|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Being a part of a mob that calls for someone else’s firing over old comments is sort of like throwing gasoline on your neighbor’s house while it burns and expecting the fire not to reach your door. We are all vulnerable to this mob fury. Twitter has 336 million active users, but it’s not just tweets that can get you fired. Everyone who has shared an opinion online — on a podcast, a blog or anywhere that can be screenshotted, copied or recorded — is a potential target. If you think you’re safe, think again. Sacco had just 170 followers; the tweet still ruined her life. No one is too anonymous. No tweet is too old. The more we make businesses pay attention to an online reaction, by directly calling for a firing or cheering on those who do, the easier it’ll be to get someone fired in the future. If a bunch of keyboard warriors out for blood can influence companies to ax employees over old jokes, then we’re all in jeopardy. If you’ve been online for any significant period of time, you’ve probably either said or will say something that, in or out of context, could be used to embarrass you in front of a potential employer. No one who helps build a guillotine imagines that one day their head will be on that chopping block. |
so my personal choice to use or not use any specific social media outlet is not in any way relevant to not wanting the application owners censoring their usage.
If there is a market for a completely uncensored social media platform, one will be built.
Where it becomes a problem for me is when the ISPs block sites like info wars when they have committed no crimes or other violations.
Thats the point that is being made.
If there is a market for a completely uncensored social media platform, one will be built.
Where it becomes a problem for me is when the ISPs block sites like info wars when they have committed no crimes or other violations.
Thats the point that is being made.
that seems wildly inconsistent to me.
You're ok with Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Apple removing content from people who have committed no crimes, but not Verizon, Comcast, AT&T, etc?
Twitter gets more views than the NY Times and Washington Post combined.
And you can make the same argument about usage, it's estimated that over 70% of American households have a choice in ISP.
Quote:
The point is that in a free-ish market, they can run their business as they see fit.
If there is a market for a completely uncensored social media platform, one will be built.
Where it becomes a problem for me is when the ISPs block sites like info wars when they have committed no crimes or other violations.
Thats the point that is being made.
that seems wildly inconsistent to me.
You're ok with Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Apple removing content from people who have committed no crimes, but not Verizon, Comcast, AT&T, etc?
Twitter gets more views than the NY Times and Washington Post combined.
And you can make the same argument about usage, it's estimated that over 70% of American households have a choice in ISP.
yes thats pretty much what I am saying. One is a utility and one is a private entity and should be held to different standards. But you could potentially convince me that the ISPs are private entities as well but having a choice between 2 providers is hardly an open market.
Quote:
In comment 14031543 Mr. Bungle said:
Quote:
and making you use Facebook, Twitter, Google, and iTunes?
Is this a serious post?
I think its valid question, and it ties into your net neutrality point from earlier. I think it boils down to what you consider a utility vs a private entity.
I can see an argument where ISPs are considered utilities where individual social media platforms are private entities. And as such need to be held to different standards. Although I'm sure there are valid arguments that even the ISPs are private entities.
So if one party, or segment of a party, has access and use of free accounts in social media that reaches hundreds of millions of users and access is denied to all other parties it's OK? We're nowhere near there yet, but the tenor of your post suggests that would be fine.
You couldn't take out an ad on ABC or CBS promoting hate speech or lunatic conspiracy theories (a conspiracy theory is one thing - advocating that people harrass or disrupt victims as was the case with the Sandy Hook families is another). Similarly, you shouldn't be able to do those things on YouTube, Facebook, etc. They're basically broadcast media now, and should be treated as such.
A foreign nation - an enemy of our state - managed to influence our election the last time around. If they had done it via TV broadcasts from Canada or Mexico, we wouldn't be having this debate - it would be a crime, and we'd be out for punishment. Instead, some people are playing willfully stupid because it helped their candidate. What happens if next time around you don't like the results?
People in this country need to wake up. The most essential part of any democracy is a well regulated, fair election process. Ours is at a crossroads, and is facing a number of challenges, from poorly constructed and secured voting machines to foreign nations running intelligence ops to skew public opinion. This is only starting to be a problem now - it is going to get worse.
