Kanye West To Acquire 'Uncancelable' Social Media Platform Parler (techcrunch.com) 321
Kanye West, the rapper who also also goes by the name Ye, has reached an agreement to buy "uncancelable free speech platform" Parler, the two said in a statement Monday, in a move they said will help individuals express their conservative opinions freely. From a report: As part of the deal, financial terms of which were not disclosed, Parler has agreed to sell fully to West but the social network will continue to receive technical support from Parlement Technologies, including access to its private cloud services and its data center infrastructure. The deal is expected to close in the ongoing quarter. West, who has accused Meta and Twitter of censoring him in recent weeks, said in a statement: "In a world where conservative opinions are considered to be controversial we have to make sure we have the right to freely express ourselves."
Here's why conservatism all over the world sucks (Score:5, Insightful)
The U.S. Just Lost 26 Years" Worth of Progress on Life Expectancy [scientificamerican.com]
There are no conservatives anywhere, only populists
Re: (Score:2)
I can see how you would blame conservatives for COVID deaths but how do you attribute overdoses, especially among indigenous people, to conservatives?
Re:Here's why conservatism all over the world suck (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right; conservatives have a great track record of providing healthcare and addiction services to native communities and combating the poverty that leads to crime and addiction. Totally not their fault.
Re:Here's why conservatism all over the world suck (Score:5, Insightful)
The endless oppression that perpetuates these conditions totally isn't their fault either...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'd be happy to flood you with various [oup.com] academic [jstor.org] sources [springer.com], but you aren't the type to trust (or understand) actual research. Let's try the GAO [gao.gov], or do you think that's also part of some nefarious deep state plot? If you're that far gone, let me know and I'll see if I can find a facebook meme or a low-quality youtube video for you.
Re:Here's why conservatism all over the world suck (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop being so emotional and loading this up with blame and bootstrap sentiments. What you are saying is fine advice for an individual; clean yourself up, work hard, take control of your life. But for policy and society and general it's somewhat empty rhetoric.
Fact of the matter is there are very strong correlation between poverty and crime, especially when we talk about rational crime and studies show the highest crime areas in most places are inflection points between wealth and povery.
Much simpler than facing the real issues.
What are the "real" issues, or what is more real than saying people who are destitue would probably look towards things like crime more than people who are doing well enough to support a somewhat dignified living situation.
Re:Here's why conservatism all over the world suck (Score:5, Insightful)
It is emotional Statements like " fucking insult to people who worked" and "lazy, selfish, feckless, violent" are just dripping with vitriol and you are clearly trying to get a rise out of people and turn them against what I would consider reasonable and effective positions. It is absolutely emotional rhetoric.
There's also a lot of crime on Wall Street and company boardrooms.
Don't pivot you were clearly talking about violent crime and so am I.
There is in fact plenty of drug taking in the middle class but how much of that is tied to violence. I imagine we can both agree that the drug war is a failure and possesion and intake of drugs in and if itself is not immoral or violent in nature so not really a point at all. People who commit violent crime in the name of the drug trade, why would you say people turn to that over a more normal job?
99.9% of poor people in the west do not commit crime. Poverty in the west is NOT a driver of crime
I mean it's not the only driver of crime but i don't see how it logically follows that people with less would be somehow less inclined to commit crimes? For your statement to be true the majority of crime would be commited by middle and upper class people? Can you back any of this up?
Is poverty the mother of crime? Evidence from homicide rates in China [nih.gov]
The Unequal Burden of Crime and Incarceration on America’s Poor [brookings.edu]
If you are blaming "gang culture" and "personality types" are you saying crime is genetically inferred? If you are just a "race realist" just come out and say it and this whole discussion is a lot easier because I am simply going to ask you to prove that since you are making a science and fact based assertion.
Re:Here's why conservatism all over the world suck (Score:4, Insightful)
Reading the post above yours that you're replying to it just blows my mind how quickly some techies will completely abandon science to justify their world outlook.
Any social scientist in the world would laugh at their ridiculous attempts to claim poverty and crime arent connected.
Re: (Score:3)
You know that calling someone a "soy boy" just outs yourself as an idiot, right?
It's based on a misunderstanding about the effect of plant oestrogen on men. There was a study that found it changed the chemistry of... sheep.
