Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

Well, I stated I was against banning him. I just pointed out that every dumbass right wing conspiracy theory from the past decade has had Paul's approval at one point or another.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I am with Kapture on this one. PJW broke none of the current rules of those platforms that I can see. While I don't agree with him on most things, I support his right to say them. Yes, I know that FB/IG and Twitter are not government entities, but they are evolving into an almost utility company importance in modern society because so much public discourse and business is conducted there. Further I hate the trend toward nanny statism - be it from the government or powerful corporations like FB.

Treating Facebook as if it's a basic human necessity like water or electricity just means that it's MORE likely to be tightly regulated and monitored.

[AlabamAlum]

Treating Facebook as if it's a basic human necessity like water or electricity just means that it's MORE likely to be tightly regulated and monitored.

While that may be true in some aspects, the local power company isn't shutting off PJW's electricity. And, for that matter, the local KKK has running water, access to a phone, gas, and power, too.

[Dr. Strangelove]

While that may be true in some aspects, the local power company isn't shutting off PJW's electricity. And, for that matter, the local KKK has running water, access to a phone, gas, and power, too.

I mean, that's a fair point. Once it's a utility everyone needs to have equal access. But that doesn't change the fact that if you really object to the Nanny State, asking the govt to view Facebook as a utility is probably the last thing you should want.

It's a tricky question. Maybe we're entering a new era where Apps and even ISPs are going to be treated as 'publishers' and be held legally responsible for the content they distribute. They'd HAVE to censor at that point. After that it's back to shouting on a street corner or the park for the cranks

[iam416]

[AlabamAlum]

I mean, that's a GREAT point. The only point. Once it's a utility everyone needs to have equal access.

FULL STOP!

Kidding aside. I said, "evolving into almost utility company importance." Further, I have never considered access to utilities as nanny statism.

Publishers publish things like The Turner Diaries, copies of Mein Kamph, and all manner of hateful or whacky conspiracy books. Hell, go to Amazon and you can buy a PJW book right now (he's not banned from there and of course you can self publish). You can also buy the Milo book, Farrakhan's book, and all sorts of idiocy.

ISPs host Stormfront, and all manner of KKK and Aryan Nation websites.

In other words, meh on them censoring more like publishers and ISPs.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Diane Sawyer of ABC did a TV Piece that was aired last night called "Screen Time." To no one's surprise, a huge amount of our 24h day is spent on our devices and a huge portion of that time is spend on social media. The focus was on trying to change our behavior and use our phones, tablets, etc. as devices and their inherent technology that enhance our every day activities. I've heard this line before ....... the issue is the stimulation of the pleasure centers of the brain by social media interaction. It's addictive. Scientifically proven .....

The other point was big corporations (e.g., FB and Google) see it's users as end products (Tim Cook of Apple denies this) to be shaped to consume the things that others are paying for that shaping. Of course, those who spend a lot of time on these apps are getting manipulated and it's not only as a means of shaping the users buying habits. Clearly, it's become a means of shaping political views, getting folks to think a certain way about hot-button issues and get voters aligned in that thinking with particular candidates.

Although all the big name companies in one way or another deny they collect the massive amounts of data they do collect from users of these apps to benefit their bottom lines. It's a weak argument that smart people shouldn't buy. Tim Cook was the only executive that agreed to be interviewed. The others sent in statements.

But this gets to the notion of the conglomeration of these social media apps have become a utility. The Europeans HAVE regulated them to the extent they can and Tim Cook of Apple was a lone voice calling for some level of regulatory authority. I dunno. I think it's a matter of consumers and users of these apps taking personal responsibility for what's out there and making consciousness decisions to participate within them or not or at some level in between. I can't see the government I want to have regulating what I involve myself in but then again not everyone is capable of making good decisions about such things. Hard question regarding regulation if at all and then to what extent.

[millenwasmyfavorite]

All good points.

A few succinct caps I've read recently:

-If it is free, the consumer is product (probably always been true, but to the degree of what we are seeing now... not much precedent).

-Every entity that supplies something on the internet measures their success through time on screen. This probably seems obvious, until you think about an organization's driving objective is figuring out how to get you to devote more time to them than you currently do.

[AlabamAlum]

DSL,

In closing, PJW should not have been banned from the various social media sites - essentially because of a one-time association with Alex Jones. The thought we have to protect the users of Facebook or society in general from some whacko conspiracy theorist on social media is just beyond the pale to me (yes, I still miss Pale). And it seems to me that it is disparate treatment politically; in other words: one's rights to foment whackadoodle theories, slanted hit pieces, and/or over-the-top rhetoric is more tolerated from a Michael Moore than an Alex Jones. Or at least it does from my seat in the outfield bleachers.

This isn't the mediocre Shostakovich's Russia, comrade! No matter how many Facebook ads you and your commie ilk buy!

[Kapture1]

the have the same protections that the telephone utility companies had back when people used LAN lines, AT&T for example. AT&T could not be held liable if two people were using their utility to plan a crime for example. however, AT&T never banned someone from their service because of their beliefs and what they said over the phone. that is where now Facebook is acting like a publisher of content rather than the utility they have protection for (they are not responsible and can not be held liable for what is posted on their site). if they wish to be a publisher of content, then they should be treated as such by the FEC.

or they can get out of the publishing and censorship business, they should not be allowed to have it both ways.

[Hannibal]

Crazy Derby finish today. I'm pretty sure that's the first time that the unofficial winner has been DQ-ed. A 65-1 long shot finishes runner up in the race and is declared the winner.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Yeah I can't remember any of the Triple Crown races ending like that. Takes a lot of balls to DQ the winner.

[Ghengis Jon]

A $2 trifecta was worth $23k. Wow.

[Ghengis Jon]

is rolling back protections on Monday that resulted from the Deepwater Horizon explosion. More important to solidify campaign donations from oil companies than to protect people or the environment.

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/03/720008093/trump-administration-moves-to-roll-back-offshore-drilling-safety-regulations

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump predictably weighs in on the DQ Derby finish. Says "political correctness" is to blame