Joe Biden 2021

[hobbes2702 13061]

10 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

I thought that about you.

Explain what about it is a power grab. Explain how they have anymore power to take down a post than I do.

[workswithseed 2110]

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

You literally think the US govt shouldn’t be able to say “that’s untrue”? They are making any decisions on what is being removed. These private companies evaluate the claims the same way they would for any other users claim. They aren’t grabbing any power of any kind. They have the exact same power as you or I in this case. I can flag the same things as misinformation. Seriously how hard is this for y’all to understand?

Yes, cause government hasn't lied before. I mean if their was no public funding in social media sites, than I would have agreed, but as you know money is a really good motivational tool. 

[hobbes2702 13061]

1 minute ago, workswithseed said:

Yes, cause government hasn't lied before. I mean if their was no public funding in social media sites, than I would have agreed, but as you know money is a really good motivational tool. 

Ok. So what power do they have today that I don’t?

[Sawbonz 27585]

44 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Now, what if Cuomo was just take down info about putting sick patients into old folks homes,

This doesn’t make sense. Are you saying cuomo could tell Facebook to take down posts saying he ordered NH to take covid positive patients discharged from hospitals and facebook would do it?  That’s absolute bullshit

[aggie08 21529]

It is fucking amazing how hard people will fight to have their "news" sources knowingly lie to them--completely unobstructed--as long as they're spouting shit that they want to hear. Fucking tooth and nail.

Yes, there's some "BoTh SiDeS!" to it, but, right now, only one side is actively trying to kill people.

 

[Biff Tannen 45724]

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Ok. So what power do they have today that I don’t?

You can keep asking. He’s going to keep not answering. 

[workswithseed 2110]

42 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Ok. So what power do they have today that I don’t?

They have the power of purse strings, and the power of policy making. 

[Biff Tannen 45724]

Just now, workswithseed said:

They have the power of purse strings, and the power of policy making. 

When you control the mail, you control information?

[workswithseed 2110]

Just now, Biff Tannen said:

When you control the mail, you control information?

I mean we did have a censor bureaucracy, I'm glad that's one of the few things we did get rid of.

[washparkhorn 9939]

54 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

It is fucking amazing how hard people will fight to have their "news" sources knowingly lie to them--completely unobstructed--as long as they're spouting shit that they want to hear. Fucking tooth and nail.

Agree 100%. It's maddening.

Media silos in our society are a curse. Most who fall prey to media silos don't know they are trapped in them. 

And I will say if for the 50th got dammed time -  paywalls to intelligent news and opinion  exacerbate and accelerate the news silo problem. 

Spoiler

facebook needs to lean in and understand who seeks the data he sells. After all, facebook users info (you) is what fb sells - always has been. Possible facebook solutions (spitball) - know your customer (buyers of data, not users) standards; removal of "news" as a feature.

_____

Intelligent news and opinion (now paywalled) might drop the self-destructive paywalls if facebook exits the news market. I expect Intelligent news revenue would rise with a departure by facebook from the news markets.

• Intelligent news and opinion is what most rational people seek.
• The paywalls at Intelligent news and opinion appeared at an inopportune time - when factual reporting was needed most.
• If facebook exits the news market, eyes will seek out a news source (I still recommend AP and Reuters, but even Reuters is now paywalled more than it was + local news + original sources).
• In our freemarket of news and ideas, rational humans will seek reliable information. No rational persons wants to be stone cold wrong - that's a failure to rational people.
• That should dramatically improve "views" for intelligent news and opinion - which leads to revenue. 

 

Free movement of news allows viewers to compare and contrast, which is extremely useful for intelligent humans when discerning truth from fiction.  Marketplace of ideas requires common language rather than a Tower of media silos named Babel. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by washparkhorn

[hobbes2702 13061]

14 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

They have the power of purse strings, and the power of policy making. 

Right. So then you agree they have no actual ability to remove posts on Facebook? Same as you and I. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by hobbes2702

[Biff Tannen 45724]

1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

I mean we did have a censor bureaucracy, I'm glad that's one of the few things we did get rid of.

I don't know what this means.