Needless to stay, it doesn't apply to humans, and even if it did, plant oestrogen is not the same thing as human oestrogen and you wouldn't expect it to have the same effect. There is zero evidence that consuming soy, which happens to contain plant oestrogen, feminizes men in any way.
Iron
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe crime rates are far more complicated and nuanced than simply which political party controls the mayorship or even just one city council in one area of the city.
Also depending on the method none of those towns are even in the top 10 in terms of crime:
Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think) [forbes.com]
10 Most Dangerous Cities in the US (#1 is the highest cost of crime)
St. Louis, Missouri
Jackson, Mississippi
Detroit, Michigan
New Orleans, Louisiana
Baltimore, Maryland
M
Re: (Score:2)
Only in the U.S. . In Europe the conservatives were much more eager in implementing harsh anti Covid measures which makes sense as conservativism is usually about control. The ones who got rid of the masks prematurely were the so called liberal countries and parties.
Don't confuse conservativism with right-win esotericism.
Re:Here's why conservatism all over the world suck (Score:4, Funny)
Don't confuse conservativism with right-win esotericism.
Oops! Too late!
There are many forms of conservatism (Score:2)
There are those that are best described as 'reactionary', endorsing the patterns of the past and arguing that everything is worse now. There are those who are essentially libertarian - wanting less government on principle. And there is Roger Scruton's Conservatism, which argues for the legitimacy of present practice because that is what has evolved, and it suits the people even if it's not terribly rational. The classic example of this is the British monarchy; if it didn't exist, noone would invent it. But
Re: (Score:3)
Sure. To avoid death, drop into an "orbit" around a black hole that gets arbitrarily close to the Schwarzschild barrier. Of course, it had better be a hyperbolic orbit, and you'd best pack a huge amount of radioactive shielding. By the time you get out, time will have come to an end, so you'll never die.
There are probably other ways. I've heard, e.g., that the damage that prevents revivification happens when you attempt to thaw the corpsicle, If that's true, then submerge the frozen body in liquid heli
I know why (Score:2)
He wanted to make sure no one can contradict his claim to be the greatest rock star of all time despite not actually being a rock act. Or much of anything, really.
I disagree (Score:2, Interesting)
Parler .... (Score:3)
...added a content moderation layer to the platform last year in bid to be restored by Apple’s App Store.
Re: (Score:3)
And weren't they the one that always disallowed 18+ content because apparently that's not part of free speech.
Re:Parler .... (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly very little on that site is fit for consumption of anyone under 18. But then neither is any church yet we send our kids to those brainwashing institutions as well so, ... *shrug emoji*
Free speech != amplification (Score:2)
NO ONE CAN STOP HIM NOW (Score:2)
Now Ye is free to post all the blatant Jew-hate he wants!
(Seriously it seems that Ye has slipped from whatever ragged threads of sanity he was grasping onto...either that or some kind of endoparasite is eating his brain)
Re: (Score:2)
No it's ok because Kanye is black and that makes him Jewish too. That's actually his argument.
Re: (Score:2)
There's definitely some Nation of Islam influence in his latest mental meltdown...
Re: (Score:2)
And speaking from a free speech perspective, he can do what he wants. If he wants to espouse anti-semitism then people need to be exposed to the rhetoric and then determine to either ignore or engage it. It seems he says a lot of things people think are crazy but then again he's not a politician, he's a musician and maybe listening to a musician for political insight is part of the problem. If you like his music, great if you listen to him for insight on political issues, you're not trying hard enough to fi
Just Watch (Score:2)
If Ye allows free speech, the Google, Apple, Paypal, etc. monopolies will absolutely cancel his platform.
Open sourcing a client into F-Droid would help a little bit but without root Google forbids software updates. Apple is completely without options.
Containment Unit: 'Parler' (Score:3, Insightful)
Inherently bigoted summary (Score:2, Interesting)
By saying "express their conservative opinions freely" the author of this post shows inherent bigotry. A non-partisan would have simply said "express their opinions freely" and left out their personal bias.
Re:Inherently bigoted summary (Score:5, Funny)
By saying "express their conservative opinions freely" the author of this post shows inherent bigotry.
It was a paraphrase of what Ye said, not a personal opinion.
