5 ms·

If "browser history" is already off your radar when responding to a claim like this, you're beyond saving. What is it with this absurd need to defend how poorl

If "browser history" is already off your radar when responding to a claim like this, you're beyond saving. What is it with this absurd need to defend how poorly your country is doing by essentially saying "hey at least we're not North Korea!"? Get your head out of the clouds here: Your country elected an atrocious president, who, with both some poor timing and some atrociously bad decision-making got handed a platter of crises that are completely beyond the capabilities of his administration. Now, as a direct result, your country is more divided than it has ever been in recent history. People are rioting while a pandemic is happening. Civilians are being shot, journalists are being arrested, and you're here, pretending everything is fine because you're not literally starving in a prison right now. Like, what? You want to wait&see even longer until this fully develops or you want to start fixing? Let that sink in: The people who say "it could be worse" are part of the problem.

moduspol 6y ago
I'm not saying "it could be worse." I'm saying, "it's not as bad as it appears." Police brutality nationwide is not as bad as is being represented (despite the most recent case being a tragedy), and the reason people are comfortable protesting is because COVID-19 failed to meet apocalyptic expectations. Not to mention we have an election coming up, and there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear worse than they are. I don't support warrantless browser history requests, but it won't be too long until a generation who grew up with computers is actually in the legislature. It's a very solvable problem, and not in the same ballpark as protests in big cities or COVID-19.
- scrollaway 6y ago
  > the reason people are comfortable protesting is because COVID-19 failed to meet apocalyptic expectations Risk is a trade-off. People are out there protesting because the problem is bad enough that it warrants risking lives over. And not just in an "I might catch COVID" way: People are being teargassed and shot. > there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear worse than they are. This cuts both ways: there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear better than they are. Consider this: I'm an outsider, and have no horse in that demented race. I follow what's happening over there because what does happen may impact my country. What I see does not look good, and there isn't really a debate about this on this side of the atlantic. The fact that whether your country is doing as bad as it appears to be is even in question just shows how divisive your media is. > I don't support warrantless browser history requests Well I'm glad to read that, but in this thread, warrantless browser history requests aren't the only thing you've been downplaying. Personally, I think you're trying to convince yourself that things aren't "that bad". The longer you do so, the harder it's going to hit when you realize not only it is that bad, but it's only gotten worse since.
  - moduspol 6y ago
    > People are out there protesting because the problem is bad enough that it warrants risking lives over. And not just in an "I might catch COVID" way: People are being teargassed and shot. I think the vast, vast majority are truly risking nothing and know it. What you see in the media are the tiny minority who know what they're getting into. > This cuts both ways: there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear better than they are. Consider this: I'm an outsider, and have no horse in that demented race. I follow what's happening over there because what does happen may impact my country. What I see does not look good, and there isn't really a debate about this on this side of the atlantic. I understand what you see doesn't look good, but what you're seeing is entirely filtered through what traditional and social media want you to see. You (presumably) don't have family all over the country you stay in contact with who know what it's really like here. And what is it like? There were some protests in certain areas of big cities. For everyone else (the vast, vast majority), it was just another weekend. > The fact that whether your country is doing as bad as it appears to be is even in question just shows how divisive your media is. Media is supposed to be divisive. If you're getting only one perspective from your media, you should already be concerned. > Well I'm glad to read that, but in this thread, warrantless browser history requests aren't the only thing you've been downplaying. Personally, I think you're trying to convince yourself that things aren't "that bad". The longer you do so, the harder it's going to hit when you realize not only it is that bad, but it's only gotten worse since. We're not at war. COVID-19 is on the way out. The fact that people are protesting over-emphasized police brutality is evidence things aren't as bad as they are. They're not protesting a lack of food, or access to drinkable water. Let's try and keep things in perspective here.
