961–970 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AWS laid out the timeline in their letter to Parler: > "Because Parler cannot comply with our terms of service and poses a very real risk to public safety, we plan to suspend Parler’s account effective Sunday, January 10th, at 11:59PM PST." https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johnpaczkowski/amazon-p... According to my watch, it's a few minutes past 17:30 PST.
Any idea who is hosting them now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People should have to take a Civics based test to vote The problem is what grade level? 1st grade: What country do you live in? 3rd grade: Name all 3 branches of government 6th grade: How is a bill made into a law? 9th grade: Who are your elected representatives and what are their positions on issues A, B & C? ... PhD: Compare and contrast Hamilton and Jefferson's viewpoints on the Constitutional convention, bankin…
This is implicit in the continued public education (as a job) requirement of suspending the voting rights; whatever a current public education consists of. Thus they might have to train up to, at least during the initial test, currently, what a high-school civics test final would be. During the time in (comprehensive) public education that would also be a job they are paid a living wage for. I view (non-broken-window…
Maybe that's the level you feel comfortable with? That's great until someone smarter than you comes along and thinks that the test is too easy and too many "uneducated" people are voting. I love history and politics, but I don't know everything and I know that there are tests that can be drafted that I can't pass. Are you willing to be on the outside looking in, willing to be presented with a test so hard you can't pass it and can't vote? Willing to be represented by officials that you can never peacefully vote out of office? How long until a narcissist decides that they're the only one smart enough to vote? That's unfortunately the fate of every country that's fallen into a dictatorship.
I see that you want an educated electorate but voting tests have been tried before and tons of innocent, smart, well-intentioned people get cut off in the process. Democracy is the only form of government we know of where we can meaningfully and non-violently express our collective opinion as a group. When you take a vote away from someone, they're left with a choice between compliance or violence, neither of which are good.
Maybe, the paid public education you mention would still be a good idea, just without the voting rights test.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, 6 months of coordinated riots and the "right" is the problem https://fukkot.com/riots/all/ Oh and Biden won less counties than Hillary, which was already low for her (hence her loss). Biden under performed in every state except for 5 key swing states and even then it was only a "win" because a never before seen amount of mail in ballots were used. Perhaps they were fake, or perhaps people that would never set fo…
I'm sorry you're incapable of seeing that this is factually incorrect. I hope that you're able to reflect on this in the next few years as Donald Trump's legacy will be similar to that of Nixon, if not worse. And deservedly so. I don't believe any further conversation will be in the spirit of Hacker News' rules. I'm sorry your leader tricked so many of you and then immediately threw you all under the bus. At moderati…
There will be no reflection of "Donald Trump's legacy" that is positive for the left. I do not watch CNN or fox news, or get my "news" from twitter. For the last 5 years, I've mostly kept in touch with reality through youtube. There were tons of independent journalists that I followed. Some that were covering the election had paid subscriptions to pollster data and software. They could drill down into county level and precinct level data and it was shocking to see vote totals that exceeded the population of the entire precinct! You could go back historically and see every election 2016,2012, etc and see the turnout rates were always 50-70%. It was these precincts that flipped the entire state from red to blue. I thought surely this would be going into audit and court territory and did not bother to save the data or videos as I figured "all would come into the light".
Then youtube banned all these channels. They were not even republican! They were banned for comparing voter turn out numbers with data they paid money to access! Fast forward to this last week. I'm watching another youtube journalist interviewing people at the Jan 6th protest. She was mostly talking with older people, asking what made them show up, etc. There was music, food, and people just generally hanging out. I go back to work for the rest of the day and ignored the news cycle only to get a notification of her posting another video later in the evening about how she just found out about the siege on the capitol. She was there and knew nothing about until getting back to the hotel! And then the entire left wing media labels the event as terrorists and white supremacists. Her next video the next day was about her now being on a no fly list and couldn't get on a plane. Now her entire channel is deleted and I have no idea what happened to her! All this for interviewing grandmas at a protest!
My entire way of getting news for the last 5 years is now non-existent. And you tell me that I am supposed to "reflect" on this? That somehow because I don't drink everything that CNN makes up means I need to be removed from society? That I should only get my news from one "official" source?
I try to engage with people on the left, and it's always "show me the proof!". I had great proof, and numbers, but the left removed it all and now I have nothing and am told the BLM protests were so much more honorable than the capitol protest when all of the videos on youtube of people organizing through facebook and telegram groups with slogans of "good cops are dead cops" are now also deleted and people act like the protests never happened. We do not have a state run media in america, but it is clear that we have a media run state and every one on the left is the very definition of 'Koristne Budale'. All the way to the point of voting for a man who the KKK applauded in the 60's for his pro segregation policies. Now he is somehow the face of "anti racism" and "defund the police" when in the 90's he pushed for the death penalty for repeat drug offenders.
Why don't you try a thought process? How would you feel if it was herds of trump supporters marching through cities lighting everything on fire for 6 months while everyone talked about how peaceful they where? So you think, "We'll show them come Nov 4th". And on Nov 4th, Biden takes an immediate lead only to loose in the middle of the night because Trump's "mail in ballots just arrived" and there's no need to check signatures. And then it bounces around the courts for nearly two months, none of them speaking on the matter at hand, but instead claiming that somehow it is not the court's problem to solve. So you attend a protest at the capitol only to be labeled as a terrorist because some really fringe people were all the media focused on. You'd be absolutely loosing your mind. If you think it feels bad being on the left, trying being on the right!
Oh and Trump is not my leader. It took him two weeks before he started talking about the numbers I had on the 5th. He in many cases this year has been late to the game. Our only hope is extreme voter reform, but the democrats love a loose ballot. They do not orchestrate fraud, they only make sure the pool stays too muddy to clean.
