Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

alqst.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 512 posts

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#491

Post by FloorEgg »

slg wrote: post #443
FloorEgg wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A balance between democracy, free speech and capitalism are worth fighting for, protecting, and are an engine for prosperity. They aren't any less sustainable than life itself or any other framework societies have run on. I am all for continuous improvement, but to throw any of those three pillars out seems like a terrible idea, and only an extremely well laid argument could convince me otherwise. I have never seen s…

Let me be as straightforward as I can be. You are debating a straw man that arose out of you inserting your own adverb into my first comment. You saw "unrestricted" as "completely unrestricted" rather than the "relatively unrestricted" I intended. That intention should have been clear because I was talking in a thread about Meta so my comments can be assumed to be about the systems in which Meta operates. Everyone el…

Shame on me for assuming the words you wrote were the words you meant.

I assumed that by "unrestricted capitalism" you meant laissez faire, or in alignment with how it's defined in textbooks, Google, or any modern LLM model, etc...

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#492

Post by za3faran »

za3faran wrote: post #489
bongoman42 wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Islamic system literally permits slavery, including sexual slavery. It is far worse than capitalism any day.

The slavery it permits (yet heavily restricts) is different than the one in your head that europeans and americans engaged in, so that's a straw man. Sex slavery is not permitted. When you read history, you would see that many Mawali were scholars, and you can read about the Mamluki empire. This was never seen anywhere in human history. As discussed elsewhere in this thread, the slavery that you're thinking of is sti…

> you would see that many Mawali were scholars

Correction, scholars were Mawali

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#493

Post by cess11 »

pear01 wrote: post #475
cess11 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name some then. What "agency"? Participation in US elections is junk level, politicians openly and routinely 'redistrict' and suppress voting, and the median US citizen is revulsed by the prospect of egalitarian organising. The current US president is an Idi Amin style autocrat, and the "electorate" is responding by lulling around in the streets with one hand occupied by a live streaming spy device and then getting b…

Are you aware that the current US president won the popular vote? What redistricting and voter suppression came into play in that case? I'm supposed to conclude from this election that the electorate didn't support the current president? Your post is really unimpressive. You care about these things yet you need me to provide you the name of progressive politicians? You want to take agency away because of redistrictin…

At best, just a little more than half the electorate voted in that election so I'm not sure what you mean by "popular vote".

For an electorate to have agency it has to be informed, egalitarian and politically organised. None of this holds for the notable usian elections. There are local exceptions of course, but on average usians do not organise politically and loathe those that try. This is why "activist" is an insult in the US and union busting widely tolerated. It is also why the US does not have political parties in the sense other countries have them, i.e. groups of people self organising and making collective decisions.

In the US, elections are commonly bought. Variations on this practice is also exported, and has been an issue for decades, including in Europe where the US has used a little of everything from mafia mediated terrorism to high tech psyops to get their way.

As for the parliamentary practices of the US, issues brought up in those contexts are often treated in a way that is absolutely inscrutable to most voters and in a way more reminiscent of televised game shows than actual democratic deliberation. Recently there was a proposal made but the initial sponsors did a miscount so it actually had a chance to pass, so they suddenly turned around and voted against it. Deceptions like that seem to be everywhere in usian politics.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#494

Post by platevoltage »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #486
platevoltage wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Anarchism is an extension of nature, and a better analogy would be blaming an engine for only Rolls Royces having seatbelts.

Capitalism is fully compatible with anarchism. (Though certainly it functions better under a system where your neighbor can't just kill you and take your stuff.)

Which system prevents your neighbor from killing you and taking your stuff?

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#495

Post by FloorEgg »

platevoltage wrote: post #426
FloorEgg wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism is an extension of nature. Nature can be cruel, but it's still nature. Blaming capitalism for what's happening in America is like blaming an engine for a car not having seatbelts.

No. Anarchism is an extension of nature, and a better analogy would be blaming an engine for only Rolls Royces having seatbelts.

I don't understand your intended distinction with the rolls royces analogy. Would you expand?

Also, I may not have as robust understanding of anarchism... Does anarchism incorporate game theory and account for tensions between competition and cooperation?

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#496

Post by platevoltage »

za3faran wrote: post #458
platevoltage wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither does Christianity, but you really wouldn't really know that by observing the practices of so called Christian Nations™

The west is practically fully secular, and they have relegated religion to individualistic practice, so to your point, there aren't any "christian nations". This is on purpose so those in power are able to do whatever they want. They're trying to do the same with Islam, enormous amounts of money are being spent, but Islam has the advantage of an extremely strict and rigorous scholarly heritage and preservation, thank…

I can't tell if you're pro or anti secular government.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#497

Post by Ajedi32 »

platevoltage wrote: post #494
Ajedi32 wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism is fully compatible with anarchism. (Though certainly it functions better under a system where your neighbor can't just kill you and take your stuff.)

Which system prevents your neighbor from killing you and taking your stuff?

Basically any system other than anarchy? In every civilized country I know of if your neighbor kills you then afterwards they'll be on the run from the law, not selling your house on Facebook marketplace the next day.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#498

Post by buellerbueller »

latexr wrote: post #325
buellerbueller wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The offline world is where the people are. Social is where the accounts are, many of which have a nonhuman substrate with the goal of coercing alignment out of you.

I don’t understand the point of the pedantry. Obviously I was talking about people you know personally that you know are not bots, and obviously I prefer and advocate for connecting with those you interact with offline. I don’t see how you can read my comment in good faith and take anything else from it.

It's quite simple: on socials, you don't get just what you want. You get what the algo wants you to want. "Social is where the people are" is naive and polyanna.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#499

Post by mnau »

slg wrote: post #488
mnau wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was basically what Ford vs Dodge was about. Ford lost and had to change direction. If C-suite does not operate in that direction, they can sue and will win. There is no point in going in different direction, courts already quite clearly said you will lose. > My ambition is to employ still more men, to spread the benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible number, to help them build up their lives…

>If C-suite does not operate in that direction, they can sue and will win. There is no point in going in different direction, courts already quite clearly said you will lose. If this is true, it should be easy to point to some examples from the last hundred years. Because that Wikipedia article you linked makes it very clear that the conclusion you're drawing is highly debated. The disagreement is important enough to…

It faces criticism, but still held true. "sacrificing profit for moral reasons" is not acting in best interest of shareholders. That doesn't mean maximizing value at all times btw, e.g. assessing potential reputational damage and sacrificing some profit by not doing something can be acting in best interest of shareholders (or not, depending on circumstances).

Target is embroiled in one of such lawsuits over ESG mandates. https://www.dandodiary.com/2023/08/articles/esg/target-hit-w...

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#500

Post by platevoltage »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #497
platevoltage wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which system prevents your neighbor from killing you and taking your stuff?

Basically any system other than anarchy? In every civilized country I know of if your neighbor kills you then afterwards they'll be on the run from the law, not selling your house on Facebook marketplace the next day.

Anarchism does not mean that no rules or consequences exist in a society.
Post reply on HN