What's new
By:

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

Bucknutz said:
All the “book burning” bros here who promote that fake narrative, are you okay with this?


View: https://x.com/disclosetv/status/1823035468394754244?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


Threatening action to shut down speech. Speech that the government can subjectively classify the context to whatever they feel like. I think I just heard this recently coming from a VP candidate.

You guys are obviously against this “book burning” right?
Click to expand...

Why do I give a **** what happens in the EU?
 
Here is something on the EU DSA (Digital Services Act). This act has been challenged in court by google and amazon it looks like, but it also looks like it is being applied across the board. Of course the big boys do not want to be constrained, it makes it harder to generate views and clicks if they have to self-censor the most inflammatory and vile **** they traffic in. How can they get that sweet ad revenue from the incels if they can't stream the christchurch shootings live? You do realize this is the kind of content they are going after, right? They are also requiring transparency on the algorithms and how advertisers target users. Of course the big boys don't want to give this up, it might give families something to help break the hold they have on children in our society that drive the most ad revenue, and making it more public ensure that they have to answer to it in a public sphere, instead of in the shadows. So they can explain, IN PUBLIC, why boys aged 12-17 get more violent images thrown at them in a day than any other age group, for example, things like that. Also how they peddle and encourage outrage and fake media posts to rile up the masses so they stay glued to their computers to keep that ad revenue flowing, regardless of the damage done.

en.wikipedia.org

Digital Services Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

But if you check a few more sources you see this is the bulk of what they are after, transparency, not censorship. You can still get all the pissed off Donald Trump videos you want, while others can protest the share of sexually charged ads and other content thrown at pre-teens, especially girls, that has been shown to not only keep them glued to the computer or phone, but to also increase their acceptance of online grooming (yes that is another real category with big problems).

This is a far more nuanced and deep conversation than simply "muh rights!!" And you can bet that if the giant "evil" ones, such as google, facebook, amazon, and especially twitter are up in arms about it, then it is probably good for our society as a whole and we should probably support it.

By the way, the next demo that gets the most violent images are men aged 25-40 - prime incel territory, and the perpetrators of most of our mass shooting sprees worldwide, only their violent imagery is intermingled with subversive political messages as well, most of them fake and targeted to drive max outrage. There was even a time a few years ago when it was discovered that Russia was disseminating a lot of this on purpose, trying to destabilize western culture, aided and abetted by facebook, google and twitter, who were more than happy to use that to prop up their billionaire owners.

www.technologyreview.com

The Facebook whistleblower says its algorithms are dangerous. Here’s why.

Frances Haugen’s testimony at the Senate hearing today raised serious questions about how Facebook’s algorithms work—and echoes many findings from our previous investigation.
www.technologyreview.com www.technologyreview.com


So if we are going to discuss this, let's at least be intellectually honest about it.



Edit: by the way these are just some of the top google responses to these searches, after you scroll past a dozen scams shoved to the top to make google more money of course. There is a lot more out there about this, but a lot of the really good stuff starts on page 2.
 
LogGrad98 said:
So if we are going to discuss this, let's at least be intellectually honest about it.
Click to expand...
Then be intellectually honest. It is B.S. The government isn't prosecuting someone who did harm, or even prosecuting the person who said something which may have contributed to the mindset of the person who did harm, but instead they are prosecuting someone who has an ownership stake in a technology that some unrelated individual used to communicate words that a third person took as a call to action. If a government can prosecute someone two people removed from the action doer, someone who isn't a citizen of or even located in their jurisdiction, then the government can prosecute anyone anytime at will.

There should be consequences for foreign governments threatening American citizens in this manner.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Now, do I agree with it? Not sure actually. I think they should be able to post and send what they want to, within the law, but I think there is also a moral responsibility beyond the legal terms defined in "the law" that operators of sites like this should be expected to uphold.
Click to expand...
What morals? Your morals, my morals, the government morals? This is the subjective part, I keep bringing up. I know for a fact, there are some posters on this site, which would be fine to suppress Trumps speech because it's the "moral" thing to do. Trump hasn't even said anything, yet its the "morally" right thing to do.

It's okay for me or the Government to "morally" suppress Kamala's interview because I subjectivly think it's hate speech.