OK, we're adding one more to the 'hates democracy' column. We're also kicking a kitten in your honor.
You couldn't take out an ad on ABC or CBS promoting hate speech or lunatic conspiracy theories (a conspiracy theory is one thing - advocating that people harrass or disrupt victims as was the case with the Sandy Hook families is another). Similarly, you shouldn't be able to do those things on YouTube, Facebook, etc. They're basically broadcast media now, and should be treated as such.
A foreign nation - an enemy of our state - managed to influence our election the last time around.
jcn56 couple counter points:(IMHO)
1.) We have lunatics public officials advocating disrupting lives of public officials of differing parties being broadcast by major outlets, already. And it is working.
2) Correction - there were foreign entities (a few and one major) attempting to influence elections - TRIED - no evidence they actually did change a single vote.
Quote:
over one of the worst humans on the planet (that regularly encourages his dimwitted followers to harass Sandy Hook parents) losing an income source is pathetic...
OK, we're adding one more to the 'hates democracy' column. We're also kicking a kitten in your honor.
Fucker smells like tuna anyway...
They are accelerating through drastic moves on these social media platforms, through banning, shadow banning, biased algorithmic manipulations. Beyond that Infowars thing yesterday it is a direct attack on 1st amendment. What really got my attention was their shadow banning of US Congress members. That takes some balls and may come to get them or identify congressional members that support it and are fucking traitors.
You couldn't take out an ad on ABC or CBS promoting hate speech or lunatic conspiracy theories (a conspiracy theory is one thing - advocating that people harrass or disrupt victims as was the case with the Sandy Hook families is another). Similarly, you shouldn't be able to do those things on YouTube, Facebook, etc. They're basically broadcast media now, and should be treated as such.
A foreign nation - an enemy of our state - managed to influence our election the last time around. If they had done it via TV broadcasts from Canada or Mexico, we wouldn't be having this debate - it would be a crime, and we'd be out for punishment. Instead, some people are playing willfully stupid because it helped their candidate. What happens if next time around you don't like the results?
People in this country need to wake up. The most essential part of any democracy is a well regulated, fair election process. Ours is at a crossroads, and is facing a number of challenges, from poorly constructed and secured voting machines to foreign nations running intelligence ops to skew public opinion. This is only starting to be a problem now - it is going to get worse.
Didn't help my candidate.
And while I don't think actual voting machines are at risk because they are rarely, if ever, connected to a network, I agree that in general this is a problem that will get worse before it gets better. As I said earlier, I expect considerable litigation and administrative disputes involving the FEC and FCC before there's even a chance of this getting worked out.
People in this country need to wake up. The most essential part of any democracy is a well regulated, fair election process. Ours is at a crossroads, and is facing a number of challenges, from poorly constructed and secured voting machines to foreign nations running intelligence ops to skew public opinion. This is only starting to be a problem now - it is going to get worse.
I just want it stated for the record that my candidate didn't win. I voted for neither in the past election. Democracy is based on having freedoms to elect who you want without fraud or coercion of the process. I'd posture that so much has been made of the Russian influence (or the more common term t he Media uses - "meddling") is because Trump did win.
There are legitimate tenets of election fraud. Having dead people vote. Voting under fake identities. Rigging the ballot box, voting machines and other voting tools. Purposely miscounting votes. Barring people from voting.
Only now are we stretching the idea that voter fraud includes a propaganda campaign. We can ask why only now it is being debated, but that's for another time.
If Russia hacked into the actual tallying of votes - that would be a threat to our democratic process. When they tap into the imbecilic masses who hinge on bogus stories from Facebook? Sorry. That doesn't cut it for me.
Should we aim to stop that? Of course. Should we act like our country is under attack and that the sacred election rules have been trampled? Absolutely not.
We basically have a system of institutional propaganda anyway. It is called campaigning. Where spreading falsehoods and lies goes unpunished. Even when they get fact checked, there are very few sanctions put in place for making shit up.