We are about to have 80 million americans that will never see Biden or the DNC as legit. It will be like fighting over Jefferson Davis all over again.
I hope you reflect deeply. I've been an agnostic, a leftist, a libertarian. Telling me to get enlightened and go back ain't happening.
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” — George Orwell, Animal Farm I understand the moves by Stripe, Twitter, and co. However, I would argue that the long term implications set by this precedent are much worse. When the Snowden story first broke back in 2013, many on HN argued that, hey it's all good, I have nothing to hide, and I trust our President. Three short years later, who took…
> If the leader of the free world can be banned from all social media and co, who are based in the very same nation, and who are monopolies, then what hope is there for the rest of us? 1. "leader of the free world" is an incredibly arrogant statement. 2. He can be banned for the same reason that the rest of us can: inciting violence. I'd argue that having equal rules for everyone (or even _stricter_ ones for politici…
If you ask Trump opposition, they will all say he should go to jail for 1000 years for hundreds of crime that Trump committed.
I'm not close to he situation, but I'd feel much better if a judgement like this actually comes from a trained judge with a proper due process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am aware of that, which is why I expressly stated a related condition of restoring those person's rights as citizens by linking the temporary suspension of those rights to continued education (remediation of the citizen being failed by the state).
You're still failing the civics test, as you don't seem to be aware that the entire point of the poll tests was never to actually test anything, but rather to serve as a pretext to deny people their constitutionally guaranteed voting rights. You can't "fix" this problem by offering remediation measures that would be immediately coopted by exactly the same actors to exactly the same goal. All the continuing education…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In their defense, I agree with you that this is a first time when global internet connectivity + social media + hatespeech cocktail has become poisonous to our societal health. We need to deeply think about all this - allowing peaceful, objective, conservative opinions and policy (such as the Lincoln Project) while condemning hate speech, violence, white supremacy and other racist behavior. "He who fights with monste…
> We need to deeply think about all this - allowing peaceful, objective, conservative opinions and policy (such as the Lincoln Project) while condemning hate speech, violence, white supremacy and other racist behavior. But that’s the problem. Nobody trusts people in Silicon Valley or New York City to decide what those things are. These are people who have internalized ideas like “you can’t be racist against white peo…
But it's easy to provide real examples of conservative speakers who are experiencing no meaningful interference. So, replace The Lincoln Project with The Federalist.
I was on the fence about this, but reading the comments convinced me it was the absolute right decision. The fact that all these institutions just allowed this horrible hateful speech for four years, in the name of free speech etc, despite all the harassment, harm (mental and otherwise) it caused to so many people in America actually emboldened so many to the extent that now that they crossed this invisible line, the…
What counts as “horrible hateful speech?” The media has been publishing articles recently with outright racist slurs against white people (using phrases like “unbearable whiteness”). Is that hateful speech? (I think so but then again I’m an elder Millennial.) And does the fact that it’s the President saying something warrant giving him more or less latitude? The right and moral thing to do was to give the duly electe…
Anti-whiteness crusaders can and frequently do go too far, but I object, strenuously, to the idea that mainstream articles about problematic whiteness are somehow comparable to anti-Black racism. That isn't true, and I think you know that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can you will have the means? Lmao sounds like you believe popular support is an indicator of correctness and that is very very wrong you should read about Galileo pal
Lmao, pal to you too. Galileo succeeded, we heard his theory and eventually found it more correct than the previous one. And he managed that without Twitter, Youtube or Parler.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a clear difference between people clearly going to the same bakery over and over to harass and old guy, and being unable to actually do politics because of the technocrats and their cronies don’t be dishonest and don’t assume things for which you do not have proof. Not only that but if society decides that the Earth is flat would you agree with any decisions stemming from that, assuming there is a thing such…
> There is a clear difference between people clearly going to the same bakery over and over to harass and old guy,There is a clear difference between people clearly going to the same bakery over and over to harass and old guy. Look back a few decades and this is exactly the same argument that segregationists were using. You've basically just said: "That shopowner has a right not to deal with blacks, why do they keep…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>So forcing businesses to associate with someone in order to protect fair elections or free speech rights wouldn't be incongruous. A fair point. How would you apply that in this case? I'm not being snarky, I just don't see the relevance of applying your (correct in certain circumstances) reasoning in this particular case.
I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know the details of this case, so I won't speculate about how this case might be resolved under current law. But the general principle I would apply here is that people who own important infrastructure shouldn't be allowed to interfere in elections (Trump 2024 in this case, I assume) by refusing to allow candidates to use that infrastructure. I don't think that's controversial in the cas…
1. When it comes to political actors, forcing a person or organization to support a specific candidate (who isn't even on any ballot at the moment) amounts to political coercion and is antithetical to a free society;
2. Which candidate do you hate the most? If what you were saying was reasonable, then you could be forced to provide material support for that candidate. How would you feel about that?
3. Stripe is not a utility like electricity or the phone company. Nor are they anywhere close to a monopoly. In fact, Stripe is just one of many players in that market[0];
4. Not only does the Donald Trump Campaign (a specific "candidate") have other options for online payment processing, online payment processing is not the only way to collect donations. As such, in addition to the dozens of other payment processors on the market, Bank transfers, Western Union, Zelle, CashApp, old fashioned checks and money orders, cash etc., etc., etc. are also available.
You've got this all backwards. Political activity/speech is strongly protected in the US -- no just positive activity/speech, but negative activity/speech as well.
And if the government can force Stripe (or you or me) to provide support to a political actor, then all of our rights are being impinged.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_online_payment_service...