[Biff Tannen 45724]

1 hour ago, washparkhorn said:

Most who fall prey to media silos don't know they are trapped in them. 

@workswithseed

Honestly, I'm not sure why I bother.

[workswithseed 2110]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

@workswithseed

Honestly, I'm not sure why I bother.

Cause, you're bored?

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I don't know what this means.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States

Beginning in the 1830s and until the American Civil War, the US Postmaster General refused to allow mailmen to carry abolitionist pamphlets to the South.^[7]

^{that's just a snidbit of censorship in American censorship, but you get the idea. It's unfortunate that this shit was allowed.}

[Brisketexan 105309]

Good thing the government never provides misinformation. 

Yes, cause government hasn't lied before. I mean if their was no public funding in social media sites, than I would have agreed, but as you know money is a really good motivational tool. 

The serial killer pointing to the guy who just got pulled over for failing to signal: “see, he’s a criminal too!”

The fucking logical fallacies are maddening. They stand with people who spew false information, for the purpose of harming our fellow humans and Americans, and their defense is “it’s ok, and in fact I am gung-ho about spreading the same false, insane, and harmful bullshit, because the government has lied before.” You fucking suck at logic, you fucking suck at life, and you are a scourge upon the planet.

[TwiceHorn 31534]

Well, it is a little troubling that posts are flagged by the government.  There is or may be a pretty obvious incentive to remove posts flagged by the government, particularly if you are under, say, antitrust scrutiny.

I find this particular justification for doing it reasonable if not compelling.  But it does set a precedent for the government flagging or otherwise exerting influence on what remains posted and what is taken down where the circumstances are less compelling, and the truth or untruth of the content less obvious.

[Neonmoon 38130]

I don’t think the government should be involved. Facebook should have been doing it since the word go, but Zuckerberg is the devil so here we are. But I agree with Twice, the government has a compelling reason. 

[Ten Bears 2483]

4 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Yes, cause government hasn't lied before. I mean if their was no public funding in social media sites, than I would have agreed, but as you know money is a really good motivational tool. 

Serious question - what was your first language?

[dcar00 14354]

5 hours ago, aggie08 said:

It is fucking amazing how hard people will fight to have their "news" sources knowingly lie to them--completely unobstructed--as long as they're spouting shit that they want to hear. Fucking tooth and nail.

Yes, there's some "BoTh SiDeS!" to it, but, right now, only one side is actively trying to kill people.

 

calm down Karen. no one is actively trying to kill people.

edit: except in Chicago.

Edited July 18, 2021 by dcar00

[dcar00 14354]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

I don’t think the government should be involved. Facebook should have been doing it since the word go, but Zuckerberg is the devil so here we are. But I agree with Twice, the government has a compelling reason. 

well yes of course the govt shouldn't be involved at all, in a sane world, but here we are.  facebook can do it but they should be subject to lawsuits if they do.

[workswithseed 2110]

1 hour ago, Ten Bears said:

Serious question - what was your first language?

Bable.

[aggie08 21529]

14 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

calm down Karen. no one is actively trying to kill people.

edit: except in Chicago.

What an unbelievably stupid post.

[TwiceHorn 31534]

19 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

well yes of course the govt shouldn't be involved at all, in a sane world, but here we are.  facebook can do it but they should be subject to lawsuits if they do.

Well, in a sane world, the idiots that post this shit would be marginalized and not lionized by morons.

I don't think facebook should be sued for removing posts, any posts, for any reason.

[dcar00 14354]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Well, in a sane world, the idiots that post this shit would be marginalized and not lionized by morons.

I don't think facebook should be sued for removing posts, any posts, for any reason.

then their protections should be taken away.  

[GRHorn 105]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, it is a little troubling that posts are flagged by the government.  There is or may be a pretty obvious incentive to remove posts flagged by the government, particularly if you are under, say, antitrust scrutiny.

I find this particular justification for doing it reasonable if not compelling.  But it does set a precedent for the government flagging or otherwise exerting influence on what remains posted and what is taken down where the circumstances are less compelling, and the truth or untruth of the content less obvious

I’m truly amazed at CR posters inability to see how fucked this really is. Do you think the government insisting these disseminators of misinformation being completely deplatformed will help with vaccination efforts? Which is presumably the reason they’re doing it. It will have minimal effect.
 