But another country does it and we are being attacked? That's the part I just don't buy. We shouldn't absolve people from being morons by creating a bogeyman.
Or was the fabric of our democracy not threatened by that?
You couldn't take out an ad on ABC or CBS promoting hate speech or lunatic conspiracy theories (a conspiracy theory is one thing - advocating that people harrass or disrupt victims as was the case with the Sandy Hook families is another). Similarly, you shouldn't be able to do those things on YouTube, Facebook, etc. They're basically broadcast media now, and should be treated as such.
A foreign nation - an enemy of our state - managed to influence our election the last time around. If they had done it via TV broadcasts from Canada or Mexico, we wouldn't be having this debate - it would be a crime, and we'd be out for punishment. Instead, some people are playing willfully stupid because it helped their candidate. What happens if next time around you don't like the results?
People in this country need to wake up. The most essential part of any democracy is a well regulated, fair election process. Ours is at a crossroads, and is facing a number of challenges, from poorly constructed and secured voting machines to foreign nations running intelligence ops to skew public opinion. This is only starting to be a problem now - it is going to get worse.
Should non-citizens vote?
Most people say true voter fraud is small, and maybe it is, but my guess is no one really knows. Once the fraud is perpetrated it's hard to uncover unless the voter is dead or caught in another crime. For every article that says voter fraud is insignificant there is one (or maybe a half) that shows another one-off case of a non-citizen voting.
And from what you read about today, mayors and governors in more liberal cities and states are making it much easier for illegals to vote.
How is that not a concern? Maybe what was once insignificant becomes significant and unlike fake stories propagated by "useful idiots" this is intentional and orchestrated and coordinated by government officials.
Shouldn't you actually have to be a citizen to vote? Seems like another one of those no-brainers that actually becomes a hysterical debate for some people and results in spews of racism.
Or was the fabric of our democracy not threatened by that?
Yes, we should...
Really?
Except it has been stated by several competing entities that there is no evidence that anyone was influenced and it has been acknowledged that not a single vote was changed.
But that is ok, keep hoping...
Mr. Bungle : 2:01 pm : link : reply
and then strategically releasing them to the public at times and in ways that influence the dominant news cycle is merely "propaganda"?
Really?
Propaganda is the fake stories or Facebook posts that people latched onto.
The release of information is an interesting thing to parse. Release of emails impacted the election, but sitting on a story until weeks before the election on a Billy Bush interview from a decade ago didn't?
In an ironic way, the way I look back at the run up to the election, I thought the dominant news topics were decidedly anti-Trump. And I probably wouldn't have voted for him anyway. I guess if the timing of information comes from "within" it is OK?? From Russia? Nyet!!
I just want it stated for the record that my candidate didn't win. I voted for neither in the past election. Democracy is based on having freedoms to elect who you want without fraud or coercion of the process. I'd posture that so much has been made of the Russian influence (or the more common term t he Media uses - "meddling") is because Trump did win.
There are legitimate tenets of election fraud. Having dead people vote. Voting under fake identities. Rigging the ballot box, voting machines and other voting tools. Purposely miscounting votes. Barring people from voting.
Only now are we stretching the idea that voter fraud includes a propaganda campaign. We can ask why only now it is being debated, but that's for another time.
If Russia hacked into the actual tallying of votes - that would be a threat to our democratic process. When they tap into the imbecilic masses who hinge on bogus stories from Facebook? Sorry. That doesn't cut it for me.
Should we aim to stop that? Of course. Should we act like our country is under attack and that the sacred election rules have been trampled? Absolutely not.
We basically have a system of institutional propaganda anyway. It is called campaigning. Where spreading falsehoods and lies goes unpunished. Even when they get fact checked, there are very few sanctions put in place for making shit up.
But another country does it and we are being attacked? That's the part I just don't buy. We shouldn't absolve people from being morons by creating a bogeyman. [/quote]
I'm sorry you have a hard time understanding that propaganda campaigns are a real threat to democracy. But they are, and always have been. That there are segments of the population that are ass-backwards ignorant and don't understand the world around them is a different story, and we can't resolve that with any kind of legislation or rules.
