431–440 of 744 posts
You're not pro-LGBT if you think trans women aren't women.
I think you meant to say "You're not pro-LGBT if you think women aren't women." Why are you segregating "trans women" as different than just "women"?
If you were saying "tall women aren't women," the appropriate rejoinder is "yes, tall women are women," not the useless tautology "women are women."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can choose to not be a platform for anything that they want. You don't have a right to that platform. Forcing YouTube to leave everything up infringes on their rights to run their site as they want.
To play devil's advocate to the "private platform" argument: we force tv networks and radio stations to give equal air time to all presidential candidates.[1] NBC is a private a company but if they permit one candidate to host SNL they must give the other candidate(s) an equivalent opportunity so as not to unfairly sway public opinion. I don't necessarily think that "infringes" on NBC's right to run their platform as…
Youtube, or any other site uses no public property in that way so they are not, and should not be beholden to the same rules.
You're not pro-LGBT if you think trans women aren't women.
This isn't my opinion. I will happily call people by whatever pronoun they wish to be called. That's just common decency in my opinion. That comment was in reference to this story, it looks like I got the quote wrong: https://www.nationalreview.com/news/journalist-sues-twitter-... I think there's a difference between how we should recognise someone socially and the reality of an individual's biology. What's worrying…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But I DO know that removing videos from YouTube won't make it better. It may make it worse. I think you're right, and I have some first-hand knowledge on the matter. I've debated QAnon types and flat earthers alike. In both cases, they often see an absence of information as some overarching conspiracy. I'm not really sure who is worse (the flat earthers are a subset of a broader "government-is-hiding-things" conspi…
The time for moderation is over. Way over. If YouTube and Facebook has moderated in the beginning their would be no problem. That would just be the way it is. But now? Too late.
There's no winning this battle of censorship, it will never be enough for the mob. While the other half is saying it's too far. And a small percentage of crazies becomes even more convinced of a global conspiracy. And the actual extremists will use their banning to justify why they were right to be extremist in the first place.
They should have stopped at people promoting violence, spam, and other obvious illegal stuff. Jumping into being the central body that moderates what is 'acceptable speech' online is minefield riddled crazy town with very little real ROI. Which will hopefully quicken Facebook's decline.
I'm starting to think that comment sections on news sites are a really bad idea. At first I thought NPR and the like were cowards for removing theirs. It's bad enough that NYT can be pretty biased on its own, but the comment sections are always full of low-tier thinking that just push whatever narrative is currently in the Overton window. What I find distressing is how people remark that a telecom and advertising gia…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The job doesn’t pay well. I think this is an outdated belief. Many officers earn 6 figure salaries in the US.
A quick google, the top three results said average was 50k-60k. One result said the top 10% make low 6 figures. I doubt the majority of officers in those lines are top 10%, almost by simple math.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What it means it allows people to visit without discrimination on basis of legally protected classes like gender and race No, the "public square" designation specifically allows people to do things like come to the mall and set up political protests and whatnot. It's not about _access_ to the mall; it's about speech protections. Is uploading videos more akin to setting up a store at the mall, or more akin to standi…
One flaw in the analogy is that physical space is limited and difficult for a person to move around in. The digital space is effectively infinite, and switching is as easy as typing in a new url (compared to the physical challenge of moving to another state/region).
That said, I'm not quite sure I understand your point. A speaker in physical space can pretty easily take their speech elsewhere; most obviously to the nearest public street corner. So moving away from a private venue typically does not require anything nearly as drastic as "moving to another state/region".
I'd really like to understand your point and how it applies to both the mall and youtube situations, though, and would appreciate you explaining it if you have the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be willing to say Islamic extremism is worse than white supremacy.
One difference is that radical Islam basically just wants you to convert. White supremacy doesn't really present that option.
Then what do you call actual radical islam that preaches death to all infidels, women honor killings and unending war-on-the-west, among other equally grotesque actions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An increase in censorship is very frequently good. Consider a discussion forum that never banned any users or removed any spam. It quickly becomes very difficult to have a meaningful discussion when a third of the posts are "CHEEP ROLE X bUY NOW" and another third are racial hatred.
Except this is censorship based on political ideologies