Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:20:45 GMT
I recognize that risk (its why I want to see civil society fill the breach and not the state) but I think its important to also recognize we're navigating between a Charybdis and Scylla. Government censorship is a risk but so is the spread of race based hate, doxxing, threats of violence, swatting, fake news, etc. Do we really want Twitter and FB to devolve into 4chan? Somehow we have to balance those risks. I think a civil society response is a potential solution.
A civil society response may indeed be a potential solution. Here's how it looks. "Don't like it? Change the channel." Boom. Done and done.
When people *choose* not to support something because it doesn't make sense to them ... that's how civil society responds organically to cultural highway markers that are no longer relevant to them.
We are not seeing "civil society" respond to the Internet. We are seeing world governments cracking down on global tech companies based on somewhat nebulous criteria. And people rationalizing that as the "civil and responsible" approach is one of the most horrifying examples of pod people thinking I've seen play out in real time.
Queshank
I don't know man I really dont find that persuasive. I think this is one of those big divides we have. I do see a civil society response. I do see a grass roots celebration of this as well. I don't deny Germany and other governments are playing a role here, too, but I see a civil society response you don't. And I see a need for one that you don't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:26:08 GMT
We balance those risks out by making better arguments. That's called freedom of speech. Queshank Sure and I support doing that. But I also think norms and expectations steer people toward socially acceptable standards of conduct. That's why etiquette is so important. I don't see 4 chan as a beacon of discussion and argument. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:32:25 GMT
We balance those risks out by making better arguments. That's called freedom of speech. Queshank Sure and I support doing that. But I also think norms and expectations steer people toward socially acceptable standards of conduct. That's why etiquette is so important. I don't see 4 chan as a beacon of discussion and argument. Which is probably why only a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY tiny minority of the Internet dwelling population frequents 4 chan.
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:33:32 GMT
A civil society response may indeed be a potential solution. Here's how it looks. "Don't like it? Change the channel." Boom. Done and done.
When people *choose* not to support something because it doesn't make sense to them ... that's how civil society responds organically to cultural highway markers that are no longer relevant to them.
We are not seeing "civil society" respond to the Internet. We are seeing world governments cracking down on global tech companies based on somewhat nebulous criteria. And people rationalizing that as the "civil and responsible" approach is one of the most horrifying examples of pod people thinking I've seen play out in real time.
Queshank
I don't know man I really dont find that persuasive. I think this is one of those big divides we have. I do see a civil society response. I do see a grass roots celebration of this as well. I don't deny Germany and other governments are playing a role here, too, but I see a civil society response you don't. And I see a need for one that you don't. Nothing else matters when we start controlling and censoring speech. Nothing. Gay rights. Immigration. Abortion rights. Nothing.
As I've said to others.
I'm past trying to persuade people. I don't care anymore. This is my hill I'll be on with a rifle ready to die on.
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:34:25 GMT
Sure and I support doing that. But I also think norms and expectations steer people toward socially acceptable standards of conduct. That's why etiquette is so important. I don't see 4 chan as a beacon of discussion and argument. Which is probably why only a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY tiny minority of the Internet dwelling population frequents 4 chan.
Queshank
Indeed but occasionally one of those slugs infests normal platforms. Thus the need for standards. There's never been a time (that I know of) when speech on FB wasn't regulated. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:36:43 GMT
Which is probably why only a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY tiny minority of the Internet dwelling population frequents 4 chan.
Queshank
Indeed but occasionally one of those slugs infests normal platforms. Thus the need for standards. There's never been a time (that I know of) when speech on FB wasn't regulated.
"Those slugs" 
Truthfully I've never even gone to 4chan. Not even out of mild curiosity. I'm not even sure how one goes about getting there. "Those slugs" just entertains me.
Quehank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:38:01 GMT
I don't know man I really dont find that persuasive. I think this is one of those big divides we have. I do see a civil society response. I do see a grass roots celebration of this as well. I don't deny Germany and other governments are playing a role here, too, but I see a civil society response you don't. And I see a need for one that you don't. Nothing else matters when we start controlling and censoring speech. Nothing. Gay rights. Immigration. Abortion rights. Nothing.
As I've said to others.
I'm past trying to persuade people. I don't care anymore. This is my hill I'll be on with a rifle ready to die on.
Queshank
I'm fine with free speech. I don't want to control or censor speech. But I'm also fine with de-platforming Nazi's who advocate violence. 90% of what D-Man said on these boards I would let slide, but a few comments hinted that force or violence should be used on minorities, and I would ban him for that, if it were my call. And I don't feel a shred of guilt when it comes to being soft on free speech. Not a shred. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:38:12 GMT
My problem is a very, very, very tiny minority is supporting a government crackdown on Internet outlets.
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:38:39 GMT
Nothing else matters when we start controlling and censoring speech. Nothing. Gay rights. Immigration. Abortion rights. Nothing.
As I've said to others.
I'm past trying to persuade people. I don't care anymore. This is my hill I'll be on with a rifle ready to die on.
