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

Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

techtransparencyproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 969 posts

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#651

Post by wavefunction »

wdn wrote: post #642
Railsify wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Members of Congress will use this event as a catalyst for fundraising, soon after the election they will draft legislation that threatens to control and/or regulate the tech giants. Shortly after that the lobbyists representing Big Tech get wind of this new legislation on the horizon and donations will flow like a river to the PACs and re-election campaigns, then the proposed legislation will be shelved.

If you see how much wealth the politicians, especially the one holding important position, you see why they want the job for a merely $200,000 a year. Clinton and Obama got very wealth after their presidency. Pelosi wealth goes up many fold for becoming speaker of the house. Not only their wealth go up, everyone around them got a lot wealthier too.

Why are you not mentioning any Republicans?

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#652

Post by eganist »

idrios wrote: post #578
eganist wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you expand the definition of terrorism to such an absurd degree (anybody who may need grief counseling) you're diluting actual terrorism. > The Pulse nightclub is what real terrorism looks like. And the Christchurch shootings. And 9/11. > The storming of the capitol was not at all similar. Interesting. What makes 9/11 a terror attack that doesn't similarly make the Capitol Insurrection one? Because they both lef…

I'd say intent to kill is what makes them terrorists. What makes this muddied is the varying degrees of intent from all the people who stormed the capital. Some saw it as a chance to kill people. Others just went to protest -- not really unreasonable since we've been having protests nonstop for like a year. Calling both kinds of people terrorists feels sort of like calling the passengers of the 9/11 flights terrorist…

> I'd say intent to kill is what makes them terrorists. What makes this muddied is the varying degrees of intent from all the people who stormed the capital. Some saw it as a chance to kill people. Others just went to protest -- not really unreasonable since we've been having protests nonstop for like a year.

> Calling both kinds of people terrorists feels sort of like calling the passengers of the 9/11 flights terrorists too

I'm straining my neck to understand how you equated the litany of protesters who broke into the Capitol building (excluding the terrorists who came equipped with pipe bombs, tactical gear for hostage-taking, and who planned the insurrection for months) with innocent bystanders on doomed flights on 9/11.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#653

Post by alsetmusic »

wavefunction wrote: post #651
wdn wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you see how much wealth the politicians, especially the one holding important position, you see why they want the job for a merely $200,000 a year. Clinton and Obama got very wealth after their presidency. Pelosi wealth goes up many fold for becoming speaker of the house. Not only their wealth go up, everyone around them got a lot wealthier too.

Why are you not mentioning any Republicans?

> Why are you not mentioning any Republicans?

That’s a good point. It’s not like Trump’s holdings weren’t fed a line of patrons while he was in office. Seems odd to leave out the most prominent and recent example.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#654

Post by aerosmile »

filoeleven wrote: post #613
caseysoftware wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternative take: Maybe DC Police and others learned some restraint in the ~6 months in between and tried to avoid escalating the situation in the earliest moments. Even if it was misplaced, isn't that a better opening mindset?

That’s a fair take concerning the Capitol police (who are a separate force from DC police, just FYI). But even the calls to have the National Guard on standby, given new intel 1 or 2 days before the event that it was going to be bigger than expected, were denied before the event. Then when things began to escalate, calls for National Guard assistance were denied by the Pentagon for at least a full hour. In a rapidly-…

You’re onto something there. But it’s more a means to a political end, as opposed to another data point of systemic racism. Both are awful, but not entirely correlated in this instance.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#655

Post by CivBase »

standardUser wrote: post #72
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure public support for removing Facebook from app stores wouldn't be too different than Parler. If we are principled people, and FB is failing to moderate, then any reasonable person who supported Parler's removal would support Facebook's. What would be different between the two decisions is the sheer magnitude of money on the line, in the case of Facebook's removal -- in capital markets, in employment, etc.

"If we are principled people, and FB is failing to moderate, then any reasonable person who supported Parler's removal would support Facebook's." Is Facebook failing to moderate, or failing at moderation? If the standard is perfect moderation, there is no social media. If the standard is a good faith efforts at moderation, Facebook should be tolerated (if not compelled to do better) and Parler should be punished (unl…

People keep saying Parler intentionally did not moderate. But every actual source I've seen says that they were trying to moderate but lacked the manpower to do so because the platform grew too big too fast.

I'd be interested if anyone can share anything indicating a refusal to moderate.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#656

Post by Izkata »

alsetmusic wrote: post #653
wavefunction wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you not mentioning any Republicans?

> Why are you not mentioning any Republicans? That’s a good point. It’s not like Trump’s holdings weren’t fed a line of patrons while he was in office. Seems odd to leave out the most prominent and recent example.

Trump didn't make money off of the presidency, if anything he spent (2016-2017) or lost (2020) wealth: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/forbes-400-donald-tr...

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#658

Post by alsetmusic »

downandout wrote: post #489
asdfk-12 wrote: post #438

Half of a billion in lobbying dollars well spent by FAANG[1] - business as usual continues for facebook despite their decreasing popularity and repeated scandal and failure, from Cambridge Analytica to Libra. Those in my immediate circle have mothballed or closed their accounts, although Instagram seems to have more holding power. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ajdellinger/2019/04/30/how-the-...

What’s interesting about this to me is that Facebook, where most of the planning took place, is still online, while Parler has been, for all intents and purposes, killed. I wonder why AANG isn’t colluding to kill F like they did with Parler - by tomorrow morning - now that this has come to light. It seems only fair given that we now have an established standard of user behavior that dictates whether or not companies…

This reminds me of a discussion with a parent who was distressed about Parler being deplatformed. She was never on it, but her choices of news media told her this was “bad”.

I argued that threats of violence were viable on the platform. She didn’t seem to believe me. I later sent screenshots of violent rhetoric that I found with a quick web search. No response.

There are people who refuse the validity of reality right up until they can’t anymore. Then silence.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#659

Post by macg333 »

Izkata wrote: post #656
alsetmusic wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you not mentioning any Republicans? That’s a good point. It’s not like Trump’s holdings weren’t fed a line of patrons while he was in office. Seems odd to leave out the most prominent and recent example.

Trump didn't make money off of the presidency, if anything he spent (2016-2017) or lost (2020) wealth: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/forbes-400-donald-tr...

Just because he didn't make money because he's a failure at business and his particular ventures were negatively affected by the coronavirus (the explanation given in your article) completely ignores that he funneled a substantial amount of tax payer dollars into his private ventures by spending so much time there with his security detail.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#660

Post by bernulli »

Izkata wrote: post #656
alsetmusic wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you not mentioning any Republicans? That’s a good point. It’s not like Trump’s holdings weren’t fed a line of patrons while he was in office. Seems odd to leave out the most prominent and recent example.

Trump didn't make money off of the presidency, if anything he spent (2016-2017) or lost (2020) wealth: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/forbes-400-donald-tr...

That’s not what the article says at all. It says that his hotel businesses went south due to COVID. That’s orthogonal to the myriad ways he extracted money from being a president.
Post reply on HN