Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolan7]

Okay, I should clarify my point here I guess.

I am against the wanton censorship of free speech.

However, obscenity laws are still a thing. And that's fine. So long they're reasonable. Take whatever stance you want, the fact that there's both large porn and non-porn media sites is a great thing and they should probably stay that way.

Alex Jones absolutely should have been muzzled. He was well past the point of protected free speech. Thus, media removed illegal content from their sites.

Not Logan Paul is still a large Youtuber. He was tasteless (putting it mildly) and he was punished for this. You could call it a slap on the wrist but there were consequences for his actions. However, he's still up (minus, you know, the whole suicide forest video). That's... Not really great, I think he's terrible, but he's "allowed" to keep posting because he really hasn't incited violence or spewed bigoted comments at the world.

[got delayed by resident cray-cray and rounds, so probably ninja'd]

There's a problem with "reasonable."


Say, Middle Eastern standards--  That news anchor in the bright red suit top that shows just a teensy bit of cleavage?  PROFANE! RACY! WHORISH!

Or, going the other way--  That indigenous tribe in South America. Bare breasts as far as the eye can see. God forbid that some poor impressionable child see that in the western world! (remember the hysteria about Janet Jackson's nipple slip faux-pas? I sure as hell do.)

"Reasonable" is by its very definition, "What either *I* consider reasonable" (which does not speak for other people, or their tastes), OR, "What the current culture considers reasonable", which does not respect individual people's choices.  It is a terrible, and very inconsistent measurement device for considering things that ultimately determine people's rights. (Remember, it was "Reasonable" a century and a half ago to keep slaves. Mull on that.)

I almost replied to Gentlefish about the difference between obscenity and hate speech, for this reason.

The stuff being deplatformed isn't "obscene", and it artfully dodges the legal definition of hate speech, but is close enough that it repels most people.  It repels people enough that private companies would like to distance themselves from that content.

The argument is whether the government should force such companies to host that content.  Presumably by declaring Google a "Utility", which incidentally might allow it to be an actual local monopoly instead of the pretend-monopoly they claim it is.

[SaberToothTiger]

Censoring or letting AJ say whatever isn't the clou of the issue, but the fact that Facebook, Google and similar corporations have a near monopoly on information and it's ditribution. If the internet information monolith wasn't so ridiculously powerful then booting AJ out from YouTube et al wouldn't be much of a coup - he could always resort to other means of spreading vile lies and all would be well. However, why would the internet information providers stop at Alex Jones? Why would they not start outright influencing the public at large? Why wouldn't they try and use the power they have now to seize even more? Why wouldn't they simply influence the elections? They have the means to do so, they can manipulate public opinion with ease. Facebook can tell you what you want to hear, suggest ideas to you and make you think they are yours. Censoring AJ could very well be the first move towards a literal plutocratic oligarchy, a system where access to information is tightly controlled and in which the rule by the people would be a sham. In the end, blacklisting AJ could very well be the attractive beginning of a slippery slope.

[Gentlefish]

You all raise fair points here. Haha, honestly I'm not sure how to respond other than this is an issue I find myself surprisingly attracted to.

I'll keep an open mind on this subject but will continue to posit that, aside from ridiculous DMCA copyright law enforcing, Twitter and YouTube are operating just fine.

Facebook is a massive can of steroid-addicted worms and should absolutely be addressed.

[SalmonGod]

I don't think what happened to Alex Jones, specifically, is problematic by itself at all.  It is what should have happened.  I'm more concerned with the issue of so much centralized control over information existing in the first place, in many ways besides the ability to oust specific people from their services, and have been for at least a couple years before 2016.  In fact, publicly blacklisting him was an honest way of going about things.  They could have just made his content never suggested to anyone who isn't already subscribed to him.  This is the kind of thing I expect them to do less transparently in the future - subtly promoting content that politically benefits them over others, instead of outright censorship.

[Rolan7]

Such "Shadowbanning" has long been a thing on Reddit, of course.  And arguably it has always been a thing on Youtube, in that their capricious and shifting algorithms... sometimes don't platform some people as much as other people.  ;_; /s

Their goal is to curate attractive personal video lists.  Not to promote or deny any viewpoint.

[SalmonGod]

Yeah, I'm aware it has been a thing in some forms in some places for a while already.

But even if Google and the like have been nice enough to only use these means in pursuit of monetary gain and not political so far... I expect that after 2016 pushed this stuff into the realm of political scandal and everyone in politics is now undoubtedly aware of the potential, leadership in these companies is going to have it on their minds now when making decisions, and it's only a matter of time before powerful political interest groups begin approaching them with intent to corrupt.

[wierd]

Meanwhile, in the oval office...

Trump: "It's totally not a shutdown-- I Dont like the word shutdown, everyone says it's a shutdown, but it's not, it's a strike!"

Reporter: "Mr President, how long do you intend to be 'on strike?"

Trump: "Months! Maybe even YEARS!"

[Max™]

Who exactly would we be putting in charge of all of our personal information? Is there an alternative there to google and facebook which we could trust to do this in the unlikely scenario where said alternative got off the ground in the first place?

We could ask the government if they could be trusted with the access and control that google or facebook have, but well, they aren't functioning fully at the moment, magic 8-ball was stolen or something, answer missing, try again later I guess?

Jumping from "we're not going to enable nazi conspiracy theorists" to "we're done with them, now we're coming after you, ordinary non-shitmouth citizen" is wild, btw.

except that he’s asking for 5 million (or was it billion? Some ridiculous number), so, it’d be what, a diamond encrusted wooden picket fence?

Also, portions of the Democratic base would flay the Democrats alive if they allowed Trump to ‘win’. So, it’s a real no-go.