I canceled them just like I canceled twitter (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you still use Facebook or Instagram?
Price (Score:2)
Am I the only one wondering what the price tag was?
Certainly, a mentally unstable Ye is fully capable of making large spontaneous purchases. But the timing seems odd since Musk is supposedly about to buy Twitter and change the moderation policies.
I have to suspect that the price tag was fairly small given Parler's user base and lack of potential for growth (they'll always be a niche alt-right site). Though you could probably do something like adding cash transfers (tips?) and taking a cut.
It will also be am
Re: (Score:2)
It’s probably a money pit. The only advertising you’ll get is people selling MAGA apparel and Go Brandon stickers.
Re: (Score:3)
I blame Kardashianitis for his ills, but that's another issue entirely. I see him as Michael Jackson without all the pedophilia; a talented musician who has been given too much gravitas in terms of opinions and influence. Every generation has them, mine had John Lennon and all of his nutjob philosophy that we now know was heavy drug use and a dose of the crazy wife.
The spreading of the market into multiple social media platforms is actually a good thing because it will encourage more discussion rather than
Re: (Score:3)
the timing seems odd since Musk is supposedly about to buy Twitter and change the moderation policies.
Maybe he just thinks everyone else famous is buying a social media platform, so he has to buy one too... and this is the biggest one he can afford.
Somebody buy slashdot (Score:2)
You really don't understand, do you? Hey man, don't you realize in order for us to make this thing work, man we've got to get rid of the pimps, the pushers, and the prostitutes, and then start all over again, clean?
not really (Score:4, Insightful)
free-speech platform parler
looks like someone never read parler's TOS
You can't have a right wing Twitter (Score:5, Insightful)
What your actual right winger is really after is a feeling of victory that they don't get in their daily lives because like most Americans they're getting the shit kicked out of them by our economic system. So they go online to social media and stick it to some libs to get that hit of dopamine that comes from a fake victory as they get ready for it their third shift at whatever shitty job pays the bills
Re:finally someone doing something (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, you mean deplatforming the guy who just got an almost $1B judgement against him from a jury of his peers for defamation and slander over those same lies? Yeah, I think you picked the wrong example there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, so that way anti-semitism can be part of the Parler culture from the top down [jpost.com].
Sure hope he's willing to keep paying when the other investors take his money to get out, and he can't find any new ones because of his tip over the extreme right edge. Maybe Mel Gibson can front him some cash?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Must've flushed the remaining of his meds.
Pretty hilarious that he'll now have to compete with Ol' Musky for the chud demographic.
Re:I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, it's a 3-way race for chuds. Don't forget "Truth" Social!
Re:I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I get it. However, I don't think you've been keeping up on current events. When even Donald Trump says you're acting too crazy [nypost.com] and too anti-semitic, you've just gone right over the edge without even thinking about pumping the brakes.
Re:I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Ye is in a personal bubble, he says what he thinks without any external editing. And he's often wrong headed about a lot of stuff. He has been hospitalized for psychiatric evaluation where it apparently he claimed to be Jesus. He has been diagnosed with bipolar syndrom, and he has admitted that. One really shouldn't be believing in the words of someone going through a manic phase, a bit of a doubt is a good thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Well they can't apply the standard go to of "racist" for Kanye.
Aside from the anti-Semitic stuff, he also claimed that African slaves in the US were slaves by choice. He seems pretty racist to me.
Re: I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Putting up black men as figureheads is a deliberate on the right. They desperately need black votes to win elections 10 or 15 years out. It's always some brain-damaged entertainer they take advantage of. Look at Herschel Walker, the dude had so many concussions in the NFL he can barely speak. They put him on TV and have him wave his toy cop badge around. I can't believe people actually fall for this stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What in that post is racist, i.e., a manifestation of prejudice plus power? Those are verifiable empirical facts. The far right know they can't survive on the white boomer vote forever; we of that demographic will have largely died out within the next 25 years or so. By that time, whites of any age will be a minority in the US, so they have to court nonwhite populations to stay viable. Whether those populations will buy the right's theocratic, plutocratic, antidemocratic, and antifactual bullshit is another
Re: I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Historically a huge percentage of Hispanics have voted Republican, because a lot of them are Catholics, and the Republicans are anti-abortion. They have immense common ground there. However, Catholicism is finally waning (putting up a good show though still) and Republicans also often say/do things which are racist. The DeSantis stunt flying program surely didn't win Republicans any friends in the Hispanic community.