But it sets the precedent for other moves by the government to handle misinformation that will be more invasive or dubious. The unvaccinated will get fucked. Why do Y’all care? The rates of vaccinated getting dying are so low it’s inconsequential. Just go about your business. 
 

Please imagine someone you hate having this power. How about GWB squashing all “misinformation” about WMDs? Or President DeSantis or whatever. 

My impression is that y’all think it’s good and you’ll get a few years to really turn the screws before it matters. May really backfire. Plus it’s an extremely warped way of viewing governments role. 

[cactusflinthead 27601]

So...you're telling me it's ok to let people lie?

Got it.

We should allow disinformation and misinformation to go unabated.

Right.

Why don't you continue to fuck off?

[aggie08 21529]

8 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

So...you're telling me it's ok to let people lie?

Got it.

We should allow disinformation and misinformation to go unabated.

Right.

Why don't you continue to fuck off?

But it's a slippery slope!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JimmyJames 12271]

57 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m truly amazed at CR posters inability to see how fucked this really is. Do you think the government insisting these disseminators of misinformation being completely deplatformed will help with vaccination efforts? Which is presumably the reason they’re doing it. It will have minimal effect.
 

But it sets the precedent for other moves by the government to handle misinformation that will be more invasive or dubious. The unvaccinated will get fucked. Why do Y’all care? The rates of vaccinated getting dying are so low it’s inconsequential. Just go about your business. 
 

Please imagine someone you hate having this power. How about GWB squashing all “misinformation” about WMDs? Or President DeSantis or whatever. 

My impression is that y’all think it’s good and you’ll get a few years to really turn the screws before it matters. May really backfire. Plus it’s an extremely warped way of viewing governments role. 

Well if YOU say so I guess I should be concerned. 
 

Obviously I’m being facetious. Your rep here totally sucks and I tend to believe the opposite of everything you post. Until proven otherwise.

[dcar00 14354]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

I’m truly amazed at CR posters inability to see how fucked this really is. Do you think the government insisting these disseminators of misinformation being completely deplatformed will help with vaccination efforts? Which is presumably the reason they’re doing it. It will have minimal effect.
 

But it sets the precedent for other moves by the government to handle misinformation that will be more invasive or dubious. The unvaccinated will get fucked. Why do Y’all care? The rates of vaccinated getting dying are so low it’s inconsequential. Just go about your business. 
 

Please imagine someone you hate having this power. How about GWB squashing all “misinformation” about WMDs? Or President DeSantis or whatever. 

My impression is that y’all think it’s good and you’ll get a few years to really turn the screws before it matters. May really backfire. Plus it’s an extremely warped way of viewing governments role. 

the only good information is the best, fantastic(insert bad orange man) information.......that we approve of.  

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, dcar00 said:

the only good information is the best, fantastic(insert bad orange man) information.......that we approve of.  

Whatever 

[dcar00 14354]

40 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

So...you're telling me it's ok to let people lie?

Got it.

We should allow disinformation and misinformation to go unabated.

Right.

Why don't you continue to fuck off?

like yeah right I know....Russian Collusion 

[dcar00 14354]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

Whatever 

hey the Big W-E.  you could have gone straight for hitler.

[Serak The Preparer 3431]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

I’m truly amazed at CR posters inability to see how fucked this really is. Do you think the government insisting these disseminators of misinformation being completely deplatformed will help with vaccination efforts? Which is presumably the reason they’re doing it. It will have minimal effect.

What the fuck does "the government insisting these disseminators of misinformation being completely deplatformed" mean? They are flagging posts, the same thing you or I could do. Facebook can respond the exact same way to my action vs the government's action. There is no regulation. There is no law. You language of "insistence" is intentionally hyperbolic so there is not even a reasonable response.

 

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, cactusflinthead said:

So...you're telling me it's ok to let people lie?

Got it.

We should allow disinformation and misinformation to go unabated.

Right.

Why don't you continue to fuck off?