There's a reason why there are caps on campaign advertising, why there are rules preventing monopoly ownership of media outlets, and why there are regulations on what can be broadcast wrt political campaigns. Saying you disagree means you'd like to see all those go by the wayside too.
Now - the other types of voter fraud or problems with the election system - are real, should be addressed, and have existed for a very long time. These are new threats - dragging those strawmen into this conversation is a joke.
I'm disappointed, but not surprised - that so many Americans have no problem with people spewing hate. Prior to the expansion of the Internet and social media, I honestly believed the US was better than a lot of the world in that regard, but that was just me being naive. We're no better than a lot of other places, unfortunately. ISIS believes in one kind of purity, white or black supremacists another - but idealogically, they're the same. Giving any of them a platform is wrong, and has squat to do with free speech, it's just trying to protect a long and disgusting status quo.
I just want it stated for the record that my candidate didn't win. I voted for neither in the past election. Democracy is based on having freedoms to elect who you want without fraud or coercion of the process. I'd posture that so much has been made of the Russian influence (or the more common term t he Media uses - "meddling") is because Trump did win.
There are legitimate tenets of election fraud. Having dead people vote. Voting under fake identities. Rigging the ballot box, voting machines and other voting tools. Purposely miscounting votes. Barring people from voting.
Only now are we stretching the idea that voter fraud includes a propaganda campaign. We can ask why only now it is being debated, but that's for another time.
If Russia hacked into the actual tallying of votes - that would be a threat to our democratic process. When they tap into the imbecilic masses who hinge on bogus stories from Facebook? Sorry. That doesn't cut it for me.
Should we aim to stop that? Of course. Should we act like our country is under attack and that the sacred election rules have been trampled? Absolutely not.
We basically have a system of institutional propaganda anyway. It is called campaigning. Where spreading falsehoods and lies goes unpunished. Even when they get fact checked, there are very few sanctions put in place for making shit up.
But another country does it and we are being attacked? That's the part I just don't buy. We shouldn't absolve people from being morons by creating a bogeyman.
I'm sorry you have a hard time understanding that propaganda campaigns are a real threat to democracy. But they are, and always have been. That there are segments of the population that are ass-backwards ignorant and don't understand the world around them is a different story, and we can't resolve that with any kind of legislation or rules.
There's a reason why there are caps on campaign advertising, why there are rules preventing monopoly ownership of media outlets, and why there are regulations on what can be broadcast wrt political campaigns. Saying you disagree means you'd like to see all those go by the wayside too.
Now - the other types of voter fraud or problems with the election system - are real, should be addressed, and have existed for a very long time. These are new threats - dragging those strawmen into this conversation is a joke.
I'm disappointed, but not surprised - that so many Americans have no problem with people spewing hate. Prior to the expansion of the Internet and social media, I honestly believed the US was better than a lot of the world in that regard, but that was just me being naive. We're no better than a lot of other places, unfortunately. ISIS believes in one kind of purity, white or black supremacists another - but idealogically, they're the same. Giving any of them a platform is wrong, and has squat to do with free speech, it's just trying to protect a long and disgusting status quo.
Quote:
Hacking the private emails of a presidential campaign team
Mr. Bungle : 2:01 pm : link : reply
and then strategically releasing them to the public at times and in ways that influence the dominant news cycle is merely "propaganda"?
Really?
Propaganda is the fake stories or Facebook posts that people latched onto.
The release of information is an interesting thing to parse. Release of emails impacted the election, but sitting on a story until weeks before the election on a Billy Bush interview from a decade ago didn't?
In an ironic way, the way I look back at the run up to the election, I thought the dominant news topics were decidedly anti-Trump. And I probably wouldn't have voted for him anyway. I guess if the timing of information comes from "within" it is OK?? From Russia? Nyet!!
Was the Billy Bush tape coordinated by a foreign adversary?
The KKK preaching that people of color are inferior might regrettably be covered. But when these groups are using these platforms to assemble and use force to cause disruption and harm - they lose their first amendment protection.
