3 ms·
It's kind of interesting that this is the exact comment I expected to see. Obviously, the mockery of "free speech" as "freeze peach" is because the meaning beh
by bontaq 7y ago
It's kind of interesting that this is the exact comment I expected to see.
Obviously, the mockery of "free speech" as "freeze peach" is because the meaning behind that, for a lot of people complaining about it, is that they would like to say something hateful. It's so frequent that it's become a meme.
It's unfortunate, and places that put an emphasis on free speech are shitholes like gab and voat. They would like whatever hate they're selling to have a bigger audience, and it's not really on corporations to provide that.
I would say the term has been co-opted by the right in online spaces, which makes it hard to talk about. It's no longer classical "free speech," almost always you have ask, "what were you trying to say with that free speech?"
Are they being banned for being anti-government? Anti-bank? Anti-military? Anti-religion? The pro- versions of those? Or is it maybe something else. Your vision of a "leftist" crack down, could be interpreted as the "right" getting more extreme and being banned.
- koonsolo 7y agoThe "left" seem to be offended by facts too, which as a rational person, seems very strange to me. Like the guy who got fired from google by stating facts, etc. Make no mistake, both extreme left and right are totalitarian dictatorships. With the extreme left even more dangerous, as history clearly shows.
- bontaq 7y agoThat's nice, would you mind stating a fact the left is offended by?
- koonsolo 7y agoAll things related to the "gender equality paradox" seems to be a hard one to swallow for the left. This is also the one that got Google employee James Damore fired. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox
- bontaq 7y agoAgain, you are not stating a fact the left is offended by. You are posting a wikipedia article to a topic, just in case you forgot. In addition to that, after reading this guy's ideas, do you not see how it's absolutely against google's goal of higher diversity? It's honestly terribly written. They go from "google's biases," to "stop alienating conservatives." Then they go on about how it's bad we let less experienced women in tech, comparing it to mandated increases in home-less women. What the fuck?
- koonsolo 7y agoHere's a fun controversial fact related to the "gender pay gap": There is no gender discrimination related to pay in the younger portion of the US workforce.
- bontaq 7y agoHey that's great! Here's the comment you should be responding to: "That's nice, would you mind stating a fact the left is offended by?"
- Excel_Wizard 7y agoYou disavowed the wikipedia article for being strictly fact-based, having no interpretation. I can vouch for the fact that there are many left-leaning people offended by the contents of that article. You disavowed Damore's stance because it has been interpreted in a way you think is wrong and offensive. You can't disavow both of these at the same time without contradicting your claimed intent (of wanting to hear facts that the left is offended by). It's obvious, based on your reaction to Damore's stance, that you are offended by, if not the Gender Equality Paradox, something extremely adjacent to the Gender Equality Paradox.
- insickness 7y agoDamore got fired for saying that men and women may have different inherent proclivities, that not all the differences in representation in different areas of tech (and nontech) are due to discrimination.
- Excel_Wizard 7y agoThe current population of African Americans in the U.S. has a lower average IQ than the current population of White Americans in the U.S.
- koonsolo 7y agoThe downvotes say it all
- mizzack 7y agoFBI table 43