Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 298: Blood Sugar Flex Magik

(+) Yeah! (+)

Jakyl25 posted...

Im gonna be the guy that Wang was rightfully busting the media for not being

All mass protesting for ANY REASON during a pandemic is IDIOTIC

Youre gonna harm your community virally more than the police would

Definitely ill-advised. But people break.

Perhaps we've forgotten since the LA riots were so long ago and many officers weren't even alive for them now but...We know riots are how this ends.

---

It was made worse when people saw the riot gear and the tear gas come out.

When police don't show the same restraint they showed when a bunch of white people that had made death threats storm a capitol with guns. Its pretty much shoving the inequality right in peoples face. People are stupid, but you hit a point where it becomes very clear to everyone just how uneven society really is.

---

Im not even talking about the riots though

I mean even the peaceful organized protests

Dont do it. Not now.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im gonna be the guy that Wang was rightfully busting the media for not being

All mass protesting for ANY REASON during a pandemic is IDIOTIC

Youre gonna harm your community virally more than the police would

What are you gonna do, hold the protests until later? Because the police aren't going to stop killing people

Paratroopa1 posted...

What are you gonna do, hold the protests until later? Because the police aren't going to stop killing people

Neither is the virus, at a much higher rate
---

red13n posted...

People are stupid, but you hit a point where it becomes very clear to everyone just how uneven society really is.

And one of those inequalities is health care
---

Nanis23 posted...

Then this is what I mean as well
I am just saying I feel like that same person could have done the same thing if the victim was a white man that annoyed him. He is just a scum

Alright, that's the cop we know who had him.
What about the other 3 who didn't just let it happen but supported him?

Cops abusing authority, going too far, like... Yeah it's a known problem and expected in basic psychology. But what would you do to limit it where a case like this doesn't happen? Add more rules to clearly break? The most i can think of would be to hold them more liable than the normal citizen as opposed to much less (or at times seemingly not at all) and hope the threat of actual punishment would cause more hesitation when not at risk.

Outside of that? You're pretty much asking for cultural reform of some kind to occur. Not that removed from people pointing to racism in this case since they say the system is racist too. A case that would benefit everyone would be supported by almost everyone but they focus on a group affected more now by it.

From there it spirals outwards to class (also a significant factor, across all races) but generally any reform you're looking for on a class angle will help the race one too. That's generally the main alternative lens i'm aware of.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im gonna be the guy that Wang was rightfully busting the media for not being

All mass protesting for ANY REASON during a pandemic is IDIOTIC

Youre gonna harm your community virally more than the police would

Agree with this
The murder totally warrants (peaceful) protest, but its impossible to do that safely right now.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

red13n posted...

People are stupid, but you hit a point where it becomes very clear to everyone just how uneven society really is.

And one of those inequalities is health care

Yes? What is your point?

Again, you can only kick people in the teeth so much before they decide enough is enough.

The sane thing is to stay home, the sane thing is to not mass gather.

But people have been pushed to the point sanity isn't a thing.

---

also Wang is again trying to take the hard right racially blind angle to this.

It doesn't matter if its a poor primarily white neighborhood, police action is still disproportionately skewed to minorities.

While class hurts, there is still racial motivation found in police action.

The facts point to his argument as exactly what it sounds like, a load of bullshit from someone we know frequents racist, bullshit spewing circles.

---

red13n posted...

Yes? What is your point?

Again, you can only kick people in the teeth so much before they decide enough is enough.

The sane thing is to stay home, the sane thing is to not mass gather.

But people have been pushed to the point sanity isn't a thing.

I dont buy it. These protests are totally sane. People arent lugging guns around actually going crazy like the lockdown protests. In almost any other environment its totally justified.

My point is that people still arent taking this virus seriously enough. Would these protests be happening in the middle of a hurricane?
---

red13n posted...

btw the news hasnt shown the whole video because it is too disturbing for TV so most people haven't seen the whole thing. It wasn't just him restraining him. The officer actively taunts him and gives him commands that he literally cannot follow while restrained like that.

It wasn't just abuse of authority, it was downright inhuman.

Do you have a link to the full video?

And, is there anything at all linking this to racism?

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im gonna be the guy that Wang was rightfully busting the media for not being

All mass protesting for ANY REASON during a pandemic is IDIOTIC

Youre gonna harm your community virally more than the police would

Respect for that one.

