101–110 of 641 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of y'all are from countries that are in great turmoil. Which is partly or mostly our fault. Maybe we could concentrate on doing less of that.
It really is not the fault of the US that Mexico has drug gangs that kill people at random. It's not the fault that Pakistan and India are nearly at war forever. It's not the US fault that many countries support and require female genital mutilation. The US is not as evil as you think.
Here is the State Department's rationale: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...
> The A/I Collective… manually vets all potential users for ideological affinity before granting them access to its infrastructure.
What is the truth behind that? Such behaviour would undermine A/I’s claim they are akin to Gmail if they explicitly are not a neutral ISP. After that, it becomes a question of degrees: what were their specific criteria for access to the platform?
Asking out of genuine curiosity. I wasn’t familiar with this group before today.
Here is the State Department's rationale: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US Republican party has been inventing an increasingly elaborate alternate reality fiction in order to convince their voters to keep voting for policy positions that obviously work against those voters' own interests. One component of this alternate reality is a fictional terrorist organization called "antifa." They claim that anyone who does not align with their policies is a member of this organization. This al…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US Republican party has been inventing an increasingly elaborate alternate reality fiction in order to convince their voters to keep voting for policy positions that obviously work against those voters' own interests. One component of this alternate reality is a fictional terrorist organization called "antifa." They claim that anyone who does not align with their policies is a member of this organization. This al…
[flagged]
Lots of maga are idealists (even if their ideas are not based in the real world), a number of them are LARPers and a small number are hard core intent on eliminating “the enemy”. To think that no maga member is violent and entertains violent options, is denying reality. Also it’s disingenuous to think they are all out of their minds looking to overthrow the government. Many just have ideals that don’t align with the mainstream.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1153982516232...
I am first hearing about this group today, but here is some context: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20... Apparently they provide the digital infrastructure for violent Antifa cells and because of a 9/11 related executive order, the A/I is able to be branded a sponsor of terrorism. I guess this makes it a crime to give them money or provide aid to them (if you are a US citizen). EDIT: who i…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20... This designation offers some specific examples of violence being coordinated using their systems. Some are indeed extreme, if true. That doesn’t invalidate their mission or overall contribution to the world at large; it just was sufficient ammo for extinguishing another threat to power.
> “That doesn’t invalidate their mission or overall contribution to the world at large;” Give me a break. Ends to not justify all means. This is a completely appropriate response by the state department.
Here is the State Department's rationale: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...
Like trying to scrutinize the motives of a complete lunatic.
My impression is that they didn’t say “hey we don’t have customer information but we don’t service violent groups and we will responsibly investigate and discontinue service to offenders.”
Their vibe was much more defiant, like, “we designed this to be anonymous and specifically intend/expect for it to be used in any way regardless of legality and are okay with it.”
Is it right for the US to be the global arbiter of this issue and domains in general? Of course not.
Here is the State Department's rationale: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...