Live data from Hacker News

Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

buzzfeednews.com

951–960 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#951

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moving the discourse further away from the light won't help cure the divide in this country. We need more discussion, not less. We need to get both sides talking to each other not to themselves about each other.

Do we? Most discussions in comment sections between people of different persuasions tend to be toxic and abusive these days. when moderators attempt to impose standards of civility there's a chorus of complaints about 'censorship'. There have to be limits to patience with bad-faith dialog, otherwise you're just enabling trolls and abusive people.

You and I probably have different political views and yet we are able to remain civil.

Everyone in my neighborhood, every single neighbor, speaks different languages, has different cultural origins and most are of different races. We don't support the same candidates or policy positions but we do all support and look out for each other.

I guess my point is, politeness even when there are significant disagreements is possible. We need to analyze the communications that do and don't work, find the similarities and patterns and encourage the beneficial ones while discouraging the negative ones.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#952
post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet if we look at it objectively, the right is clearly overrepresnted in our political system. Republicans lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. In the next presidential election there will be many eligible voters who weren't even born last time they won. The Senate gives a seven point advantage to Republicans. So please, explain to me where you get this idea that the right is "tre…

> And yet if we look at it objectively, the right is clearly overrepresnted in our political system. That isn't nearly as clear as it seems, because of the incentives the electoral college creates. Republicans could pick up a lot more votes in places like California or New York if they had any reason to try, but none of those votes help them if they can't flip the state. Spending resources campaigning in California s…

Thanks for your reply. Let me start by saying that I agree the numbers would look completely different if it weren't for the Electoral College. That is because the Republican platform has consistently failed to win over a majority of Americans: absent the EC, the Republican Party would have to recalibrate its platform in order to remain competitive. This feedback mechanism is essential to a functioning democracy, and it's currently broken, because Republicans still have a decent shot at winning nationally thanks to the bias in the EC.

With respect to your argument that the EC actually overrepresents swing states, you may be correct. However, the EC bias clearly favors Republicans over Democrats. In 2020, that bias was 3.9% in favor of Republicans, although it varies from election to election[0]. When the size of the bias exceeds the margin of victory for the winner of the popular vote, the popular vote loser takes the EC, as in 2016.

Furthermore, you didn't actually address the most antidemocratic institution of all: the Senate. The Senate is heavily biased towards small states; California (pop 39m) and Wyoming (pop still not control the Senate.

Finally, I'm sure that you can end up with a situation wherein conservatives "feel" underrepresented; my whole point is that they objectively are not, so this whole persecution complex evinced by some is completely ridiculous. People are entitled to their feelings; they should also be willing to look at facts and adjust their reactions accordingly.

[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-11-22/republ...

[1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senates-rural-skew-...

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#953
post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet if we look at it objectively, the right is clearly overrepresnted in our political system. Republicans lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. In the next presidential election there will be many eligible voters who weren't even born last time they won. The Senate gives a seven point advantage to Republicans. So please, explain to me where you get this idea that the right is "tre…

7 of the last 8 elections. And yet they are the ones “out of touch”

Thanks for the correction!

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#954
post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that is what reddit, twitter and Hacker News reinforce constantly. It's either because it's true, or because the other side has been repeatedly discouraged from adding their two cents in those communities. I've been seeing the world through this lens for so long that I can't tell. I find it somewhat implausible that half the population is dumb, racist and all those other labels. It seems much more likely that I…

Why does the left have to censor the right? Surely they should be able to beat the right with logical and reasoned arguments? Censorship has always struck me as a tool that a side which isn't confident in its arguments uses.

The woke don't believe in debate[0].

They feel that the deck is rigged against them, debating reinforces the current oppressive system, that all disagreement is illegitimate, and that anyone with power who isn't dismantling the current system is evil.

[0] https://newdiscourses.com/2020/07/woke-wont-debate-you-heres...

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#955
post #831
post #827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I find it somewhat implausible that half the population is dumb, racist and all those other labels. " No - they aren't. The answer is very easy: They believe Donald Trump . Trump has credibility in their minds, and when he repeats the lie, over and over - that 'the election was stolen' - they believe it. On election night - he literally came out and said 'If you count the fake votes, Biden won' - declaring mass frau…

The thing I find interesting, seeing distant relations on Facebook talk about this, is that they tend to hold seemingly mutually-contradictory views and spout them in a span of minutes. e.g. "I was there, and it was antifa dressed as Trump supporters that broke into the Capitol. We believe in law and order and would never do anything like this ..." followed by statements saying that they are going to take over buildi…

People need to think intelligently and everything requires context.

There are 1000 random people at an event, there's no doubt that there were a few ANTIFA interlopers there, but that doesn't really mean anything.

A single cop 'opening a gate' doesn't mean much either.