Personally I'm much more on the other side but you're consistent and it's legit gonna be a problem in a few weeks. The twisted view in my head is that cops don't have to do anything to stop these protests beyond wait. Within a week they'll become a health risk and can use that as an excuse OR the crowds will shrink to a point that won't matter as much because smaller crowd means smaller issue and the health risk of thousands will become the news story.

This is a case where doing nothing fixes the problem.

They're on path for the cruelest approach: instigate the problem further, escalate tensions, ruin the neighborhood, then have it fall into further ruin. If you're concerned about coronavirus, that is exactly what the next two weeks will entail.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Do you have a link to the full video?

And, is there anything at all linking this to racism?

I mean, is there anything at all that links the Rodney King beating to racism?
---

And the fucking irony of all ironies is that the people protesting about how its unjust to not let a man breathe are going to be directly causing a bunch of respiratory failures
---

I'm not even sure I can link it here. It is literally a video of a guy being murdered and there is a decent chance hes dead before the video is even over.

---

wasn't it established that covid has like a 0.01% chance at spreading in open air? so open air mass gatherings shouldn't be that big a deal?

not trying to be a muffin-ish "lol lockdowns" guy, i genuinely thought that was the latest development in the covid researches.

---

https://twitter.com/normative/status/1265945186766643201?s=21

Disgusting and, ironically, an unconstitutional assault on actual free speech itself.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

wasn't it established that covid has like a 0.01% chance at spreading in open air? so open air mass gatherings shouldn't be that big a deal?

not trying to be a muffin-ish "lol lockdowns" guy, i genuinely thought that was the latest development in the covid researches.

Interacting with people outdoors is safer than interacting with them indoors (all else being equal), but Im almost certain that youre wrong. Being outdoors certainly wont, for instance, protect you against someone coughing right in your face. It will just cut down on the virus building up in the air.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

wasn't it established that covid has like a 0.01% chance at spreading in open air? so open air mass gatherings shouldn't be that big a deal?

not trying to be a muffin-ish "lol lockdowns" guy, i genuinely thought that was the latest development in the covid researches.

This is one of those "not enough science" things, but also likely misinformation based on how we know droplets travel and dissipate. They aren't just magically going to go away from humans just because we are outside.

They aren't going to linger in place and affect someone long after like they might indoors, but person to person close contact spread can happen so fast that number is unlikely to be true.

---

granted, if that number refers to raw "going outdoors chance you will be infected" maybe its right. The chance of actually being infected anywhere individually is incredibly low.

But if everyone took that to mean there was no risk of infection, that low chance would turn into infecting almost everybody pretty quick.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/normative/status/1265945186766643201?s=21

Disgusting and, ironically, an unconstitutional assault on actual free speech itself.

My commitment to free and open debate on the Internet remains as strong as ever. Therefore, it remains the policy of the United States that lawful content should be free from censorship in our digital marketplace of ideas.

Great so they want every social media platform to be 8chan
---

Also after a cursory reading of that draft, I dont think any of it applies at all to what Twitter did to Trumps tweets? Odd
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/normative/status/1265945186766643201?s=21

Disgusting and, ironically, an unconstitutional assault on actual free speech itself.

Read a WaPo article over the EO and somehow there was a Zuckerberg v Dorsey feud over the "fact-check" Twitter applied that started all this and I see Zuckerberg decided to double down on being the worst.

---

It takes major talent to manage to be worse than Dorsey at curating your platform
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also after a cursory reading of that draft, I dont think any of it applies at all to what Twitter did to Trumps tweets? Odd

It does not. They didn't actually do anything in regards to free speech aside exercise a bit of their own.

Mind you, in this capitalist society we have created, businesses are free to expel you for your free speech provided they are not doing it in a way that discriminates against a protected characteristic.

---

I would be very interested to see any good faith lib right vs auth right takes on this
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also after a cursory reading of that draft, I dont think any of it applies at all to what Twitter did to Trumps tweets? Odd

Addressing what Twitter actually did wouldn't look as sympathetic as him trying to pretend he's being silenced though

---

I just skimmed it but I actually approve of the idea of enacting penalties on companies that bow to foreign censorship.

But this hits a hard no when it infringes on a companies ability to moderate clearly objectionable content. With the internet we know that via technology people will abuse these websites to spread harmful messaging and to the public make them seem like legitimate, widely accepted ideals.

