this must be DTs encrypted code.
i meant something like a protest ride through wangchung, or slowmo.
What is censorship? Trump is a clown but...
- Thread starter Dave Taylor
- Start date
- Status
this must be DTs encrypted code.
i meant something like a protest ride through wangchung, or slowmo.
I was going to write a much longer post. But I’ll borrow from someone smarter.
In a recent Neal Stephenson book, the characters wear something like google goggles and are wired full time. Due to the unrestricted nature of the web (called the Feed in the book) you need a full time editor to parse the false or dangerous stuff from the feed. People who don’t are irrational, often dangerous nut jobs who believe the theory of the moment.
With legit news channels becoming increasingly polarized and/or focused on entertainment over truth, people are using social media for information. Social tracks your trends and feeds you more stuff that it thinks you agree with. And soon enough you get Flat Earthers.
While these companies are indeed private corporations able to delete users and content as they see fit, they do have a significant influence that certainly can be used to nudge or even outright fabricate public support or opinion. Despite the cheery interfaces there’s no reason to believe their goals are benign.
Aside from the time vacuum they create, (happiest guy on Earth Yoann Barelli admitted to spending many hours farting around on IG and recently quit cold turkey) there‘s a real issue with the platforms and the power they wield. You can say “well just don’t use them.” But everyone uses them. Maybe some meaningful legislation could come down the pipeline. We shall see.
Pretty good article:
In a recent Neal Stephenson book, the characters wear something like google goggles and are wired full time. Due to the unrestricted nature of the web (called the Feed in the book) you need a full time editor to parse the false or dangerous stuff from the feed. People who don’t are irrational, often dangerous nut jobs who believe the theory of the moment.
With legit news channels becoming increasingly polarized and/or focused on entertainment over truth, people are using social media for information. Social tracks your trends and feeds you more stuff that it thinks you agree with. And soon enough you get Flat Earthers.
While these companies are indeed private corporations able to delete users and content as they see fit, they do have a significant influence that certainly can be used to nudge or even outright fabricate public support or opinion. Despite the cheery interfaces there’s no reason to believe their goals are benign.
Aside from the time vacuum they create, (happiest guy on Earth Yoann Barelli admitted to spending many hours farting around on IG and recently quit cold turkey) there‘s a real issue with the platforms and the power they wield. You can say “well just don’t use them.” But everyone uses them. Maybe some meaningful legislation could come down the pipeline. We shall see.
Pretty good article:
Ashcor
Well-Known Member
Parler DOES (well, did....) in fact moderate posts and actually has some pretty draconian posting policies.
In reality, Parler doesn't even have group coordinated chat. To my knowledge there is zero proof of any coordination on parler to what happened at the capitol. If you can find it, show me, I'm willing to look at actual evidence. Meanwhile over on Twitter there are open threats against sitting members of congress that are not removed. Twitter has been used non stop during the riots of the past year by BLM and Antifa rioters to coordinate their activities. It's literally a joke. Twitter's stock was in the toilet before Trump started using it and now it's there again. Twitter literally killed their golden goose. I heard today that shareholders are now filing a class action suit against Twitter although I couldn't find any confirmation on that to be fair.
I keep hearing from people that Trump attempted a coup. How exactly did he do that? Do people even understand what a coup is? At no point did Trump instruct anyone to attack the capitol, in fact he said quite the opposite. You really have to twist words and cherry pick phrases to come to any conclusion like that. But even if he did, that's not a coup. Drives me nuts how people just parrot anything their political hero's or the mass media personalities say without event he slightest knowledge of what they are talking about. What's even more infuriating about it is that we all walk around with devices in our pockets that give us access to literally all the knowledge in the world. Why would you listen to someone tell you want was said, in a clip, out of context when you can watch the entire video or read the entire post, in context, right from the source? It's just intellectual laziness.
For those wondering what the definition of an actual coup is: https://www.britannica.com/topic/coup-detat
Ironically, you can't stage a coup if you're already in power... that's not how it works. If Trump goes to the pentagon after Jan 20th and asks them to remove Biden's administration, call me.