Re: (Score:3)
However, Catholicism is finally waning (putting up a good show though still)
As far as I'm familiar while Catholicism is declining in popularity among American Hispanics they're not becoming less religious, they're just switching Christian faiths https://www.pewresearch.org/re... [pewresearch.org] .
A few generations out that might change though as the inevitable Americanization of this disproportionally new to the US ethnic group happens.
Re: I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Is everything about race with you? By definition that makes you racist, you realize this right?
Recognizing racism doesn't make one a racist.
Trolling does, however, make one a troll.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow, look at you go. Do me a favor though, when exactly did anyone in this thread ever say that Ye buying Parlor was racist?
Gotta love the twits that when they fail to make their own point change the subject to something they think they can "win".
Re: (Score:2)
Parler is a steaming pile and it seems unethical to unload it on West.
Implying that the nutjobs are only there until they can cash out? I think more likely is that the nutjobs trade their tools in circles and find ownership of them desirable. Don't pity West, he knows what he is buying. He's a nutjob, famous and funded. Being black doesn't make you immune from rightwing extremism.
Re: I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the Parler buy is at the behest of Candance Owen's. West was recently hanging out with her (As indicated with the whole "White Lives Matter" display they put on together) and her husband George Farmer is the current CEO of the company. I'm pretty sure Parler has been looking for VC as their "ad model" hasn't yet played out well. As recently as January they filed that they had another round of angel investment. [techcrunch.com] With West buying up the platform, is more of the same passing the hot potato that nobody can figure out how to make a profit from and I'm seriously doubtful that West will be able to turn it around. Basically, Parler found a rube to sell to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I knew he was a bit random but... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well he wants a place where he can spew his anti-semitic tirades without consequence. And owning social media platforms seems to be what obscenely-rich narcissistic assholes do now, so I guess "free market" and all that.
Re:Look out Elon... (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh that's at least a three-way horse race at this point. Four if you include the idiocy going on over at Meta.
Seems one of the late-trending patterns in social media is that social media networks will ultimately be owned by consequence-unencumbered obscenely wealthy narcissist douchebags like Musk, Trump, Zuckerberg, and now "Ye".
Re:Anti-Ye (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.psypost.org/2022/0... [psypost.org]
https://thehill.com/opinion/ci... [thehill.com]
Re:Anti-Ye (Score:5, Informative)
And yet Anti Fa and BLM despise Jewish people. With a militant passion.
That is a lie, and you are a liar. But that makes sense too [fastcompany.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm yes we should totally have more people on twitter talking about how they're going to "death con 3 the jews" lol.
Re:Anti-Ye (Score:5, Insightful)
This example has nothing to do with conservatism. He recently posted some vile antisemitic crap and was deplatformed.
Are you sure? Because normally when conservatives get banned from a social media platform for posting vile hate speech such as antisemitism, they then complain that conservative speech is being unfairly censored...they'll need to clear up once and for all just what that encompasses at the very least. "Conservatism" may also include blatant disinformation, again it's not clear...
Re:Anti-Ye (Score:4, Informative)
Which time? Most recently it seems that this lovely bunch was banned for inciting a harassment campaign against a pediatric hospital? Should that be considered an aspect of conservatism?
https://news.yahoo.com/libs-ti... [yahoo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Anti-Ye (Score:5, Insightful)
Problem is that the algorithms on social media sites actually tend to reward bad behavior. Controversial things get views and clicks, and things that get views and clicks get promoted to other viewers. With no moderation, you could easily end up with a feed that is nothing but hate speech, conspiracy theories, etc. Simply blocking any particular incident of speech you find objectionable does not prevent your feed from being filled with objectionable material. The problem is that "bad postings" don't really haunt the people who made them. In many cases, it's a benefit. It provides them more exposure.