Such a simple minded response. Anyway, here’s what I think about it. 
 

Lolololol

[Brothahorn 10087]

In his remarks, delivered during a press conference at the White House with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Biden condemned communism as a “failed system,” adding that socialism is not a “very useful substitute.”


I'm proud of you, Joe.

[aggie08 21529]

12 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

In his remarks, delivered during a press conference at the White House with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Biden condemned communism as a “failed system,” adding that socialism is not a “very useful substitute.”


I'm proud of you, Joe.

Suckers. He's got us right where he wants us. Lulled into a false sense of security and comfort. As soon as we turn our backs...BOOM!...we're communists now.

[Biff Tannen 45724]

On 7/17/2021 at 8:47 PM, aggie08 said:

But it's a slippery slope!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is what it boils down to for so many of their dumb arguments. And I get it. Because they are horrible people, they expect other people to all act in the same way they would. If presented the power to stop misinformation about Covid of course the next logical step for them is to take it to the extreme and censor everything and turn the world into an authoritarian hellscape. Because they are horrible people. 

[cactusflinthead 27601]

 

[Captainant 27757]

21 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

In his remarks, delivered during a press conference at the White House with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Biden condemned communism as a “failed system,” adding that socialism is not a “very useful substitute.”


I'm proud of you, Joe.

And I'm guessing that anything like a right to healthcare or education is communist/socialist in your book too, right?

[DonkeyCigars 143]

On 7/17/2021 at 8:47 PM, aggie08 said:

But it's a slippery slope!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Two words for everyone: Patriot. Act.

Some of you people are quick to forget the lessons of history. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, regardless of noble intentions or dishonest guises, it's very difficult to reverse and there are always unintentional consequences.

Our government is not some altruistic good where people go to be of service. It's a necessary evil, full of egos and agendas for ambitious power and careers with a lot of money at stake. We would be wise to really think through what sort of powers we grant the government to have and try and think through all the implications and consequences outside of a single use case.

At the very least, it's been interesting to see the change of mindset and feelings about government-- I wonder if it's a youthful/Gen Z naiveté or if hope just springs eternal for some people.

[David Dennison 18946]

35 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Two words for everyone: Patriot. Act.

Some of you people are quick to forget the lessons of history. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, regardless of noble intentions or dishonest guises, it's very difficult to reverse and there are always unintentional consequences.

Our government is not some altruistic good where people go to be of service. It's a necessary evil, full of egos and agendas for ambitious power and careers with a lot of money at stake. We would be wise to really think through what sort of powers we grant the government to have and try and think through all the implications and consequences outside of a single use case.

At the very least, it's been interesting to see the change of mindset and feelings about government-- I wonder if it's a youthful/Gen Z naiveté or if hope just springs eternal for some people.

That "of the people, by the people, for the people" stuff is just a bunch of talk.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

37 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That "of the people, by the people, for the people" stuff is just a bunch of talk.

Do you think just because something was written 245 year ago that it means the execution and buy-in still exists in the present?

It was real, I believe in the beginning, but like with all things, time collapses a beautiful vision of idealism into ugly realism. Over time, as new management and people get involved, sometimes cultures change for the worse. Sometimes the value and vision and mission statements just become lip service. Like anything else, if you don't have people tending the flame and keeping the fire stoked with the original intent, it will go out.

[dcar00 14354]

How's Joe coming along building the Department of Homeland Information?

[GW Hayduke 1953]

On 7/17/2021 at 9:19 PM, dcar00 said:

like yeah right I know....Russian Collusion 

Are you referring to Trump’s campaign manager providing internal polling data to a russian operative, Russia operating troll farms to sway US opinions using social media, trump asking Russia to find Hillary’s emails, Russia hacking DNC emails, Trump’s advisor collaborating with Wikileaks on the timing of the public release or Russian hacked emails, or the meeting at trump tower between three senior members of Trump’s campaign and a Russian attorney to get documents to incriminate hillary?  

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20486]

On 7/17/2021 at 6:01 PM, Neonmoon said:

I don’t think the government should be involved. Facebook should have been doing it since the word go, but Zuckerberg is the devil so here we are. But I agree with Twice, the government has a compelling reason. 