Now, If you'd like a real example of a coup attempt it was from Nancy Pelosi going to the pentagon and asking them to ignore any orders from Trump. THAT is as close to a coup attempt as we've had. The speaker of the house asking the military to ignore lawful orders of their commander in chief. The pentagon basically told her they don't take political sides and to leave them out of it, as they should have. Thank God our military still has some sense.
Regarding the capital riots, if you look at the timeline of the event, the capitol building was being breached before Trumps speech was even started, while the vast majority of the protesters were at the speech location. And even if he had said in his opening remarks that people should attack the capitol, (which he never did, at any point) and they left immediately with all the road closures it would have taken them over 50 minutes to get there.
thenationalpulse.com
To interpret anything Trump said as a call to violence is really making a leap. Meanwhile during the actual riots in Minnesota, Kamala Harris tweeted this: "If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota." Protesting.... you mean burning down building and looting? that protesting? So please, tell me who's actually supporting violence? It's funny isn't it? We watch all summer as the police are condemned for brutality against rioters and as soon as the rioters are not left wing, the same people say the police should have beaten, shot and arrested them. Will Kamala tweet again telling people to donate to bail funds for the capitol rioters? I think not. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
(Make sure you read the entire article, especially the part where the guy who tried to kill police officers was bailed out by MNFF).
Here's where Kamala said the rioters "Should not stop." Again, don't be lazy, read the whole article and watch the entire video clip, its in full context.
I'll end with this, for those who think what happened at the capitol was unprecedented in recent history, let's jump waaaaaaay back in time to 2018, remember when left wing "mostly peaceful protesters" pounded on the doors of the supreme court and occupied the capitol building... that was awesome...
trendingpolitics.com
Now, nothing I point out here should in any way be construed as support for what happened at the capitol. I don't support rioting over anything and I think what was done was stupid and counter productive to any cause. And as usual, it ended badly. But to sit here and listen to the political left act like this was somehow different than what they have supported and encouraged over the last 7 months with BLM and Antifa is simply laughable. In case you were unaware, BLM and Antifa spent the better part of 3 months attacking a federal courthouse on a nightly basis, and at one point tried to seal police in the building and set it on fire. Where was the outrage from Nancy, Kamala, Biden and the rest of the democrats then? Crickets....
And finally, in the creme de la creme of hypocrisy, this is the post from Trump during the protest/riot that twitter prevented from being shared, or retweeted and then took down.
If they were so concerned about Trump (or anyone) endorsing violence, why would they prevent people from seeing that video where Trump told the protesters to be peaceful, respect law enforcement and go home? When was the last time we heard a democrat tell protestors to "respect law enforcement?"
In reality, Parler doesn't even have group coordinated chat. To my knowledge there is zero proof of any coordination on parler to what happened at the capitol. If you can find it, show me, I'm willing to look at actual evidence. Meanwhile over on Twitter there are open threats against sitting members of congress that are not removed. Twitter has been used non stop during the riots of the past year by BLM and Antifa rioters to coordinate their activities. It's literally a joke. Twitter's stock was in the toilet before Trump started using it and now it's there again. Twitter literally killed their golden goose. I heard today that shareholders are now filing a class action suit against Twitter although I couldn't find any confirmation on that to be fair.
I keep hearing from people that Trump attempted a coup. How exactly did he do that? Do people even understand what a coup is? At no point did Trump instruct anyone to attack the capitol, in fact he said quite the opposite. You really have to twist words and cherry pick phrases to come to any conclusion like that. But even if he did, that's not a coup. Drives me nuts how people just parrot anything their political hero's or the mass media personalities say without event he slightest knowledge of what they are talking about. What's even more infuriating about it is that we all walk around with devices in our pockets that give us access to literally all the knowledge in the world. Why would you listen to someone tell you want was said, in a clip, out of context when you can watch the entire video or read the entire post, in context, right from the source? It's just intellectual laziness.
For those wondering what the definition of an actual coup is: https://www.britannica.com/topic/coup-detat
Ironically, you can't stage a coup if you're already in power... that's not how it works. If Trump goes to the pentagon after Jan 20th and asks them to remove Biden's administration, call me.