I don't deny there are free speech implications to social media (of course not 1st amendment), but at the same time, there are free speech ramifications to hosting a platform and being told you cannot control what is on it. Imagine if you held open mic night at a bar you owned and were told you had to let the KKK guy rant as long as he wanted and you were not allowed to kick him out. You'd lose customers and your bar would quickly develop a reputation as "the KKK bar." Prior to the internet, if you wanted to write to a mass market, you needed to find a publisher for your book. Publishers can pick and choose which books they publish, and people who wanted to publish hate speech typically could not get a mainstream publisher. Granted, people have more options in bars and publishers than they do with social media, but the existence of sites like Parler and other "alt" social media indicates there are plenty of places to go if you'd like to post objectional content.
Re: (Score:2)
This example has nothing to do with conservatism. He recently posted some vile antisemitic crap and was deplatformed. I do support that people should post whatever they want on the major platforms, as long as it is not illegal. And that readers, themselves, should be able to block what they don't want to see or optionally follow others' user-based moderation.
Let people show who they really are and have to deal with bad postings haunting them. Even though it mostly has nothing to do with "the first amendment", it is still a free-speech issue.
Ye is free to buy Parler and try to make it that platform.
But I don't see why Twitter should be forced to become that platform.
There are countless examples of high profile people quitting Twitter because of the abuse, forcing them to carry everyone's legal content could easily lead to Twitter becoming a toxic wasteland like Parler or Gab.
You can suggest that Twitter should attempt that change, but I certainly don't think Twitter should be forced to take that risk through law.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, most calls for "free speech" in social networking are really thinly veiled requests for freedom from consequences of saying really stupid or offensive things.
The brilliance of free speech is that it gives people the freedom to truly express themselves, and the freedom of everyone else to express to that first group exactly what they think of that expression. Free speech has never been freedom from consequences of that speech.
Really? (Score:2)
"I would rather have racists publicly show where they stand than have it all go underground."
Since it's not going away, I'd rather it all went underground. Fake it 'til you make it.
Re:Anti-Ye (Score:4, Insightful)
>Remember back when the ACLU would defend peoples' rights, regardless of political correctness?
Remember? You mean like they continue to do to this day?
2017
We challenged the D.C. Metro’s refusal to post an advertisement for alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos’ book;
We defended Donald Trump’s speech rights when he was charged with inciting violence at a Trump campaign rally;
We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court in support of a tea party supporter challenging a ban on wearing political insignia or apparel at polling places;
With the NRA, we supported a federal law that reduced obstacles to people with mental illness to buy guns, which we viewed as harming people with disabilities; and
We advocated in defense of the First Amendment rights of a Columbus City Schools employee who posted an anti-gay slur on Facebook, and who faced being fired for doing so.
2018
We filed an amicus brief supporting the NRA’s First Amendment challenge to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s directive to New York financial services organizations to reconsider the “reputational risks” of doing business with the NRA and other gun rights groups;
We filed an amicus brief supporting Republican voters’ constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court to a Maryland partisan gerrymander that created a Democratic district for which one of our biggest donors, David Trone, was running, and ultimately won; and
We sent a public demand letter to the Vermont governor, asking that he to stop banning gun-rights activists who posted negative comments, almost entirely political, on his official page.
2019
We challenged Arkansas State’s “free speech” zones as applied to a homophobic and racist student organization;
We won an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Koala v. Khosla), on behalf of a conservative student magazine denied funding by the University of California at San Diego after they published a story mocking “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces”; and
We filed comments on Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ Title IX rule that supported fair process requirements for live hearings, cross-examination, access to all the evidence, and delays in proceedings if the student accused of wrongdoing also faced a student criminal investigation, even as we criticized the rule for reducing the obligations of schools to respond to reports of sexual harassment.
2020
We filed a brief in Michigan supporting anti-Semitic protesters picketing in front of a synagogue on the Sabbath;
We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court with the conservative Americans for Prosperity Foundation and the Institute for Justice in support of a case challenging a free speech zone by an evangelical Christian, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom;
We represented a number of voters, including a Republican, to defend drive-thru voting, which was set up in Houston in November to enable safe voting during the pandemic;
We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting a Catholic school’s religious right to discriminate in the hiring and firing of a teacher with significant religious responsibilities;
We sent a letter on behalf of a Trump supporter in Georgia who was being criminally prosecuted for flying a flag on his own property that said, “Trump 2020: Fuck Your Feelings.” Charges were dropped after the prosecutor received our letter;
We protested New York Attorney General Letitia James’ effort to shut down the NRA based on the wrongdoing of some of its leaders as a violation of the right of association;
We filed a brief in the Supreme Court with the Cato Institute, the Institute for Justice, the R Street Institute, and the Rutherford Institute on behalf of property rights of people declaring bankruptcy; and
We filed an amicus brief in Esshaki v. Whitmer in support of a conservative Republican candidate for Congress who was challenging a signature coll
Oh please... (Score:5, Insightful)
'There is literally not one thing that was breathlessly, endlessly reported as urgently true during that crisis that has not been subsequently proved to be wrong or deeply suspect.'
