condemn it.

We haven’t passed a comprehensive immigration law since 1986, and the enforcement framework in use today arises from bipartisan legislation passed in 1986, major subsequent revisions in 1996, and layers of later executive discretion exercised by administrations of both parties. We had four years of functionally non-existent enforcement, and while I cannot ascribe motive, the natural outcome was to make later enforcement incredibly difficult -- a consequence that is now plainly visible.

If you think those laws are unjust, argue that -- but don’t pretend this is some novel or uniquely partisan creation.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Good they moderate. I can moderate my own feed -- the majority of people don't need, want, or enjoy an overtly paternalistic hugbox, and especially if moderation tends to be unidirectionally skewed in one political direction. It's not surprising that growth is slow.

On one side, sure, there's "overly paternalistic" moderation, but, on the other, there's AI powered revenge porn running rampant, so I'd argue there should be at least some moderation.

Calling a juvenile bikini edit "AI-powered revenge porn" is incorrect by definition. Revenge porn involves the non-consensual distribution of real, explicit sexual imagery of an identifiable person with the intent to cause harm.

Lumping sophomoric image edits into that category is exactly the kind of moral and definitional inflation being actively used to manufacture pretext for suppressing speech under the guise of "moderation."

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you claiming that enforcing existing 2026 U.S. immigration law -- developed through decades of bipartisan agreement and consistent with policies in other liberal democracies -- is in any way comparable to 1939 Germany and their systematic murder of millions? That comparison is precisely the problem: it distorts history, inflates moral claims, and shuts down serious discussion. This is also largely the standard le…

Even if the current state of immigration policy was forged in a bipartisan agreement(it wasn't), it would be inhumane and I would condemn it. Fortunately the Republicans, specifically Tom Homan and Stephen Miller, can be shown to have a record of dehumanizing people to the point of cruelty. As far as anyone could tell they were behind the effort to separate children from their families, and the decision to intentiona…

I don't think the Obama comparison is very useful. Trump faces a vastly more difficult problem than Obama did. For most of his presidency, Obama simply continued the Operation Streamline era policies that he inherited from Bush. He didn't have to clean up after a previous administration that had completely lost control of the border, allowing somewhere between ten and forty million immigrants through. And Obama didn't have to contend with dozens of states and cities declaring themselves sanctuaries, completely off limits to meaningful immigration enforcement, even of criminal migrants.

My own state promptly made it illegal for local law enforcement to cooperate with border patrol or immigration enforcement agents in any circumstance.

So now, if we want our country to have meaningful borders, immigration enforcement has to be done the hard way, and it shouldn't be surprising that Kristi Noem's clown show is showing signs of clusterfuckery. It's actually surprising that things have gone as well as they have.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never been on twitter so I don't really know but I can agree that we see tech community in twitter but the same isn't really there in bluesky. Although I still have a web/programming which I follow and have found some people interesting from Hackernews and others too in bluesky (emsh,simonw) What is the HN consensus around lemmy? I really like lemmy and think that it might be better for tech stuff (almost simi…

It's 300 characters. Have you considered writing it on leaflet.pub or something and linking it, if it's not a back and forth? There's already a + button in the post composer to split into multiple posts. I think there's a few tweetlonger-type services that people have tried to make, but with atproto they can at least embed that extra text into the post (100kb limit), so the site only needs to stick around to view it.

> I think there's a few tweetlonger-type services that people have tried to make, but with atproto they can at least embed that extra text into the post (100kb limit), so the site only needs to stick around to view it.

Woah I didn't know this was possible, definitely gonna try out leaflet.pub, I did know about it, let's see.

Thank you for telling me about this!

Edit: Now tried leaflet.pub, looks really cool. I am gonna use it from here on out because I used to use mataroa.blog or bearblog but they didn't have comments and comments were something I always wondered.

Its comments actually hook up to bluesky itself. this does feel interesting.

I might use it from here on out or maybe the fediverse alternative to something like this (i think its name was writty or something like this) but I am pretty sure that I am gonna nowadays write on leaflet too a litte haha!

Thanks for sharing me this. I knew about leaflet.pub but didn't know that it hooked with bsky so well. Is it a recent feature or is it the case where I maybe misremembering somethings?

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one side, sure, there's "overly paternalistic" moderation, but, on the other, there's AI powered revenge porn running rampant, so I'd argue there should be at least some moderation.