Alex Jones egging on his legion of morons to harass Sandy Hook victims, Antifa, etc. - no better.
Quote:
has not yet concluded, making blanket statements about the degree to which a foreign entity had no influence over the election is premature at best...
Except it has been stated by several competing entities that there is no evidence that anyone was influenced and it has been acknowledged that not a single vote was changed.
But that is ok, keep hoping...
Sounds very scientific...
Of course, 45 says you shouldn't listen to those guys, the Russians themselves said they didn't do it.
We're at war electronically now - and people still don't get it. Our next war will take place economically and online, and we are rapidly losing ground to the Russians of all people, and that's mostly because the average American is so ass backwards when it comes to technology it's not funny.
I find the KKK disgusting, just like ISIS, and flag burning makes my blood boil, but the fact people have a right to be those things or do those things or say those things is part of what makes us America.
Also the mass rejection of those hateful opinions by the overwhelming majority and keeping them on the fringes contributes to making us a great country too.
And none of those opinions, when shared, should come without consequences which brings us full circle to the OP.
The mob. People keep trying to set that line that can't be crossed to things they don't like or disagree with.
Oliver Wendell Holmes said it well:
As did George Washington, and never in my life have these thoughts/quotes been as relevant as they are today. IMO.
Strategic release is not the point. The point is how the released information was obtained.
A "hot mic" recording is not equal to hacking someone's computer.
Of course, 45 says you shouldn't listen to those guys, the Russians themselves said they didn't do it.
We're at war electronically now - and people still don't get it. Our next war will take place economically and online, and we are rapidly losing ground to the Russians of all people, and that's mostly because the average American is so ass backwards when it comes to technology it's not funny.
Interfered with, meddled with, all likely true, but influenced the results of is where the debate comes and of course the "collusion" which is what Mueller has been investigating for 15 months.
To whatever extent they did influence, that was a warning shot. And who's to say that they stop there - elections all around the country are moving to electronic platforms that we have already seen evidence of foreign nations (not just Russia) trying to compromise.
We can't just walk away from this one and say 'hey, the election process sucks elsewhere, what's one more problem'.
As for collusion - that will be a big problem if there's actual proof. I don't see how anyone could make the argument that it's not treason, but that's a separate debate. We need to be less concerned with the past here and more alarmed about the future.
To whatever extent they did influence, that was a warning shot. And who's to say that they stop there - elections all around the country are moving to electronic platforms that we have already seen evidence of foreign nations (not just Russia) trying to compromise.
We can't just walk away from this one and say 'hey, the election process sucks elsewhere, what's one more problem'.
As for collusion - that will be a big problem if there's actual proof. I don't see how anyone could make the argument that it's not treason, but that's a separate debate. We need to be less concerned with the past here and more alarmed about the future.
The problem will be that a segment of the population won't believe the proof even if it is blatant and obvious...
Watch what happens if oil drops back below 50.
To whatever extent they did influence, that was a warning shot. And who's to say that they stop there - elections all around the country are moving to electronic platforms that we have already seen evidence of foreign nations (not just Russia) trying to compromise.
We can't just walk away from this one and say 'hey, the election process sucks elsewhere, what's one more problem'.
As for collusion - that will be a big problem if there's actual proof. I don't see how anyone could make the argument that it's not treason, but that's a separate debate. We need to be less concerned with the past here and more alarmed about the future.
I don't want to go too far down this rabbit hole, but this absolute assurance that THE but for cause of failure in '16 was the Russians is not helping to address the myriad other causes of that failure. It was a one-off thing, but the surest way to make it a two-off thing is to pat yourself on the back and say "we did nothing wrong..."
Of course, 45 says you shouldn't listen to those guys, the Russians themselves said they didn't do it.
We're at war electronically now - and people still don't get it. Our next war will take place economically and online, and we are rapidly losing ground to the Russians of all people, and that's mostly because the average American is so ass backwards when it comes to technology it's not funny.