Actually, I don't think Zuckerberg is the devil. I think he's an ordinary guy who happened to build/steal/create something so great that billions of people worldwide use it daily and now the task of reigning in harmful/false speech is impossible.  I'm not saying I feel bad for him, but he literally cannot win, except financially.  

If I were him, I'd shut Facebook down, sell it off, and live like a prince on a Hawaiian Island for the rest of my life. FB is not worth the grief.

 

['stache 21860]

Lies and misinformation have been around as long as the USA. They usually fail because the majority of the people are smart enough not to fall for it based on reputations, word of mouth, etc. There is a major difference today in the speed and breadth of information, including open social media platforms. But to me the biggest difference is the stupidity of the common American. People who for whatever reason just can't see beyond their own biases, or their own "want to be true" etc. I can also rant for hours about organized religion which today is nothing like the founding fathers practiced (many were a very vague form of enlightenment style Christianity, nothing like today's fundys). In sum, you can't fix stupid. I don't blame facebook or the government, I blame the people for being stupid.

That said, I haven't researched fully what's going on here, but I'm not comfortable with government deciding what can and cannot be posted (I know that's a gross exaggeration but the concept even in small doses is disturbing). What I would strongly support, however, is an easier standard for libel specifically targeted to social media. If you can prove that something is an outright falsehood, sue the poster and/or facebook, and have a mechanism for injunctions to get it removed. I haven't fleshed the thought out yet, but I think the speed of technology and the amount of bad actors out there would justify special rules for social media misinformation. And much of the lies are easily disprovable and should meet the "likelihood of success on the merits" standard for a preliminary injunction.

Edited July 19, 2021 by 'stache

[Longhorn_Fan68 33896]

34 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Actually, I don't think Zuckerberg is the devil. I think he's an ordinary guy who happened to build/steal/create something so great that billions of people worldwide use it daily and now the task of reigning in harmful/false speech is impossible.  I'm not saying I feel bad for him, but he literally cannot win, except financially.  

If I were him, I'd shut Facebook down, sell it off, and live like a prince on a Hawaiian Island for the rest of my life. FB is not worth the grief.

 

it is when you're a greedy slimeball like Zuck is

[David Dennison 18946]

53 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Do you think just because something was written 245 year ago that it means the execution and buy-in still exists in the present?

It was real, I believe in the beginning, but like with all things, time collapses a beautiful vision of idealism into ugly realism. Over time, as new management and people get involved, sometimes cultures change for the worse. Sometimes the value and vision and mission statements just become lip service. Like anything else, if you don't have people tending the flame and keeping the fire stoked with the original intent, it will go out.

I think most voters in this country absolutely buy into the notion of representative democracy.

I think conservatives gave up on it when they realized it threatened their power.

[wildcat09 29378]

53 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Actually, I don't think Zuckerberg is the devil. I think he's an ordinary guy who happened to build/steal/create something so great that billions of people worldwide use it daily and now the task of reigning in harmful/false speech is impossible.  I'm not saying I feel bad for him, but he literally cannot win, except financially.  

If I were him, I'd shut Facebook down, sell it off, and live like a prince on a Hawaiian Island for the rest of my life. FB is not worth the grief.

 

It's funny you say this because he's been using his money and a bunch of shell companies to force Hawaiian families to sell him their properties. He's got something like 700 acres now. He isn't just a normal guy who stumbled into a fortune, he's a weird little sociopath. 

[DonkeyCigars 143]

12 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I think most voters in this country absolutely buy into the notion of representative democracy.

I think conservatives gave up on it when they realized it threatened their power.

I think most voters in this country probably buy into the notion of representative democracy as well-- which is why you have the knife fights you have by both parties to capture votes (and limit votes). Whether it be naked ambition in policy talks (e.g. voter ID's to restrict voters who won't vote for you, or annexing new states to add voters likely to vote for you) or more nuanced, the end result is the same-- to push an agenda and build power in pursuit of power and ambition. 

Personally, I think the Democrats have a better line of sight to long term viability and power, the window is closing on the Conservatives unless they pivot their messaging and platform pretty quickly.