5 million seconds is almost 2 months, 5 billion seconds is around 156 years.

[wierd]

You know...

A sick thought occurs to me just now.

"Trump cancels 'Be President': Throwing Tantrum!"

(Check's (N) menu)

Demand

Spoiler: Thoughts and Preferences (click to show/hide)

Donald J. Trump has been feeling completely miserable lately.  He was denied funding for his border wall recently. He was investigated for Russian ties recently. He had a sex scandal revealed recently. He has been investigated for tax evasion recently. He was DEJECTED after his chief of staff testified. He felt RIDICULED when the shape of his penis was revealed. He felt EMBARASED at the state of demands recently. He felt BETRAYED by the actions of his staff recently.
He is a dubious worshiper of Mammon.
He is the president of the United States of America. He is the owner of several entertainment venues.
He is 72 years old, and has the appearance of a mutant Oompa Loompa.
He is corpulent. He has very small hands. His watery blue eyes are beady. His hair is orange and crinkly. His skin is orange and wrinkled. His mouth looks like a puckered anus.
He is flimsy and has poor focus.
Donald J Trump likes money, hookers, "Loyalty", Yes-Men for their obsequiousness, and absolutely detests transparency.
He is often nervous, and is prone to fits of Munchhausen-like self-deception and self-aggrandizement.  He often unconsciously creates absurd fabrications and distortions of the truth.  He is often unaware of how incompetent he is.

A short creature prone to great self deception.

[Folly]

except that he’s asking for 5 million (or was it billion? Some ridiculous number)

$5.7 billion. I don't understand why people keep rounding down to 5 billion, as if that other $700 million doesn't really matter.

[Frumple]

Actually trying to make a shutdown last a year or more would be political suicide anyway and trying to use a national emergency for frivolous reasons is an abuse of power that is just asking to be impeached over.

it's not just frivolous reasons, mind, the shitgibbon has been stating his willingness to invoke power that literally don't fucking exist

"Military version of eminent domain" or some crap like that (which is, like, actually straight up enshrined in our constitution as something we can't legally do). Bonus points on that front is that he managed to imply in the process he thinks he can get his idiot fence without the dems or congress at all, which would mean this entire shutdown shitshow is completely unnecessary and he's fucking with our economy and country's public servants for what amounts to shits and giggles.

[smjjames]

except that he’s asking for 5 million (or was it billion? Some ridiculous number)

$5.7 billion. I don't understand why people keep rounding down to 5 billion, as if that other $700 million doesn't really matter.

I keep hearing/reading it as 5 billion, so, I'm just going off of what others are saying/writing.

[Dunamisdeos]

You know...

A sick thought occurs to me just now.

"Trump cancels 'Be President': Throwing Tantrum!"

(Check's (N) menu)

Demand

Spoiler: Thoughts and Preferences (click to show/hide)

Donald J. Trump has been feeling completely miserable lately.  He was denied funding for his border wall recently. He was investigated for Russian ties recently. He had a sex scandal revealed recently. He has been investigated for tax evasion recently. He was DEJECTED after his chief of staff testified. He felt RIDICULED when the shape of his penis was revealed. He felt EMBARASED at the state of demands recently. He felt BETRAYED by the actions of his staff recently.
He is a dubious worshiper of Mammon.
He is the president of the United States of America. He is the owner of several entertainment venues.
He is 72 years old, and has the appearance of a mutant Oompa Loompa.
He is corpulent. He has very small hands. His watery blue eyes are beady. His hair is orange and crinkly. His skin is orange and wrinkled. His mouth looks like a puckered anus.
He is flimsy and has poor focus.
Donald J Trump likes money, hookers, "Loyalty", Yes-Men for their obsequiousness, and absolutely detests transparency.
He is often nervous, and is prone to fits of Munchhausen-like self-deception and self-aggrandizement.  He often unconsciously creates absurd fabrications and distortions of the truth.  He is often unaware of how incompetent he is.

A short creature prone to great self deception.

Ok this made me laugh. Thank you.

[bloop_bleep]

Their goal is to curate attractive personal video lists.  Not to promote or deny any viewpoint.

Um, no.

Big tech companies' sole purpose is to control the world's information and by extension, the rest of the world. Why do you think they are so intense about sucking dry every bit of information they can get to, to the point of requesting medical records? Did you know that Google indeed indisputably does track your every movement, analyze it for patterns, and then packages it in the form of a handy little interface? Why does Google need medical records and location patterns to "curate attractive personal video lists"? Google, Facebook, etc. have already demonstrated the ability to exercise their newfound power by banning Alex Jones, which is cause for alarm in and of itself. Tell me, why didn't they ban Alex Jones from their platform earlier? He's been spewing his racist crap for years. Why only now? The answer is because their power had grown to point where they decided it was time to run a test of public opinion. Their test seemed to have succeeded, which is a green light for them to push further. As we grow more and more complacent to their dominance, they'll begin to use cruder and cruder methods on more and more important figures, until we end up in a dystopian society without even realizing it.

[Trekkin]

Or, you know, they're just a bog-standard oligopoly of the sort that naturally arise in capitalist systems, albeit one we notice more because we interact with it directly every day. You don't need an evil plot to take over the world to see that, our medical records systems being as shambolic as they are, there is demonstrable demand for a more universal system for managing them that doesn't rely exclusively on individual providers and patients.

Incidentally, the real answer to "why now" has more to do with the zeitgeist than anything. Alex Jones was a normal right-wing nutjob until the events of 2016 accelerated his spiral into saying more extreme things to bigger crowds as the opposition to his wingnuttery has grown more strident, thanks largely to Trump. He was always going to cross a line somewhere.