They have also indicted Russians and indicated that their is no evidence of hacking or election interence knowing that these trials will never occur. Like indicting the tooth fairy. For the record, the russians, chinese, israel have been cyber spying for quite some time. Our country is doing the same...don't be so naive and co-opting this for your political bias. The left is covering up their actions by creating a new "monster" under the bed to fix their loss of influence in government. Its no different than the same crap we here on this board after a bad season, blame something. What we need right now is a house cleaning in government to remove the corruption. It is starting now. We see resignations, firings, and congress that are no longer interested in their seats. The light is on now, and the roaches are visible.
The FACT that Russia had waged a propaganda attack on our elections should alarm EVERY American. That some Americans are not concerned about this says a lot about their so-called patriotism and love of our democratic institutions.
Between the rumors, innuendo, and facts about the dossier being funded by the DNC, provided by McCain, the FBI running sting operations against the trump admin up to the inauguration, the obama admin doing nothing (or at least very little in the eyes of the public) and even blocking attempts by leading politicians to go public about it, it's a f-ing mess.
The FACT that Russia had waged a propaganda attack on our elections should alarm EVERY American. That some Americans are not concerned about this says a lot about their so-called patriotism and love of our democratic institutions.
Did someone say patriotism?
[img]https://rockatee.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Id-rather-be-A-Russian-than-Democrat-shirt-600x600.jpg[img]
One can believe that future attempts need to be stopped while still believing that the story has been overblown with overly dramatic references to democracy being threatened and the sacred electoral process under fire.
And again. Hacking into voting machines is threatening the electoral process. Feeding a bunch of idiots fake stories isn't.
And if we're really tossing naivete out there - evidence also exists that the Russian influence extends back well before the Presidential election, with the previous administration having visibility to the threat.
Between the rumors, innuendo, and facts about the dossier being funded by the DNC, provided by McCain, the FBI running sting operations against the trump admin up to the inauguration, the obama admin doing nothing (or at least very little in the eyes of the public) and even blocking attempts by leading politicians to go public about it, it's a f-ing mess.
The Obama administration blocked attempts by leading politicians to go public? On what planet?
One can believe that future attempts need to be stopped while still believing that the story has been overblown with overly dramatic references to democracy being threatened and the sacred electoral process under fire.
And again. Hacking into voting machines is threatening the electoral process. Feeding a bunch of idiots fake stories isn't.
And if we're really tossing naivete out there - evidence also exists that the Russian influence extends back well before the Presidential election, with the previous administration having visibility to the threat.
Maybe you're problem should be with Mitch McConnell then who blocked the Obama administration from issuing a warning about it.
My point is that naivete is as rife as the faux panic of the imminent destruction of the sacred electoral process.
My point is that naivete is as rife as the faux panic of the imminent destruction of the sacred electoral process.
Faux panic. Okey doke.
Quote:
will ever know the truth. It's really hard to know who to trust or believe. Nothing makes sense and a lot contradicts each other.
Between the rumors, innuendo, and facts about the dossier being funded by the DNC, provided by McCain, the FBI running sting operations against the trump admin up to the inauguration, the obama admin doing nothing (or at least very little in the eyes of the public) and even blocking attempts by leading politicians to go public about it, it's a f-ing mess.
The Obama administration blocked attempts by leading politicians to go public? On what planet?
Right here on Earth. Apparently not the planet you live on.
You are part right about McConnell, only McConnell wanted no part in a bipartisan report. He had zero ability to block any statements whatsoever by Obama. That's silly to think otherwise. Obama blocked Comey.
From an NPR report...
But that didn't stop then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., from alluding publicly to the Russian campaign in a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey. And Comey reportedly wanted to announce the active measures in an op-ed column, as Newsweek reported in March 2017. Two sources with knowledge about the matter told Newsweek that Obama administration officials blocked the effort.
Quote:
Our next war will take place economically and online, and we are rapidly losing ground to the Russians of all people.
Watch what happens if oil drops back below 50.
We are rapidly losing ground to the Russians economically? In what sector?