Now, If you'd like a real example of a coup attempt it was from Nancy Pelosi going to the pentagon and asking them to ignore any orders from Trump. THAT is as close to a coup attempt as we've had. The speaker of the house asking the military to ignore lawful orders of their commander in chief. The pentagon basically told her they don't take political sides and to leave them out of it, as they should have. Thank God our military still has some sense.
Regarding the capital riots, if you look at the timeline of the event, the capitol building was being breached before Trumps speech was even started, while the vast majority of the protesters were at the speech location. And even if he had said in his opening remarks that people should attack the capitol, (which he never did, at any point) and they left immediately with all the road closures it would have taken them over 50 minutes to get there.
Jan 6 'Incitement' Timeline Debunked as Ex-Capitol Police Chief Says Pelosi, McConnell's Sergeants-at-Arms Refused Security Measures. - The National Pulse+
The Washington Post has reported that the outgoing Capitol Police Chief, Steve Sund, believes his efforts to secure the premises were undermined by a lack of concern from House and Senate security officials who answer directly to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate leader Mitch McConnell. The...
thenationalpulse.com
To interpret anything Trump said as a call to violence is really making a leap. Meanwhile during the actual riots in Minnesota, Kamala Harris tweeted this: "If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota." Protesting.... you mean burning down building and looting? that protesting? So please, tell me who's actually supporting violence? It's funny isn't it? We watch all summer as the police are condemned for brutality against rioters and as soon as the rioters are not left wing, the same people say the police should have beaten, shot and arrested them. Will Kamala tweet again telling people to donate to bail funds for the capitol rioters? I think not. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
(Make sure you read the entire article, especially the part where the guy who tried to kill police officers was bailed out by MNFF).
Here's where Kamala said the rioters "Should not stop." Again, don't be lazy, read the whole article and watch the entire video clip, its in full context.
I'll end with this, for those who think what happened at the capitol was unprecedented in recent history, let's jump waaaaaaay back in time to 2018, remember when left wing "mostly peaceful protesters" pounded on the doors of the supreme court and occupied the capitol building... that was awesome...
FLASHBACK: Anti-Kavanaugh Protesters Banged On Doors Of Supreme Court, Occupied Capitol Building
As expected, the media rushed to demonize all Trump supporters as "terrorists" after the events that occurred at the Capitol yesterday. CNN's Anderson Cooper went as far as to say we're a "death cult".However, let's take a trip down memory lane and see how the media reacted in 2018 when...
trendingpolitics.com
Now, nothing I point out here should in any way be construed as support for what happened at the capitol. I don't support rioting over anything and I think what was done was stupid and counter productive to any cause. And as usual, it ended badly. But to sit here and listen to the political left act like this was somehow different than what they have supported and encouraged over the last 7 months with BLM and Antifa is simply laughable. In case you were unaware, BLM and Antifa spent the better part of 3 months attacking a federal courthouse on a nightly basis, and at one point tried to seal police in the building and set it on fire. Where was the outrage from Nancy, Kamala, Biden and the rest of the democrats then? Crickets....
And finally, in the creme de la creme of hypocrisy, this is the post from Trump during the protest/riot that twitter prevented from being shared, or retweeted and then took down.
If they were so concerned about Trump (or anyone) endorsing violence, why would they prevent people from seeing that video where Trump told the protesters to be peaceful, respect law enforcement and go home? When was the last time we heard a democrat tell protestors to "respect law enforcement?"
Ashcor
Well-Known Member
They really do hire the brain trust of the world to moderate don't they.....
AI based I would think?
Ashcor
Well-Known Member
last I heard it was still an actual person that made the final decision. AI just flags it for review.
if you really want to have you eyes opened about social media, check out "The Social Dilemma" documentary. It's on netflix I think.
A Potted Plant
Honorary Sod
This thread needs a poll for who has social media from one of the big platforms. As a millennial I find it funny that y'all have social media, my friends have dropped off those platforms. If I still had it I would just spread propaganda of the worst kind.
Ashcor
Well-Known Member
yeah my kids honestly have no interest in it other than the instant messaging apps. So what's funny is that these social media companies are currently running around like power mad "Dr. Evil's" they have no idea that they're about to drop off the cliff because the younger generation has zero interest. (queue the Dr Evil gifs..)