This is Covid suppression debate all over. (Don't want to litigate that again)

More speech is better than less speech. Even if its lying, which posters do here, like flashlights in peoples asses.
 
Bucknutz said:
What morals? Your morals, my morals, the government morals? This is the subjective part, I keep bringing up. I know for a fact, there are some posters on this site, which would be fine to suppress Trumps speech because it's the "moral" thing to do. Trump hasn't even said anything, yet its the "morally" right thing to do.

It's okay for me or the Government to "morally" suppress Kamala's interview because I subjectivly think it's hate speech.

This is Covid suppression debate all over. (Don't want to litigate that again)

More speech is better than less speech. Even if its lying, which posters do here, like flashlights in peoples asses.
Click to expand...
Society's morals in general as defined by the voting public. We do this all the time. You're acting like nothing that is done in terms of setting laws or statutes are based in any sense of "morals" at all and that's just cherry picking. In fact most of our laws are based in racist puritanism, but hey, the devil you know, amirite? Hell, I should be able to date a 14 year old, marry her. I mean, why not? Because it's against your morals? I guarantee you a non-trivial part of society would disagree with you on that, push comes to shove. We legislate based on morals all the time. So why not regulate based on them as well. How much of this is free speech realistically and how much protecting the rich at the expense of the vulnerable, if you're being honest with yourself? Is this the specter of socialism the conservatives are so afraid of, that really they might have to deal with legislative and regulatory changes based on someone else's version of morality and not theirs? The devil you know indeed.
 
Last edited:
Is anyone even remotely concerned that the US seems to not have a functioning President when all indications are significantly more widespread conflict is about to significantly kick off in the Middle East as well as the other conflicts around the world ??
 
Douchebag K said:
Is anyone even remotely concerned that the US seems to not have a functioning President when all indications are significantly more widespread conflict is about to significantly kick off in the Middle East as well as the other conflicts around the world ??
Click to expand...

Not remotely, millions of others will die before i have to worry about my skin.
 
Douchebag K said:
Is anyone even remotely concerned that the US seems to not have a functioning President when all indications are significantly more widespread conflict is about to significantly kick off in the Middle East as well as the other conflicts around the world ??
Click to expand...
Last I checked, Biden still had a heartbeat.
 
For the American citizens here, who plan to vote, are you planning to vote on Election Day, Early Voting or Mail-in?

Just looked up early voting here in Florida, it starts about 2 weeks before. This is what I have done in the past and plan to do again.
 
Douchebag K said:
Is anyone even remotely concerned that the US seems to not have a functioning President when all indications are significantly more widespread conflict is about to significantly kick off in the Middle East as well as the other conflicts around the world ??
Click to expand...
I don’t think we have a non-functioning president. But, when I hear Trump say the people in the Harris airport photo actually “do not exist”, I can’t help but wonder about the MAGA Party candidate, and his cognitive health. Seems like he may not be “well”, however one defines “well” where Trump is concerned. Would hate to see someone this far removed from reality, a fact Trump seems to be bizarrely insistent we understand, lol, in the Oval Office.

This president doesn’t seem divorced from reality. That’s important to some of us. We prefer presidents who are not insane….

www.cbsnews.com

President Biden speaks on the stakes of the 2024 election, and on his place in history

In his first interview since withdrawing from the race, the president reflects on his decision to end his bid for reelection and what he says is the importance of defeating Trump to protect democracy.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
 
Douchebag K said:
Is anyone even remotely concerned that the US seems to not have a functioning President when all indications are significantly more widespread conflict is about to significantly kick off in the Middle East as well as the other conflicts around the world ??
Click to expand...
No. The secretary of state and defense and others will be involved. This is not a monarchy just yet, so one guy being down doesn't take down the entire system, even the president.
 
Bucknutz said:
For the American citizens here, who plan to vote, are you planning to vote on Election Day, Early Voting or Mail-in?

Just looked up early voting here in Florida, it starts about 2 weeks before. This is what I have done in the past and plan to do again.
Click to expand...
I thought those are all fraudulent votes, or is that only in Georgia? jkjk


I am probably going to vote at a polling place. My wife likes to do that and I usually try to go with her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top