461–470 of 473 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The current federal government of France? Of the EU? The article is not about the USA.
The FBI is the primary party appearing to be in this investigation, and to the best of my knowledge are both of the US (govt), and are federal. (I'm not a US person so please correct me if I'm wrong.)
[flagged]
We've banned this account for engaging in political battle and ignoring an earlier appeal to stop. Please stop registering new accounts to break the guidelines with. It becomes more obvious the more you do it. The number of comments containing the word "America" alone is a pattern that has no place here. And no it's nothing to do with the site or its moderators being American; the moderators aren't American and we do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually I think that articles very opening premis is exactly as obviously false as they say the original articles premis is. In other words for example they have not shown that the purpose of a cancer hospital is not in fact to cure 2/3 of cancers. They say it's obviously absurd but that's just a bald assertion with no backing meat. It can absolutely be argued that the hospital is doing exactly what it's intended to…
Having lived in the U.S. for a while, it's apparent the purpose of a hospital is "provide big salaries to top administrators and executives whilst providing enough health care that they can get away with it".
POSIWID is about finding a single "purpose" and defining that as the apex reason for a system (usually to manipulate).
I'm not sure how we have more balanced discussions.
reductionism: squashing a many-layered phenomenon into a single tidy cause
framing: choosing one angle of a story and strawmanning or deflecting.
false dichotomy: where every shade of gray is lost.
single-axis narratives: narrative manipulation where you steer the public to think along just one line (whatever works — economic, moral, tribal).It looks like WAAD has posted a response to this situation: https://webabusedefense.com/presse/Communiquer_presse_Aff-Ad... [pdf]
Scroll down in the PDF for an English translation. "The fight against child sexual abuse material is not negotiable. It cannot be relativized. It cannot be turned against those who fight it." This sort of moral certainty won't help anyone.
It's wild how much stuff nowadays is people/bad actors just doing things and expecting nobody to call them out. Like, the whole patent troll "industry" is just abusing the law, hoping people don't stop them. Maybe folks should start calling eachother out?
https://www.accessibility.works/blog/ada-lawsuit-trends-stat... [1]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The owner of the KiwiFarms goes into detail how the attack against his site works and where the residential IPs are from: "The bot spammer - Started his attack by simply DDoS attacking the forum. - Uses thousands of real email addresses from real providers like gmail, outlook, and hotmail. - Uses tens of thousands of VPN IPs. - He also uses tens of thousands of IPs from "Residential Private Networks", which are "free…
this sort of stuff happened on reddit too but by a different moderator and his goons https://www.markdownpaste.com/document/bardfinn-method
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I downvoted it because it's commonly said by people who do bad things, as a red herring. "People from your subreddit keep killing people" "Well at least we're not infected by the woke mind virus"/"You can't accuse us of that just because we don't agree with the hivemind"/etc. It's no different from "but her emails" etc.
If there was one thing I could make people understand: Even though bad people are saying it, doesn't mean it isn't true. Social media false flag tactics happen. People from all over all sorts of political spectrums tell the same story. The sites tell the same story. If you decide to blindly dismiss claims of abuse because you don't like the ones claiming to be abused, you create a comfy little space for abuse to happ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the same technique that people on Reddit use to take down subreddits that don't agree with the carefully curated "hive mind".
I don’t know why you are downvoted, this is absolutely what happened semi-frequently until Reddit was finally forced to crack down on it. The same thing happened on Twitter/X for a while where bots would mass reply to targeted users with gore and CSAM.
What subreddits got banned because of that?
>The same thing happened on Twitter/X for a while where bots would mass reply to targeted users with gore and CSAM.
Did any of those targeted users get banned for this or was it just a form of harassment?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t know why you are downvoted, this is absolutely what happened semi-frequently until Reddit was finally forced to crack down on it. The same thing happened on Twitter/X for a while where bots would mass reply to targeted users with gore and CSAM.
Because even though it definitely happened, it's one of those things you cannot prove and that don't really get recorded anywhere. It also doesn't help that there is not even a time reference here. I want to say somewhere around 2018? Maybe earlier? Gamergate era? CTR? There are pieces of internet history which are a "either you were there or you weren't" kind of deal. Like how the implementation of image posts in Re…
How do you know that it definitely happened?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? The issue with the internet is that it's now designed to be an addictive rectangle in your pocket.
Once again, if you didn't read carefuly the comment which you're replying to - do you sincerely believe the goal of this crackdown on the Internet is sparing you of this horrible addiction you, an ostensibly grown up person, can't overcome yourself, and make you free from this rectangle in your pocket? So that you are not required to use it to produce your digital ID, to be able to access civil services, to buy thing…
My entire comment was about simply spending LESS time on the internet (while growing up in the 90s). If you never had a problem with it, good for you. Lots of people do. Digital Id's are a huge leap from my comment and have nothing to do with anything im talking about. Or do you usually jump down the throats of people who say things which in some possible, tangental way could offend you?
And in any case, I already know parents my age who aren't giving their kids computers and phones till they're adults, and I think this will eventually become, roughly, the new normal. They didn't need to be "forced," by "people like me," they just drew from their own experience and made a decision.
"Falsely suggest," well I was clearly meaning "your" in the general sense, not in your specific case, but thanks for being specific! I too have no smartphone...but I'd guess that 95% of people do! And they keep it in their pocket, all the time, because they "need it!"
Finally...I never said anything about what adults should do. I mentioned my own experience as a kid. We protect kids from lots of stuff.