Calling a juvenile bikini edit "AI-powered revenge porn" is incorrect by definition. Revenge porn involves the non-consensual distribution of real, explicit sexual imagery of an identifiable person with the intent to cause harm. Lumping sophomoric image edits into that category is exactly the kind of moral and definitional inflation being actively used to manufacture pretext for suppressing speech under the guise of…

You're right, we must be accurate in our terms, but that misclassifcation isn't worse than the act itself. The generation of deepfake non-consensual sexual images isn't revenge porn, because the woman in the image didn't even given initial consent. It being used to harass women is still a problem and is the sort of thing that requires moderation. It's not "sophomoric", it's exploitative and, in some states, illegal.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#107
post #97
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Once again you're referring to liberals even if you don't know it. You might be confused because several forces want you to be exactly that: 1) The right lumps/conflates everything from centrist liberal to far left as "the far radical left" with no in-between, which blurs many lines. 2) Center liberals who want a social media veneer they can feel good about will literally pose as leftists/marxists, but if you loo…

>but if you look at their other beliefs and behaviors (were they trying to sink Bernie, or not?) ...No? Bernie was super popular specifically with this audience. The more liberal people described themselves as, the more they supported Bernie: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-defines-the-sander... You can take the stance that nobody knows what any of these terms mean I guess, but then the picture gets kind of…

> You can take the stance that nobody knows what any of these terms mean I guess

It's not that they don't know. It's that they bend definitions to their advantage depending on what the context dictates. 538 is exactly the kind of outlet one would expect to do such a thing.

https://jacobin.com/2024/11/liberals-bernie-working-class-tr...

It seems the left-right spectrum serves better to confuse than to differentiate, and that the most productive discussions unfold when we talk issues instead.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, not sure why I'd spend a minute of my time on a social media site where the owner's boosted comments literally make me feel physically ill.

[flagged]

Personally endorsed by Musk: "If white men become a minority, we will be slaughtered. Remember, if non-Whites openly hate White men while White men hold a collective majority, then they will be 1000x times [sic] more hostile and cruel when they are a majority over whites. White solidarity is the only way to survive." https://religiondispatches.org/2026/01/09/musk-endorsed-whit...

And this is "anodyne" to you? Personally, I want absolutely nothing to do with these cretins. Being in the same virtual space with them makes me feel dirty, let alone using a platform actually owned by one of them. I wouldn't go to Stormfront to discuss gaming news, either.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling a juvenile bikini edit "AI-powered revenge porn" is incorrect by definition. Revenge porn involves the non-consensual distribution of real, explicit sexual imagery of an identifiable person with the intent to cause harm. Lumping sophomoric image edits into that category is exactly the kind of moral and definitional inflation being actively used to manufacture pretext for suppressing speech under the guise of…

You're right, we must be accurate in our terms, but that misclassifcation isn't worse than the act itself. The generation of deepfake non-consensual sexual images isn't revenge porn, because the woman in the image didn't even given initial consent. It being used to harass women is still a problem and is the sort of thing that requires moderation. It's not "sophomoric", it's exploitative and, in some states, illegal.

You’ve agreed this isn’t revenge porn. The case for moderation must stand or fall under the correct classification.

Harm has not been demonstrated. Annoyance or offense is not injury, and discomfort is not exploitation. Without evidence of systematic, material harm -- and without showing that enforcement would not introduce greater error and speech suppression -- the justification for moderation fails. Vague claims of illegality are irrelevant. A non-explicit image edit is not criminal in any US jurisdiction absent additional elements such as explicit sexual content, fraud, extortion, or targeted harassment; invoking “illegal in some states” -- without naming conduct and statute -- is just noise.

"Put them in a bikini" is closer to low-effort mockery than to any recognized category of sexual harm. The level of alarm being applied here is grossly disproportionate to the act itself and is merely being used as a pretext for broader intervention.

Re: Bluesky 2025 Transparency Report

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the current state of immigration policy was forged in a bipartisan agreement(it wasn't), it would be inhumane and I would condemn it. Fortunately the Republicans, specifically Tom Homan and Stephen Miller, can be shown to have a record of dehumanizing people to the point of cruelty. As far as anyone could tell they were behind the effort to separate children from their families, and the decision to intentiona…

I don't think the Obama comparison is very useful. Trump faces a vastly more difficult problem than Obama did. For most of his presidency, Obama simply continued the Operation Streamline era policies that he inherited from Bush. He didn't have to clean up after a previous administration that had completely lost control of the border, allowing somewhere between ten and forty million immigrants through. And Obama didn'…

> He didn't have to clean up after a previous administration

every dem president has to clean up after a republican president

Post reply on HN