Covid is caused by a virus
Vaccines usually help
The WHO has messed up in denying airborne transmission until even it was forced to admit to a mistake
Big media has made lots of mistakes during the pandemic - but to be so dismissive is foolish. And the terms of your claim are not worthy of Slashdot - what are you, some sort of artistic type? Please don't tell me you are a computer programmer, I would be very concerned at the quality of the code you produce... ;)
Re:Oh please... (Score:4, Insightful)
They're probably a Trumper and have been taught by their dear leader that any news network that is broadcasting anything that disagrees with their world view is fake. Basically they're trying to create their own alternate reality, this person is either trying to help with that or more likely is just too dumb / naive to figure out that they're being lied to.
I mean, it doesn't take a genius to simply observe that big media got what you mentioned and many other things correct (or at least correct at the time of reporting) about COVID. Meanwhile it also doesn't take a genius to figure out that major news networks are going to get some things wrong when reporting on a new and emerging disease. For one reason or another this person though is choosing to selectively view things to justify a world outlook that clearly belongs to a different reality from what you or I inhabit.
Re: (Score:2)
They're probably a Trumper and have been taught by their dear leader that any news network that is broadcasting anything that disagrees with their world view is fake.
There's even some news network that made Ye say a bunch of really antisemitic stuff in an interview [twitter.com]!
Re: (Score:2)
The WHO has messed up in denying airborne transmission until even it was forced to admit to a mistake
No. The WHO didn't admit to a mistake. It admitted that it should review the standards of evidence required during an ongoing pandemic in order to more quickly make recommendations, but they largely standby their decisions made and for good reason: they were based on scientific knowledge at the time.
Early indications that the virus was airborne did not pass levels of scientific rigour required to classify the virus as such. But that stuff takes time.
I would happily wager the opposite. If it's a mistake to a
Nah - the WHO dug in (Score:2)
The evidence for it being airborne emerged quite rapidly, but the WHO, having decided it was like SARS and not airborne, failed to respond appropriately to the incoming evidence. Note the date of the first article here - October 2020.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j... [forbes.com]
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j... [forbes.com]
Not a pretty story. Given its other mess over the first international investigation being given the run around by the Chinese authorities, it's clear that there is a problem at the WHO.
Re: This is very healthy (Score:2)
Oh well. We're all blind to something or other.
Re: (Score:2)
There is literally not one thing that was breathlessly, endlessly reported as urgently true during that crisis that has not been subsequently proved to be wrong or deeply suspect.
This lie is way too obvious. People are going to see through your bullshit. You need to mix a few true things in with your lies, that way when someone calls you out, you can point to the true things and claim that you're right. Didn't you get the memo at CPAC?
Re: (Score:2)
There is literally not one thing that was breathlessly, endlessly reported as urgently true during that crisis that has not been subsequently proved to be wrong or deeply suspect.
Can you elaborate?
Re: (Score:2)
Step 2: lose out on the profits and opportunity
Step 3: ?
Step 4: Prophet
My own little theory of Jews in the world. (Score:2)
Outside of Israel, Jews are deeply in the the minority pretty much everywhere. They are also very practical, and a disproportionate number enter into well-paid occupations, such as medicine and finance. So when the chips are down, who do the masses look to blame? The "affluent other". Doesn't matter if they got their place through hard work and within the exiting frameworks - they must have cheated!
Re: (Score:3)
There's a lot of history as well. In the past (talking about the last 200-400 years roughly) Jews were not allowed to be in a good number of professions, including craft professions.
The professions that were left were non-classical (non-guilded) ones, such as banking and trade.