THATmanMANNY
Well-Known Member
Just stating facts... The world target audience it slowly shifting to older people because of lower birth rates. So they are laughing at you if you think they just want millennials. Americans used to be the world target audience. Now it is shifting towards China. The future of many big American companies will heavily depend on the East.
apples and oranges between the BLM movement and capitol event. Centuries of laws and politics purposely designed to limit blacks from progressing. Oh don’t forget the murders and wrongfully convicted because of their color. The assumption that blacks destroyed property is unjust. For centuries black people peacefully protested and it still got them killed. Stop being so shortsighted.
Trump may have not started the non-coup but he definitely falsely led those individuals there for many months previous to the event.
apples and oranges between the BLM movement and capitol event. Centuries of laws and politics purposely designed to limit blacks from progressing. Oh don’t forget the murders and wrongfully convicted because of their color. The assumption that blacks destroyed property is unjust. For centuries black people peacefully protested and it still got them killed. Stop being so shortsighted.
Trump may have not started the non-coup but he definitely falsely led those individuals there for many months previous to the event.
agree.
When he told the pour bouys (name obfuscated cause i don't want to be associated)
to stand back and stand by (which he fudged, cause it is stand down and stand by)
it was a call to readiness. that was in one of the televised debates.
I'mma gunna go with Iggyology* here. I'd rather not be labeled because of some of my political interpretations,
which are then associated with some fringe groups. Last political post. (so if not with the PB you must be Aunt Fia)
I heard we won't be talking politics after the inauguration anyway. Queue up alien invasion for the '21-'22 season!
*Iggyology - the tried and true concept of not talking politics or religion as we were reminded by @pooriggy.
The name of this thread and the person who started is enough for me to realize that this is not something I want to get drawn into.
Good day folks.
Ashcor
Well-Known Member
I don't care who's side anyone is on politically, we need opposing sides but the press shouldn't be on any side, and big tech shouldn't be on any side. There's plenty of bad to call out on both sides and they clearly don't and THAT should worry people, a lot. When the ACLU is aligning with right leaning opinions you know it's bad.
What Google, Twitter, Apple and Amazon did to Parler is the very definition of anti-trust. And there is ZERO evidence to their claims that Parler was used to incite what happened at the capitol. ZERO. And that's the bigger issue here, it's not about who sits in an office for 4 or 8 years, it's about whether we allow a press and tech industry to control our information and silence any opposition to what THEY deem to be appropriate.
Parler was shut down by Google, Twitter, Amazon and Apple for one reason, when Twitter turned off Trump and people left Twitter, the vast majority went to Parler and therefore they (Google et al) were no longer in control of these people with their big tech censor machine. It's about control of the narrative and killing your competition.
If we have any classical example of fascism in recent history, that is it.
Excusing the riots that went on for the past 9 months because of history is ridiculous and to say that Google, Amazon, Twitter and Apple's products played no roll in organizing those riots, that lead to the deaths of 40+ people and billions of dollars of destruction is laughable. You really have to be willfully ignorant to believe that.
And again, nobody thus far has produced any actual evidence that Parler was used to organize the riot at the capitol. Google Et Al, in concert, just on their own, outside a court of law decided to execute a business competitor over unfounded accusations. This is not their role. This is not how our country works and what was done is a blatant violation of anti-trust law. It was a coordinated attack by the 4 leading tech firms against a smaller competitor. That's a problem, a big one. an it's why we have anti-trust laws.
What Google, Twitter, Apple and Amazon did to Parler is the very definition of anti-trust. And there is ZERO evidence to their claims that Parler was used to incite what happened at the capitol. ZERO. And that's the bigger issue here, it's not about who sits in an office for 4 or 8 years, it's about whether we allow a press and tech industry to control our information and silence any opposition to what THEY deem to be appropriate.
Parler was shut down by Google, Twitter, Amazon and Apple for one reason, when Twitter turned off Trump and people left Twitter, the vast majority went to Parler and therefore they (Google et al) were no longer in control of these people with their big tech censor machine. It's about control of the narrative and killing your competition.