Neither does the Republican guy who tried to prove electoral fraud by himself, committing a single act of voter fraud.

Most of the mainstream media is highly credible. Biased - but credible.

The fact that a few individuals maybe planned on doing something 'really crazy' doesn't actually mean there's a larger movement there either.

That's why we depend on the press to try to get a generally factual and broad view of the situation. Watching a mix of CNN, PBS, Fox, NBC etc. will give most people a rounded purview of the situation, even if there is a lot of bias.

Watching Fox since the election has been a very interesting experience because they cannot support Trump's false claims they have to have 'integrity'. But what some of them are doing (Ted Cruze as well) is saying 'people feel the election was stolen and they have a right to be heard' - basically they've taken the line of sympathizing with people who are angry, though they full well know the anger is based on absolute falsehood. Fox has been losing viewers to OAN where they take a 'hardcore Pro-Trump' position no matter the facts, which is what many want to hear.

On many Fox articles, the comments are split 50/50 with many hating on Trump, many supporting him. OAN and Breibart however, it's full on Trump. The language is scary, many calling for violence against Pence etc. as a 'traitor' for literally not committing Sedition and overturning the election on behalf of Trump.

So 'the truth' is going to be a real problem for the next little while.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#956
post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These groups became violent while still enfranchised. And they're still enfranchised: they can still vote, and still post to the internet, and still talk to people outside. They simply no longer get a free internet loud speaker to envangelize to others.

We've spent a couple years now (right?) tacitly approving rioting as an acceptable response to feeling disenfranchised. Now we're surprised when the same medicine gets used by others. For either side, I'm not sure it's proper minimize their complaints. If the BLM crowd says they have a serious problem with police violence, the best reaction is, "what can we do to restore confidence?" Similarly, when 40% of the countr…

While I agree that all protests and riots are a response to feeling disenfranchised or angry about a situation, it’s important to think of the cause in each case.

For BLM protests, the cause is partly real police violence that lots of people have experienced. Lots of people have this firsthand, negative experience with the police, and are frustrated that they cannot feel safe in the hands of people meant to protect them.

For the voter fraud protests, the cause is a propaganda and disinformation campaign. For months and even years, Trump has been saying that things are stollen from him, that the election would be stolen from him, etc. He really incensed this narrative of voter fraud with a lot of lies. The cause is not people’s firsthand experience of voter fraud: republicans were not turned away from the polls nor were their votes discarded. It’s that they were told by Trump and other republicans that if they loose elections, then it must be fraud.

The response, then, is totally different. In the one case, addressing the cause means to reform the police. In the other case, addressing the cause means... what? I would say it is addressing the propaganda campaign. This is what news orgs and social media sites have tried to do.

No matter how secure this election was, or how many policies got implemented, the election fraud claim would persist because the cause is propaganda, not evidence. People (even republicans) who know way more elections than I do say that this election was one of the most secure ever. The few instances of fraud that occur — and always occur in events of this scale — are hardly proof of a sinister campaign.

While I’ll agree to make voting as secure as possible (I’d support voter ID if it didn’t take 5 hours at the DMV just to be eligible to vote), that’s not really the narrative voter fraud protests are about. That’s why we push back when people try to say that the election was fraudulent: these folks are really trying to say that they should have won. They are not (primarily) trying to say that we should fix the handful of fraud instances that happened even though it wouldn’t change the result.

If I said “you’re right to be angry here,” I would be heard as saying, “you actually should have won.” Therefore, I must be honest and say “you’re wrong to be angry about this. The evidence of fraud will not address your anger about this loss.”

And let me be clear: I support trump folks right to protest because of their anger over loosing. But I cannot agree that it ought to be addressed as they say it should be.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#957
post #11

Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…

I'm angry for them. And these people own 70% of guns in the US. We will get what we deserve.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#958
post #234
post #11

Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…

> Their legal cases are rejected. Not-an-American here. When their cases seek to disenfranchise large swathes of voters based on zero evidence, what’s the alternative?

It wasn’t “zero evidence.” Hundreds of signed affidavits are by definition, evidence. If the evidence rises to a high enough standard, that’s a question for the courts, however, “zero” evidence is simply not true.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#959
post #11

Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…

Racism, sexism, belief in science are things that are not going to be negotiated on. The other side are literal intolerant fascists and should be silenced. Let’s the chips fall where they may, even if that’s some sort of civil conflict.

“Belief in science?”

Then why are California schools still closed? The left is just as guilty are the right in not following science.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#960

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half of the US fought for the right to own other humans as property. You are very, very sheltered if you think large numbers of people aren't capable of holding terrible ideas and performing horrific acts.

You are very, very sheltered to believe this situation is even close to what happened in the civil war.

I suggest we call it what it was and say the "slavery war" instead of the "civil war" (civil war is generic and even the American Revolution was a civil war)
Post reply on HN