Now wind forwards a few centuries, and what do you think happened?
Re:Anything owned by someone is not uncancelable (Score:5, Insightful)
No corporation is required to create a platform where people can post whatever they want, whenever they want.
If I host a forum about fly-fishing and you want to start ranting about sending Jews to gas ovens on my forum I can delete you and your posts. That's not "censorship" that's just me running my platform the way I want.
If you don't like those terms then don't join the site.
The government cannot infringe your right to free speech - But you do not have a right to "free speech" on private platforms.
If you want to build a truly anonymous free-speech platform go ahead - But like Parler, Truth Social and all the rest you will find it largely empty. Why? Because average people don't enjoy hanging out on sites filled with hateful racist sexist ranting.
They much prefer sites with moderation policies that keep the toxic scum out.
Re: (Score:2)
*Warning* Inappropriate Argument Expansion Ahead! (Score:4, Insightful)
Misunderstanding the first amendment has become so commonplace that the phrase "freedom of speech" no longer even pretends to be about the first amendment. It instead refers to an aspirational state of perfect self expression people "feel" they are entitled to, although it is enshrined nowhere.
Much like "literally" is now actually in the Merriam-Webster dictionary's "in effect" section as being purely figurative.
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Don't forget that these are the same people that "feel" the election was stolen against all evidence and legal proceeding that says otherwise.
These are the people that "feel" like someone is just around the corner to confiscate their guns for decades, even though there is never any serious talk about gun confiscation because it would be blatantly unconstitutional.
These are the people that "feel" all kinds of shit they can't prove [documentcloud.org] [second page, 4th paragraph, followed by 12 more pages of thoroughly debunked
Re:Anything owned by someone is not uncancelable (Score:5, Insightful)
All alternatives to the dominate platform are mostly empty.
Yes - But why are they empty?
The lack of moderation on the alternate platforms makes them very unpleasant places to be. People check them out, discover they are toxic wretched hives of scum and villainy and go back to fun Golden Retriever reels on Instagram or TikTok videos of people air-frying things.
Even here on Slashdot I know plenty of people who have tired of the scrolling ASCII-art swastikas and n-word dick-sucking rants and have moved on. They just don't find it pleasant.
(Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know the "truth" isn't always "pleasant" but ranting about confederate flags and "heritage" isn't a truth, nor is demanding Jews be sent to the gas chambers.)
Re:Anything owned by someone is not uncancelable (Score:5, Insightful)
You guys have to stop equating speech with the soapbox. You have no right to any sort of platform to widely disseminate what whatever you say, The government can not stop you from saying something, but they also cannot demand that someone else repeat your words.
You're not asking for free speech, you are asking for forced publishing, which does violate the freedom of the press.
Re:Anything owned by someone is not uncancelable (Score:5, Insightful)
The are dozens, if not hundreds, of "public squares."
The only problem is no one is there, but no one is there because only a minority wants to read toxic lie-filled conspiracy nonsense.
Re: (Score:3)
Even Fox News viewers are in the minority, although they're a very sizable and very loud one. Fox News is the only mainstream network that does what it does. The other networks that publish the same kind of content are dramatically smaller, just as Parler is much smaller than Twitter.
Re: (Score:3)
People want to scream CENSORSHIP!!! but thousands upon thousands of typical Republican talking points like you hear on Fox are posted on Twitter daily.
One example, followed by replies -
https://twitter.com/Rob_Roos/s... [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I support free speech. You and I should be able to say whatever we want. But the listener also has the right to know who is talking. I believe anonymity and free speech are usually destructive when paired. In circumstances like they have in Russia where speech is criminalized, a little destruction is a good thing. But here, where speech is well protected, it's not protecting the speaker from the government and simply prevents the effective feedback of social pressures to the speaker. Which promotes the self
Re:Anything owned by someone is not uncancelable (Score:4, Informative)
tl dr: You support free speech you agree with, when you don't agree with it, you want "societal pressure" to fix the problem for you. You fail the first test of what is the solution to "bad" speech. The correct answer is more speech, not more censorship. You also have cause-and-effect backwards, the self-organization of echo chambers occurs b/c you drive people underground out of the public square where there is no debate.
Re:Ye will be canceled (Score:4, Insightful)