If we have any classical example of fascism in recent history, that is it.
Excusing the riots that went on for the past 9 months because of history is ridiculous and to say that Google, Amazon, Twitter and Apple's products played no roll in organizing those riots, that lead to the deaths of 40+ people and billions of dollars of destruction is laughable. You really have to be willfully ignorant to believe that.
And again, nobody thus far has produced any actual evidence that Parler was used to organize the riot at the capitol. Google Et Al, in concert, just on their own, outside a court of law decided to execute a business competitor over unfounded accusations. This is not their role. This is not how our country works and what was done is a blatant violation of anti-trust law. It was a coordinated attack by the 4 leading tech firms against a smaller competitor. That's a problem, a big one. an it's why we have anti-trust laws.
Good read on this subject.
www.nytimes.com
"So it’s not surprising that serious people including Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and the Russian dissident Aleksei Navalny find the Trump bans disturbing. “This precedent will be exploited by the enemies of freedom of speech around the world,” Navalny wrote on Twitter. “In Russia as well. Every time when they need to silence someone, they will say: ‘This is just common practice; even Trump got blocked on Twitter.’”
But the answer isn’t to give Trump his beloved account back. Navalny pointed out that Trump’s ban seems arbitrary because so many other bad actors, including autocrats, Covid deniers and troll factories, still have access to the service. He called for platforms to create a more transparent process, appointing committees whose decisions could be appealed. That would be a start.
In the long term, tech monopolies need to be broken up, as Elizabeth Warren has proposed. Singer described the tech barons who finally took action against Trump after enabling him for years as “rulers of a kingdom that abdicated their responsibility for a long time.” This time, with Trump, they ruled judiciously. But they shouldn’t rule over as much as they do."
Opinion | The Scary Power of the Companies That Finally Shut Trump Up (Published 2021)
Tech giants were right to ban the president. We still need to break them up.
"So it’s not surprising that serious people including Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and the Russian dissident Aleksei Navalny find the Trump bans disturbing. “This precedent will be exploited by the enemies of freedom of speech around the world,” Navalny wrote on Twitter. “In Russia as well. Every time when they need to silence someone, they will say: ‘This is just common practice; even Trump got blocked on Twitter.’”
But the answer isn’t to give Trump his beloved account back. Navalny pointed out that Trump’s ban seems arbitrary because so many other bad actors, including autocrats, Covid deniers and troll factories, still have access to the service. He called for platforms to create a more transparent process, appointing committees whose decisions could be appealed. That would be a start.
In the long term, tech monopolies need to be broken up, as Elizabeth Warren has proposed. Singer described the tech barons who finally took action against Trump after enabling him for years as “rulers of a kingdom that abdicated their responsibility for a long time.” This time, with Trump, they ruled judiciously. But they shouldn’t rule over as much as they do."
THATmanMANNY
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone here has every said that nor was I stating that I excused the rioting but I'm trying my best to provide perspective.
Did you put yourself in black people shoes? Were you raised to always show your hands at all times? Do you have black friends? Do you think racism does not exist in America? (All serious questions)
My point is don't make the comparison and if you are and did you are only attributing to the blacks vs whites separation.
BTW you can NEVER know what is feels like to be in their shoes.
Monkey Soup
Angry Wanker
China. That place that is still communist and where they still practice ethnic cleansing and genocide? Where they plant a flag on every artificially created pacific atoll to create an economic trade zone? Yes, let’s shift the power there.
THATmanMANNY
Well-Known Member
@Monkey Soup it's called greed and competition. I'm not advocating it.
edit: world target CONSUMER
edit: world target CONSUMER
thegock
Well-Known Member
Some people might think that when two members of the Capitol (I Googled the spelling per your very lengthy post above and found the correct capitalization) police are dead, over fifty injured, some still hospitalized, that there is a problem. With four others members of the mob dead, yeah, that sounds like a problem to me.
At least we now all appear to be able to spell Parler.
rick81721
Lothar
Ah but this was no problem at all - over 700 police officers injured, 19 people murdered, billions in damage.
https://www.statesman.com/story/new...e-from-black-lives-matter-protests/113878088/
- Status