    - scrollaway 6y ago
      I don't have family but I do have a lot of friends over there in the US. Several of them used to have your nonchalant view of "all this won't affect me". None of them have it today anymore. One is leaving the US. > Media is supposed to be divisive. Oof. This is on the same level as hearing "my SO is supposed to hit me when I'm wrong". Media is supposed to be neutral and bring you the facts. Your media clearly doesn't do that, but it's certainly not supposed to be that way. You're trying to "keep things in perspective" because you think you're arguing with people who believe you're North Korea. If I believed that, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing, because by that point it would be too late. Things are really bad for the US right now, and they're headed for worse. You can keep arguing about exactly how bad it is, or you can start to think about how you can help prevent them from getting worse.
- zht 6y ago
  “Police brutality nationwide is not as bad as is being represented (despite the most recent case being a tragedy)“ Do you think this is the case across the board or is it worse for some segments of the population than others (I.e. by socioeconomic status, which neighborhood you live in, whether you are visible minority, ey )
  - moduspol 6y ago
    Across the board. I think a variety of factors contribute to some groups being more likely to commit violent crimes, resist arrest, run from police, etc., and this leads to a higher likelihood of bad police outcomes. That's not to say it justifies police brutality, of course, but again: it's statistics at a macro level.
- FpUser 6y ago
  >but it won't be too long until a generation who grew up with computers is actually in the legislature How old is your legislature in average? Many people who grew up with the computers are in their 30s/40s now. Even 50s. I being 60 yo fart was using computers since I was 20 granted there might not be too many like myself.
  - moduspol 6y ago
    I'm seeing the average age in the US House is 57.8 years, and 61.8 for Senators. I'm 31 and was one of the first few years where computers were in every classroom in my school district. We didn't have Internet in them until five or so years later, though.
bluntfang 6y ago
>What is it with this absurd need to defend how poorly your country is doing by essentially saying "hey at least we're not North Korea!"? I'm certain some of this sentiment is social media propaganda farms.
- moduspol 6y ago
  Probably the Russians.
- scrollaway 6y ago
  Sure in some places, but it seems unnecessary to imply it's the case for @moduspol.
- kalleboo 6y ago
  That reaction long-predates social media propaganda farms. A similar argument that has come up for years and years is using Venezuela as an example of "Socialism" or "the anti-American-capitalist state". "See, socialism doesn't work, just look at Venezuela".
Supermancho 6y ago
> If "browser history" is already off your radar when responding to a claim like this, you're beyond saving. I don't subscribe to your religion, so that's ok with me. I happen to think searching (and registering) social media is a progressively enlightened activity, similar to having any other record of action (criminal history) as an enduring element of identity. > The people who say "it could be worse" are part of the problem. Having a different standard of acceptability is not "part of a problem", from my perspective of what constitutes problems. Setting up an us vs them isn't a compelling call to action.
- scrollaway 6y ago
  > Having a different standard of acceptability is not "part of a problem", from my perspective of what constitutes problems. Since you're in favour of said policy, I'm going to put aside whether or not it's a good idea to do this. More simply, my point is that claiming "things could be worse" is a problem and only serves as a path for things to get worse. Politics is like a plane crash. You can choose to correct course when the sensors start pointing in the wrong direction. If you keep going, you can still try to alleviate the issues even when it's too late to prevent some kind of disaster. You can crash and maybe still salvage something. But at no point in that whole chain of events is it productive to say "things could be worse". Ok, things could be worse. Then what do you do when they do get worse?
- pjc50 6y ago
  > searching (and registering) social media .. says someone from an anonymous account.
  - Supermancho 6y ago
    Not sure what you mean by anonymous (vs identifiable). If you want to claim an identity online, I'm all for it. You should be able to own it and be accountable for it.

