621–630 of 903 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a 2 day span I saw George Soros and Tucker Carlson get hit by Community Notes. Gave me some hope that Elon is serious.
Musk has criticised Community Notes a few times for calling him out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Israeli intelligence is likely spending virtually no resources at all on influencing narratives. And if they are, they are failing spectacularly. More likely, the ministry of the exterior, the IDF spokesperson office, and civilian operations are trying to influence narratives. From what I can tell these other efforts are not doing so well either.
I think you are wrong on both parts. Cognitive / Narrative warfare has become part of standard doctrine for most major militaries. Earlier discussion about "corporate" spin offs from the intelligence sector. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34803779 Looking how many countries backed the current Israeli government for how long despite targeting the civilian population, as well as stuff like OP on most major platfo…
I would not say any governments other than the US government "back" the Israeli government. The most the Israelis get is a cold neutrality, and an occasional abstention instead of yea vote in the many UN general assembly votes against Israel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like most arguments in controversial topics, there are good versions of the argument and bad ones. It behooves everyone not to use the bad arguments to outright dismiss the good ones.
I agree with your point, however in this case i think it's important to pinpoint the hypocrisy of some people. You can't blame israel for oct 7, ask them to stop their ongoing operations in gaza, not call for the release of hostages, not say a word about the women raped by hamas and gaza civilians, AND pretend to "just want to spare the civilians population". Those people are in practice siding for the hamas, even if…
At the actual substance level, I also don’t think it’s fair or honest to take “silence” on a topic as evidence of support for it.
In this particular case, I would bet fewer than 0.00001% of the people you’re arguing with are actually okay with (or supportive of) keeping hostages in Hamas’ custody or raping people. You’re battling a cartoon villain that you drew yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> would probably take generations for sentiment to change It will likely take forever unless steps are taken to initiate a peace process.
Honestly I'm not sure how we can start a peace process after the terrorist atrocities that were committed? At this point I think the best is to just evacuate all Palestinians to the rest of the Arab countries as refugees and then just leave the contested territory as unoccupied and "dmz" like for both sides. And honestly where tf is the UN in all of this?
Israel somehow managed to convince other arab states and the US to make peace after the Lavon Affair and USS Liberty incidents, I'm sure they can manage to find some equivalent forgiveness in their hearts this time around :)
> At this point I think the best is to just evacuate all Palestinians to the rest of the Arab countries as refugees and then just leave the contested territory as unoccupied and "dmz" like for both sides.
Logistically far more israelis have dual citizenship elsewhere than Palestnians, so perhaps they should leave instead?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
removal of content is really like 10% of the cases. the most worrisome type of suppression of speech is what they call "shadow banning" which is really "reach limiting". to the extent people now refrain from using the word "Palestine" to avoid metas algirithms. I experienced this myself. We have a draft law in parliament concerning boyocott of israel. I posted a status about the law (notice it's unrelated to war or a…
From my first hand experience designing these algorithms at Meta and running experiments, and listening to feedback from accounts, I would guess that you are not getting reach because your followers do not interact with what you post. In almost every case people call "shadow ban", the cause was occasionally an actual bug (code doing something undesired and unexpected) or far more often people posting bad content. The…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"peacefully" House to house, Arab mobs went, bursting into every room looking for hiding Jews. Religious books and scrolls were burned or torn to shreds. The defenseless Jews were variously beheaded, castrated, their breasts and fingers sliced off, and in some cases their eyes plucked from their sockets. Infant or adult, man or woman—it mattered not. https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/134601
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with topics bans is that you can sabotage topics you don't like to silence them. E.g. Rust evangelicals could have been silenced quite easely by flame baiting their posts.
Some people really don't need a whole lot of baiting; for example there's a top-level comment that reads (entire comment): "'peaceful support of Palestine'", without condemning Hamas is still pro-Hamas action in this case." Never mind the stuff that's just outright beyond the pale. So we can start with that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why "From the river to the see" would be hateful in isolation. Certainly some people who say it may have hateful thoughts in their minds, but wishing for palestinian land where Israel is now is not hateful in itself.
Don't you really understand why it's an hateful speech when you wish my country stop to exists?
I wish for a future where there is peace and love, with no violence, from the river to the sea. I wish for a future where all people, from the river to the sea, have full human rights under the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I wish for a future where all people, from the river to the sea, are enthusiastic users of GNU/Linux and the worst conflicts are debates over text editors.
If someone uses "from the river to the sea" in a sentence where they call for genocide, then what would make that sentence wrong is the verb phrase calling for genocide.
Interestingly if you read the actual report from HRW, it sounds like most of the material they are referring too was legitimately taken down because it supported violence, according to Meta's policies. For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many, so it was taken down. In other cases the content praised attacks by Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organization by the US go…
Looking at the actual report, I really disagree with your assessment. It sounds like there's a bunch of nonsense in there where Meta is _not_ living up to its own policies, and is flagging stuff disingenuously. > Human Rights Watch also found repeated inaccurate application of the “adult nudity and sexual activity” policy for content related to Palestine. In every one of the cases, we reviewed where this policy was i…
One day, there will be a bigish war, and comms between the sides will be cut off, either by law, or all comms links severed. At that point, every global business will have to figure out how to split their business in two, their database in two, their server infrastructure in two, etc. and have both halves work. I suspect that few businesses have prepared for such an eventuality, and I suspect severe disruption can be…
> At that point, every global business will have to figure out how to split their business in two, their database in two, their server infrastructure in two, etc. and have both halves work. Or give up serving one side. Probably the one the executives of the company don't live in. Like how many companies stopped operating in Russia after their war in Ukraine got into high gear.
For example, Mcdonalds is now operated as Vkusno i tochka [1], and has awfully similar menu and branding to Mcdonalds.