---

Corrik7 posted...

And, is there anything at all linking this to racism?

technically nothing's been found for that.
right now we're in the phase where it's clear there's a variety of factors involved, with race possibly being one of them, by the main cop who did it, the police department, or both. and as more info comes out it's also becoming clear that the whole "resist arrest" line was bullshit too, which further hurts their credibility. like it's entirely possible these are power hungry corrupt cops and race isn't a factor per se, but it can easily get linked to include race as a factor in their committing these acts (e.g., they can get away with this abuse far better in poor black neighborhoods).

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also after a cursory reading of that draft, I dont think any of it applies at all to what Twitter did to Trumps tweets? Odd

What the EO seeks to do is reinterpret the precedent of a standing law on how the law handles content platforms. (47 U.S.C. 230)

Under the existing rules, content providers are granted immunity from liability over what their users post. (i.e. Youtube can't be held liable in court for shit posted in its comments section) and protects their right to moderate content posted provided said moderation is done in good faith. This is in contrast to when a site edits or modifies user content in which case they are held to be a publisher and thus liable under early-Internet court rulings.

This EO here is arguing that blocking/restricting content in a "deceptive" way - provided it is not in accordance with the site's Terms of Service - should qualify as them editting user content and pushing them into that "publisher" category where they are now liable in court.

It further reestablishes a WH "Tech Bias Reporting Tool" and will send all such complaints to the FTC for review for both the above and also to consider if they are violating the law by restricting protected speech under the policy of treating them as traditional public forums... and I guess the implication is that somehow this means the private companies running them are now bound by restraints placed on the government regarding free speech? Also establishes a group to look through state statues to see if they can nail them on anything there as well in these reviews.

Essentially it's him trying to open them up to being sued under the basis that they're lying or whatnot. Kind of like your response to getting an NKL here with "Well, I'm suing." Thing is, I'd be absolutely stunned if Twitter's ToS didn't have the standard boilerplate "we reserve the right to remove any content for any reason" thing that I see on every forum, etc. So I don't think this has any real teeth other than being a sobering attack on free speech by trying to scare content platforms with the threat of spurious lawsuits by anyone who disagrees with moderation. If anything, I'd expect it to lead to places closing down forums/comments sections to avoid the risk.

The EO goes on to order a review of federal spending on advertising on social media platforms based on "viewpoint-based speech restrictions". There's also an eyebrow raising part where it says the WH will collect all publicly available information on user monitoring both on (likes, follows, etc.) and off the platform. ...Which almost sounds like they just want to collect info they can use for targeted campaign ads because it seems bizarrely out of place here.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

It takes major talent to manage to be worse than Dorsey at curating your platform

it was legit impressive

---

Wanglicious posted...

technically nothing's been found for that.
right now we're in the phase where it's clear there's a variety of factors involved, with race possibly being one of them, by the main cop who did it, the police department, or both. and as more info comes out it's also becoming clear that the whole "resist arrest" line was bullshit too, which further hurts their credibility. like it's entirely possible these are power hungry corrupt cops and race isn't a factor per se, but it can easily get linked to include race as a factor in their committing these acts (e.g., they can get away with this abuse far better in poor black neighborhoods).

the issue is racism gets baked into police culture.

You have officers that are typically outside a minority community that come in and work in that community. They come to view minorities as suspects, criminals, scum, etc, and this permeates through police culture.

They end up dehumanizing and fearing them, and then, well, we get incidents like this in mass.

Granted, this isn't all encompassing and there are definitely regions where police are simply more openly racist. But in the larger cities, it tends to be more of a police culture thing.

---

ok i read a bit more...

They literally want to create a white house agency that data collects and sorts users by their likes/watches/foillows/whatever.

This sounds incredibly not legal.

---

red13n posted...

ok i read a bit more...

They literally want to create a white house agency that data collects and sorts users by their likes/watches/foillows/whatever.

This sounds incredibly not legal.

That's why I said it was eyebrow raising!

I don't know about it being not legal given they specify "publicly available" data but yes that sounds rather dystopian in theory... and jarringly out of place with the rest of the EO with the only things they have in common are "things on the internet."

Given how this administration acts I'm inclined to believe they're "just" trying to grab advertising data from social media/big data for use in their political campaign but there are definitely chilling precedents that could be set here by ordering the collection.