moduspol 6y ago

I'm not saying "it could be worse." I'm saying, "it's not as bad as it appears." Police brutality nationwide is not as bad as is being represented (despite the most recent case being a tragedy), and the reason people are comfortable protesting is because COVID-19 failed to meet apocalyptic expectations. Not to mention we have an election coming up, and there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear worse than they are. I don't support warrantless browser history requests, but it won't be too long until a generation who grew up with computers is actually in the legislature. It's a very solvable problem, and not in the same ballpark as protests in big cities or COVID-19.

scrollaway 6y ago
> the reason people are comfortable protesting is because COVID-19 failed to meet apocalyptic expectations Risk is a trade-off. People are out there protesting because the problem is bad enough that it warrants risking lives over. And not just in an "I might catch COVID" way: People are being teargassed and shot. > there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear worse than they are. This cuts both ways: there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear better than they are. Consider this: I'm an outsider, and have no horse in that demented race. I follow what's happening over there because what does happen may impact my country. What I see does not look good, and there isn't really a debate about this on this side of the atlantic. The fact that whether your country is doing as bad as it appears to be is even in question just shows how divisive your media is. > I don't support warrantless browser history requests Well I'm glad to read that, but in this thread, warrantless browser history requests aren't the only thing you've been downplaying. Personally, I think you're trying to convince yourself that things aren't "that bad". The longer you do so, the harder it's going to hit when you realize not only it is that bad, but it's only gotten worse since.
- moduspol 6y ago
  > People are out there protesting because the problem is bad enough that it warrants risking lives over. And not just in an "I might catch COVID" way: People are being teargassed and shot. I think the vast, vast majority are truly risking nothing and know it. What you see in the media are the tiny minority who know what they're getting into. > This cuts both ways: there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear better than they are. Consider this: I'm an outsider, and have no horse in that demented race. I follow what's happening over there because what does happen may impact my country. What I see does not look good, and there isn't really a debate about this on this side of the atlantic. I understand what you see doesn't look good, but what you're seeing is entirely filtered through what traditional and social media want you to see. You (presumably) don't have family all over the country you stay in contact with who know what it's really like here. And what is it like? There were some protests in certain areas of big cities. For everyone else (the vast, vast majority), it was just another weekend. > The fact that whether your country is doing as bad as it appears to be is even in question just shows how divisive your media is. Media is supposed to be divisive. If you're getting only one perspective from your media, you should already be concerned. > Well I'm glad to read that, but in this thread, warrantless browser history requests aren't the only thing you've been downplaying. Personally, I think you're trying to convince yourself that things aren't "that bad". The longer you do so, the harder it's going to hit when you realize not only it is that bad, but it's only gotten worse since. We're not at war. COVID-19 is on the way out. The fact that people are protesting over-emphasized police brutality is evidence things aren't as bad as they are. They're not protesting a lack of food, or access to drinkable water. Let's try and keep things in perspective here.
  - scrollaway 6y ago
    I don't have family but I do have a lot of friends over there in the US. Several of them used to have your nonchalant view of "all this won't affect me". None of them have it today anymore. One is leaving the US. > Media is supposed to be divisive. Oof. This is on the same level as hearing "my SO is supposed to hit me when I'm wrong". Media is supposed to be neutral and bring you the facts. Your media clearly doesn't do that, but it's certainly not supposed to be that way. You're trying to "keep things in perspective" because you think you're arguing with people who believe you're North Korea. If I believed that, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing, because by that point it would be too late. Things are really bad for the US right now, and they're headed for worse. You can keep arguing about exactly how bad it is, or you can start to think about how you can help prevent them from getting worse.
zht 6y ago
“Police brutality nationwide is not as bad as is being represented (despite the most recent case being a tragedy)“ Do you think this is the case across the board or is it worse for some segments of the population than others (I.e. by socioeconomic status, which neighborhood you live in, whether you are visible minority, ey )
- moduspol 6y ago
  Across the board. I think a variety of factors contribute to some groups being more likely to commit violent crimes, resist arrest, run from police, etc., and this leads to a higher likelihood of bad police outcomes. That's not to say it justifies police brutality, of course, but again: it's statistics at a macro level.
FpUser 6y ago
>but it won't be too long until a generation who grew up with computers is actually in the legislature How old is your legislature in average? Many people who grew up with the computers are in their 30s/40s now. Even 50s. I being 60 yo fart was using computers since I was 20 granted there might not be too many like myself.
- moduspol 6y ago
  I'm seeing the average age in the US House is 57.8 years, and 61.8 for Senators. I'm 31 and was one of the first few years where computers were in every classroom in my school district. We didn't have Internet in them until five or so years later, though.

bluntfang 6y ago

>What is it with this absurd need to defend how poorly your country is doing by essentially saying "hey at least we're not North Korea!"? I'm certain some of this sentiment is social media propaganda farms.

moduspol 6y ago
Probably the Russians.
scrollaway 6y ago
Sure in some places, but it seems unnecessary to imply it's the case for @moduspol.
kalleboo 6y ago
That reaction long-predates social media propaganda farms. A similar argument that has come up for years and years is using Venezuela as an example of "Socialism" or "the anti-American-capitalist state". "See, socialism doesn't work, just look at Venezuela".

Supermancho 6y ago

> If "browser history" is already off your radar when responding to a claim like this, you're beyond saving. I don't subscribe to your religion, so that's ok with me. I happen to think searching (and registering) social media is a progressively enlightened activity, similar to having any other record of action (criminal history) as an enduring element of identity. > The people who say "it could be worse" are part of the problem. Having a different standard of acceptability is not "part of a problem", from my perspective of what constitutes problems. Setting up an us vs them isn't a compelling call to action.

scrollaway 6y ago
> Having a different standard of acceptability is not "part of a problem", from my perspective of what constitutes problems. Since you're in favour of said policy, I'm going to put aside whether or not it's a good idea to do this. More simply, my point is that claiming "things could be worse" is a problem and only serves as a path for things to get worse. Politics is like a plane crash. You can choose to correct course when the sensors start pointing in the wrong direction. If you keep going, you can still try to alleviate the issues even when it's too late to prevent some kind of disaster. You can crash and maybe still salvage something. But at no point in that whole chain of events is it productive to say "things could be worse". Ok, things could be worse. Then what do you do when they do get worse?
pjc50 6y ago
> searching (and registering) social media .. says someone from an anonymous account.
- Supermancho 6y ago
  Not sure what you mean by anonymous (vs identifiable). If you want to claim an identity online, I'm all for it. You should be able to own it and be accountable for it.