Queshank
I'm fine with free speech. I don't want to control or censor speech. But I'm also fine with de-platforming Nazi's who advocate violence. 90% of what D-Man said on these boards I would let slide, but a few comments hinted that force or violence should be used on minorities, and I would ban him for that, if it were my call. And I don't feel a shred of guilt when it comes to being soft on free speech. Not a shred. Then what exactly was your problem with Solar's LNFS incarnation? Queshank |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:42:38 GMT
I'm fine with free speech. I don't want to control or censor speech. But I'm also fine with de-platforming Nazi's who advocate violence. 90% of what D-Man said on these boards I would let slide, but a few comments hinted that force or violence should be used on minorities, and I would ban him for that, if it were my call. And I don't feel a shred of guilt when it comes to being soft on free speech. Not a shred. Then what exactly was your problem with Solar's LNFS incarnation? Queshank A lack of clear rules and their arbitrary enforcement. What did Mojo do to get banned? Myself? It was clearly ideological. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:43:54 GMT
Then what exactly was your problem with Solar's LNFS incarnation? Queshank A lack of clear rules and their arbitrary enforcement. What did Mojo do to get banned? Myself? It was clearly ideological.
Aaaaaand... we're full circle to exactly why some Western governments started cracking down on the Internet and the reason why a tiny, tiny, and vocal minority of the American population supports those same crackdowns here in the US.
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 15:53:43 GMT
A lack of clear rules and their arbitrary enforcement. What did Mojo do to get banned? Myself? It was clearly ideological.
Aaaaaand... we're full circle to exactly why some Western governments started cracking down on the Internet and the reason why a tiny, tiny, and vocal minority of the American population supports those same crackdowns here in the US.
Queshank
I'm sure that's part of their motivation. No doubt. But it doesn't alter the fact that there are some very objectionable things being said online which should be off limits. For example, who wants to pay for ads to be run next to a link to Anders Breivik's manifesto? Not me! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 19:09:44 GMT
Aaaaaand... we're full circle to exactly why some Western governments started cracking down on the Internet and the reason why a tiny, tiny, and vocal minority of the American population supports those same crackdowns here in the US. Queshank
I'm sure that's part of their motivation. No doubt. But it doesn't alter the fact that there are some very objectionable things being said online which should be off limits. "It'll be different this time because this time, WE'RE in charge!!" Queshank |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 19:19:07 GMT
I'm sure that's part of their motivation. No doubt. But it doesn't alter the fact that there are some very objectionable things being said online which should be off limits. "It'll be different this time because this time, WE'RE in charge!!" Queshank If people don't like where this thing goes, they can vote with their feet (or IP address) and find greener pastures. Then Twitter and FB will be forced to change. I'm cool with watching that play out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 19:48:59 GMT
"It'll be different this time because this time, WE'RE in charge!!" Queshank If people don't like where this thing goes, they can vote with their feet (or IP address) and find greener pastures. Then Twitter and FB will be forced to change. I'm cool with watching that play out. I've already seen this story. The battles against Microsoft as they laid waste to the Operating System industry through creative business deals with PC manufacturers. Not through innovative and successful products. And we all know how that turned out. Queshank |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,966
|
Post by petep on Jul 6, 2020 22:23:38 GMT
You know, you can look up not only the number of legal immigrants per year but also the number of countries and where they come from.
You should look up the info and data first.
We love legal immigrants and the data and facts support this position
I thought Obama and his supporters bragged he was the deporter in chief.
What happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 17:31:16 GMT
We love legal immigrants and the data and facts support this position I call BS. If this is how we treat the people we "love," perhaps that word has lost all meaning. The facts and data suggest you are wrong. This admin is not pro-legal-immigration. You belong to a political movement that is making war on immigrants, legal or otherwise. "They Came for the 'Illegals' First, Now They're Going After Immigrants Who Played by the Rules The Trump administration might be setting the stage to eject foreign techies who've played by every immigration rule." reason.com/2020/07/06/they-came-for-the-illegals-first-now-theyre-going-after-immigrants-who-played-by-the-rules/ |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,197
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Jul 7, 2020 17:53:55 GMT
I call BS. If this is how we treat the people we "love," perhaps that word has lost all meaning. The facts and data suggest you are wrong. This admin is not pro-legal-immigration. You belong to a political movement that is making war on immigrants, legal or otherwise. Student visa holders as well: New ICE guidelines say international students must leave the U.S. if classes go onlineA lot of immigration policy seems to be driven by Stephen Miller. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 17:58:59 GMT
I call BS. If this is how we treat the people we "love," perhaps that word has lost all meaning. The facts and data suggest you are wrong. This admin is not pro-legal-immigration. You belong to a political movement that is making war on immigrants, legal or otherwise. Student visa holders as well: New ICE guidelines say international students must leave the U.S. if classes go onlineA lot of immigration policy seems to be driven by Stephen Miller. So sad. So un-fair. I am reminded of the saying "the cruelty is the point." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 18:13:15 GMT
So sad. So un-fair. I am reminded of the saying "the cruelty is the point." This makes zero sense. Was the school offering in-person classes when the visa granted? Grandfather them in. Are the online only classes a response to the COVID-19 crisis? Grandfather them in. I get that offering a student visa based on some unaccredited fly-by-night school might not be ideal, but this kind of thing is absurd. “You were going to Purdue but now they’re temporarily online only, so go back to where you came from!” That’s the best we can do? |
|
