Facebook should really come down from their high horses and let legal entities decide of stuff like this. They're a utility. (not saying that in a bad way, becoming a utility is the ultimate startup achievement)
Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
61–70 of 164 posts
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
She was not. AASK never had any authority over the military. At all. Military was legally above elected government before the coup, controls all the courts, legally guaranteed 25% of the legislature, wrote the constitution, and the comander-in-chief was never appointed by elected government. Military never answered to AASK or took orders from her or the president. At best, you could call AASK an apologist for militar…
>At best, you could call AASK an apologist for military. Ah yes, then shes definitely not responsible...irony off. >>she took the podium on Wednesday at the United Nations’ highest court to defend her homeland against accusations of genocide, arguing that there had been no orchestrated campaign of persecution. >>Instead, she insisted that what foreign observers have called an organized, years-long campaign of atrocit…
I don’t feel like arguing with people who don’t really know anything about Burma or her situation.
She had no involvement in the military’s decisions in Rakhine state. Yes, she defended the perpetrators at ICJ, either as part of a political strategy of reconciliation with military, or because she just felt like defending them because she secretly likes what happened. You guess which explanation is more likely.
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#63I doubt this exonerates Mark Zuckerberg.
It's a man who proposed Xi Jinping to name his firstborn.
Him attacking some minor military junta is barely symbolic.
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
She was not. AASK never had any authority over the military. At all. Military was legally above elected government before the coup, controls all the courts, legally guaranteed 25% of the legislature, wrote the constitution, and the comander-in-chief was never appointed by elected government. Military never answered to AASK or took orders from her or the president. At best, you could call AASK an apologist for militar…
If military never answered to her or took orders, control all the courts like you said, what is the point of the coup?
We can only speculate.
There are different factions in the military, one of which was the architect of Burma’s democratic transition, the other which opposes the transition (who current dictator/CIC is part of).
The military miscalculated, as they didn’t intend for ASSK or NLD to outsmart them in constitution of their own design. Military had expected to win enough seats with their proxy party + military appointed seats to prevent NLD choosing a president. But NLD won enough seats to choose president, and their chosen president gets to appoint commander-in -chief (military must confirm). Never before had a president appointed the CIC. The military saw this has a threat to their power. They do not want to be under any civilian control. And Min Aung Hlaing (current dictator) is also probably afraid of genocide charges if he is no longer in power.
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this is a realistic worldview though. This supposes there will be a facebook competitor. As the decades march on, perhaps there will be, but it might not be till we're long gone. There still isn't a competitor to Google, for example. Parler was a competitor to Twitter, and you saw how that played out. The next competitor is going to have to deal with that quandary.
Duckduckgo is a competitor to Google. Its based on Yandex and Bing, two other competitors to Google. Noone needs Facebook, it serves no valid purpose for the human race. Same with Twitter. We don't need them, and we don't need competition for them. They should go away with no replacement. Source: was Facebook engineer. Listened to Fuckerberg make one too many all-hands speeches about engagement. Resigned several year…
> Duckduckgo is a competitor to Google. Its based on Yandex and Bing, two other competitors to Google.
Interesting. Can you elaborate? Like is DuckDuckGo using some of Yandex’s open source? Or the Bing search API?
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
>At best, you could call AASK an apologist for military. Ah yes, then shes definitely not responsible...irony off. >>she took the podium on Wednesday at the United Nations’ highest court to defend her homeland against accusations of genocide, arguing that there had been no orchestrated campaign of persecution. >>Instead, she insisted that what foreign observers have called an organized, years-long campaign of atrocit…
I don’t feel like arguing with people who don’t really know anything about Burma or her situation. She had no involvement in the military’s decisions in Rakhine state. Yes, she defended the perpetrators at ICJ, either as part of a political strategy of reconciliation with military, or because she just felt like defending them because she secretly likes what happened. You guess which explanation is more likely.
>I don’t feel like arguing with people who don’t really know anything about Burma or her situation.
And i don't feel like arguing with someone who defends a genocide denier, and explains it with "who don’t really know anything about Burma or her situation".
>either as part of a political strategy of reconciliation with military, or because she just felt like defending them because she secretly likes what happened. You guess which explanation is more likely.
Sound like the later one, defending a genocide for "reconciliation with military" is pure evil, and is never a sound strategy.
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#67I'm in favor of Facebook taking down absolutely any page, whether it agrees with my political views or not. Why? Because Facebook's power comes from network effects. The more people, across the political spectrum, find their interests to be blocked on Facebook, the less people will find value in Facebook in general. Over time, this means Facebook is committing suicide. This is the best possible outcome for humanity.…
[deleted]
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#68What about the US military's FB page? Didn't they cause thousands of innocent deaths in Iraq? I'm sure some Americans can somehow justify it, but I doubt the grieving Iraqi's will accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukaradeeb_wedding_party_massa...
I think you are misunderstand the point of Facebook's actions.
The purpose is not to harm or pressure the Burmese military authorities -
Its to virtue signal to left-leaning activists in the USA and other Western Countries.
Technology companies have dug themselves into a hole of censorship and deplatforming, and they have no choice but to keep digging.
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
>At best, you could call AASK an apologist for military. Ah yes, then shes definitely not responsible...irony off. >>she took the podium on Wednesday at the United Nations’ highest court to defend her homeland against accusations of genocide, arguing that there had been no orchestrated campaign of persecution. >>Instead, she insisted that what foreign observers have called an organized, years-long campaign of atrocit…
I don’t feel like arguing with people who don’t really know anything about Burma or her situation. She had no involvement in the military’s decisions in Rakhine state. Yes, she defended the perpetrators at ICJ, either as part of a political strategy of reconciliation with military, or because she just felt like defending them because she secretly likes what happened. You guess which explanation is more likely.
The civilian government is also under investigation. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/anaylsis/2019/11/21/Myanm...
Re: Facebook takes down main page of Myanmar military
#70I try to understand how this decision came to be and I have no idea? A standardised set of rules would surely lead to many many more pages being taking down. And why now and not last week?
Because Myanmar people lobbied for it. The military is shooting its own people, kidnapping them in the middle of the night, and torturing them. Over 10 protestors dead and 50+ injured, as they are using live rounds on protestors. Over 500+ disappeared or kidnapped. Protestors killed include two teenagers shot in the head, one of them a medic. They also shot at ambulance. They’ve threatened to kill doctors. Stole the…
Be assured I condemn violence of all sorts. My question still stands how such decisions are made?