211–220 of 648 posts
Here is the State Department's rationale: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...
I’m not familiar with A/I, but this sounds pretty damning – the ideological vetting of users in particular seems to discount any sort of neutral utility defense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are very logical reasons why the state wielding force and violence is preferable to the alternatives… Seems like there are some pretty clear historical exceptions to this rule.
[flagged]
We have pardoned Jan 6ers convicted of "wielding force and violence" for political goals in goverment positions now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch is uncomfortably close to the situation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like providing encrypted communications? I think we can all see the potential problems with this, even if a specific group is awful. “The specific claim: a far-left media group that describes itself as a “tool” for militants to share information “to be acted upon” used A/I’s services to publish communiqués and calls to action for U.S.-designated terrorist groups, including FAI/FRI, the IRGC, Hamas, Hizballah,…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one believes pro-Hamas activists in the US are voting for Trump.
"pro-hamas activists" is approximately nobody.
Basically every movement/organization on earth has activists who support their activities, why would Hamas be any different? There are people everywhere who don't mind violence/killing and there are people everywhere who are anti-semitic. You think the intersection of those two cohorts is empty?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> It really is not the fault of the US that Mexico has drug gangs that kill people at random This is a direct result of the "war on drugs" perpetrated by the US. The other two are genuinely not the fault of the US, but bringing up two examples where the US wasn't the source of the problem doesn't exactly contradict the original claim.
> Which is partly or mostly our fault.
It does contradict the original claim because it's 3 examples of things we didn't cause - and he said "mostly our fault". If it takes 3 seconds to think of things we didn't cause, then the world's craziness is not mostly the fault of America. Mostly the US has a hand in stopping communist governments where the citizens are kept as slaves.
Here is the State Department's rationale: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...
I’m not familiar with A/I, but this sounds pretty damning – the ideological vetting of users in particular seems to discount any sort of neutral utility defense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You won't elaborate though, just make vague accusations.
I think the difference they alluded to is that they manually vetoed new users, presumably based on their self-declared goals and ideology, whereas Signal etc are neutral platforms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not familiar with A/I, but this sounds pretty damning – the ideological vetting of users in particular seems to discount any sort of neutral utility defense.
I'm not familiar with A/I, but I'm familiar with americans, and they look completely ridiculous talking smack about others doing allegedly "bad things". And they have no defense about supporting war criminals or genocidaires.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like providing encrypted communications? I think we can all see the potential problems with this, even if a specific group is awful. “The specific claim: a far-left media group that describes itself as a “tool” for militants to share information “to be acted upon” used A/I’s services to publish communiqués and calls to action for U.S.-designated terrorist groups, including FAI/FRI, the IRGC, Hamas, Hizballah,…
[flagged]