---

reading the EO...

nothing's wrong with it? it's a lot of rhetoric.

like all of page 1 and most of 2 is story. then we get into sections:

Section 230(c) gets into the publisher/provider issue. mentioned that earlier as a big issue so that's fine to want to clarify. it's also trying to bind terms of service in a more legal way which makes sense. taken more broadly this would lead to some major changes in some of what's listed - inadequate notice, unreasoned explanation? makes a big question once monetization comes to play since from the language there it's not as easy as going YOINK to your money from twitch subs/youtube superchats/patreon/whatever else.

that section needs a lot of work and clarity to really get to the nitty gritty but as a starting point, seems solid and makes sense. ...it's also not giving out any major orders, it's telling the secretary of commerce to file petition with the FCC so they can propose regulation. so this is not directly impacting anything.

Sec 3 is basically asking for internal data collection by the federal government. i'm rather confused on this. this is not directly impacting anything.

Sec 4 says that twitter and facebook are "functional equivalent of a traditional public forum" (oh hey it's this topic again), points out they're the modern public square according to the supreme court, talks about bias, and then... asks the FTC to consider taking action regarding bias collected in a tool.

...okay. so this is not directly impacting anything.

Sec 5 basically wants attorney generals at the state level to be involved. asks for them to talk and consult about stuff. this is not directly impacting anything.

Sec 6... is the definition we're using. because for some fucking reason this wasn't at the top.

so we've got internal data collection, telling the Commerce Secetary to do something with the FCC, telling the FTC to do something, telling state AG to talk. magnificent.


---

xp1337 posted...

I don't know about it being not legal given they specify "publicly available" data but yes that sounds rather dystopian in theory... and jarringly out of place with the rest of the EO with the only things they have in common are "things on the internet."

Given how this administration tends to act like organized crime I'm inclined to believe they're "just" trying to grab advertising data from social media/big data for use in their political campaign but there are definitely chilling precedents that could be set here by ordering the collection.

i mean if it's collecting public data they don't even need to make an order for that, they already do that. law enforcement (aka, the executive) does this all the time already, networking a person's contacts through that is also already done by the NSA (two hops rule), so like... it's nothing new?

the whole order is out of place because it's not even a damn order to do anything itself, it's an order to have a lot of other places maybe do something, which would then lead to a lengthy back and forth. it has rhetoric that can raise eyebrows and make headlines but it's not actually doing anything.

...which makes me wonder what we should be paying attention to instead.

---

caught up on Minneapolis stuff.

...alas. i regret to say...
they got the Wendy's too.

rioters have taken everyone's free breakfast baconator gotten with a cheapass "breakfast burrito."

---

xp1337 posted...

I'd expect it to lead to places closing down forums/comments sections to avoid the risk.

Well guys its been fun
---

Oh right i always forget, looting is only bad when the poors do it

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Well guys its been fun

don't worry

this is the promised time when cjayc will return to us and save us from the darkness. he had been waiting for this moment all along.

---

red13n posted...

ok i read a bit more...

They literally want to create a white house agency that data collects and sorts users by their likes/watches/foillows/whatever.

This sounds incredibly not legal.

its also a doubling down of the you know what of you know when.

Social media in general is causing so many problems in the world.

---

Daily dose of TCT:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/593321095027150848?s=20

---

FFDragon posted...

Daily dose of TCT:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/593321095027150848?s=20

And he's never once stopped to wonder about what the rest of the world thinks about all the disgusting stuff HE does?

I don't condone riots, but god damn has one man made us look awful on the global stage and it's ridiculous that he would comment on how the actions of others make us look on that same stage.

---

Metal_DK posted...

its also a doubling down of the you know what of you know when.

Social media in general is causing so many problems in the world.

trump acting like an idiot isn't social media's fault

---

I think the issue is that "engagement" based measures will generally default to the lowest common denominator and amplify those voices.

---

Trump, however, is starting to go way off the deep end. And social media enables that.

He retweeted a video saying the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat."

It only takes one slightly unstable follower to take that as a call to action for things to become disastrous. And he'd be (morally, probably not legally) responsible.

---

100K+ Dead Americans and this mother fucker is spending time thinking about better ways he can spread his bullshit on social media.


---

Trump cannot take criticism for crap. All kinds of ironic since much of the reason he got so much support in the first place was to fight back against "political correctness".

---

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1187829299207954437

I feel like you could use this tweet in a fairly effective campaign ad.

---