4 ms·

The GDPR is pretty good, this is terrible, like any org/government they have both good and bad policies. Sadly, i.e. Brexiteers generally want to eliminate the

The GDPR is pretty good, this is terrible, like any org/government they have both good and bad policies. Sadly, i.e. Brexiteers generally want to eliminate the good ones, (food standards), and keep the bad ones, (copyright), so am not sure what the solution to eliminating is here, but it doesn't seem to be specific to the EU.

neilwilson 8y ago
You know that ascribing views to a group without evidence is prejudice.
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  You can ascribe certain views to a group certainly, if that's what you read, observed etc. about them and it is not discriminatory. For example, I can say "religious people generally believe in a God". This is problematic when you start making judgments about people based on outright false claims or based on attributes that they have no control over. I said "generally" on purpose. There are exceptions of course, but from speaking to a lot of them, watching interviews etc. that's the impression I got for their general sentiment. I of course am not presenting this as a fact, just as what I observed.
  - neilwilson 8y ago
    If you get an impression from lots of rap videos that people of colour behave like gangsters can you then legitimately describe them all as such 'generally'? Or is it incumbent upon you to realise that you have selected a small and unrepresentative sample and look for balance. It's not difficult to find and talk to Paul Embery, Kate Hoey, Brendan Chilton, Thomas Fazi, Bill Mitchell, etc. Or for that matter me.
    - AsyncAwait 8y ago
      Of course not, however people of color is not a voluntarily made up group that represents an idea, since race is an attribute. You can criticize ideas a voluntary group stands for. I said this in my previous comment. If you cannot make observations about a voluntary group of people and their ideas, there's no point of them being associated with that group. Them being in that group is supposed to signify something. Opinions may differ as to what exactly it is supposed to be, I just offered my observation on that, that's all.

neilwilson 8y ago

You know that ascribing views to a group without evidence is prejudice.

AsyncAwait 8y ago
You can ascribe certain views to a group certainly, if that's what you read, observed etc. about them and it is not discriminatory. For example, I can say "religious people generally believe in a God". This is problematic when you start making judgments about people based on outright false claims or based on attributes that they have no control over. I said "generally" on purpose. There are exceptions of course, but from speaking to a lot of them, watching interviews etc. that's the impression I got for their general sentiment. I of course am not presenting this as a fact, just as what I observed.
- neilwilson 8y ago
  If you get an impression from lots of rap videos that people of colour behave like gangsters can you then legitimately describe them all as such 'generally'? Or is it incumbent upon you to realise that you have selected a small and unrepresentative sample and look for balance. It's not difficult to find and talk to Paul Embery, Kate Hoey, Brendan Chilton, Thomas Fazi, Bill Mitchell, etc. Or for that matter me.
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago
    Of course not, however people of color is not a voluntarily made up group that represents an idea, since race is an attribute. You can criticize ideas a voluntary group stands for. I said this in my previous comment. If you cannot make observations about a voluntary group of people and their ideas, there's no point of them being associated with that group. Them being in that group is supposed to signify something. Opinions may differ as to what exactly it is supposed to be, I just offered my observation on that, that's all.