4 ms·

> The strength of such an argument depends on whether the small step really is likely to lead to the effect. This does not fall into the fallacy aspect as it i

> The strength of such an argument depends on whether the small step really is likely to lead to the effect. This does not fall into the fallacy aspect as it is already happening, groups are already being exploited for ulterior motives to control thought. Part of having a background in security research leads one to detect vulnerabilities. This is a gaping vulnerability. > With all due respect, innocent people are dying because certain individuals incite violence against them. Let us be clear that inciting violence is criminal and not considered protected speech. > Would you be okay if your friends or family died in a shooting from an individual who consumed a particular class of content? Less people are dying today than have historically died from hateful conduct. You cannot crush hate out of a society with censorship. Driving hateful behavior underground only emboldens the extremists. Only through education and the ability for an individual to observe how consensus genuinely rejects their hate can you change such attitudes. You also cannot defeat an assumed logical fallacy with a different one, you are appealing to extremes when you take into account statistics and history.

gradExMachina 3y ago
> This does not fall into the fallacy aspect as it is already happening, groups are already being exploited for ulterior motives to control thought. Part of having a background in security research leads one to detect vulnerabilities. This is a gaping vulnerability. Part of being a minority is being afraid to walk in the streets because you don't know what kind of media a random person has been consuming [1]. Examples like [1] are many and will only become more frequent as some people succumb to hate and others exploit them. > Let us be clear that inciting violence is criminal and not considered protected speech. Of course it is, but why won't anyone think of the children, wink wink, nudge nudge. If only there was some hero to save us all from those monsters! That line of speech is frequent in certain circles and a certain class has been hearing this on repeat for a few years now. > Less people are dying today than have historically died from hateful conduct. You cannot crush hate out of a society with censorship. I am not keen on crushing anyone, I am keen on continuing living. Being visibly trans in a backwards country with crazy people is terrifying. I do not recommend. > Driving hateful behavior underground only emboldens the extremists. Only through education and the ability for an individual to observe how consensus genuinely rejects their hate can you change such attitudes. What more consensus from broader society does one need than literally telling them that their speech and actions are harmful and they need to stop? > you are appealing to extremes when you take into account statistics and history. The funny thing when you think about statistics is that those events that people conveniently aggregate to cutesy little numbers are happening to real people with real friends and families, with their own dreams and aspirations. For you I am just a statistic, a tiny minority that you can look from afar. But for me, it's my life. [1] https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/05/23/woman-86-beaten-wheelie-bin-trans/ https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/05/23/woman-86-beaten-wheel...
- uLogMicheal 3y ago
  How do you separate those cases from these cases? https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guilty-next-steps/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guil... A deliberately fabricated hate crime to advance what agenda? > What more consensus from broader society does one need than literally telling them that their speech and actions are harmful and they need to stop? Is algorithmic and incentivized actor driven censorship considered consensus? From your perspective you support one thing through censorship but want to deny what consensus tells you in other aspects of reality. Censorship driven echo chambers support some opinions while they crush others. In some respects, we need more confrontation of opinion in society. Too few are forced to question themselves in current times, emboldened by these digital echo chambers, opinion solidified in thoughts and actions. I genuinely hope that we can find a way to end this age of artificial division. Too many agendas being programmed into brains, too little reality driven truth.
  - PartiallyTyped 3y ago
    > How do you separate those cases from these cases? > https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guil https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guil... > A deliberately fabricated hate crime to advance what agenda? See, the difference is in one case a person was beat-up, and there's evidence, their life was possibly in danger, and in what you presented you have a hear-say. A false report. The difference is that one has the potential to cause harm, and the other is actual harm caused. > From your perspective you support one thing through censorship but want to deny what consensus tells you in other aspects of reality. From my perspective I fear for my life. This is what is on the line here. Not my ability to commit hate-crimes, not my ability to spew bigotry. Consensus - actual people - on average are understanding. On the other hand, there's a trigger-happy, outrage-addicted, gun-owning, self-proclaimed-terrorist and outright blood-thirsty minority who is angry because the broader society doesn't accept their bigotry. I will repeat, to you, it's some imaginary threat that has the potential to happen 60 steps down the road if you concede that hate-speech is bad for everyone and pushes people to commit atrocities, and to me, it's my life.

gradExMachina 3y ago

> This does not fall into the fallacy aspect as it is already happening, groups are already being exploited for ulterior motives to control thought. Part of having a background in security research leads one to detect vulnerabilities. This is a gaping vulnerability. Part of being a minority is being afraid to walk in the streets because you don't know what kind of media a random person has been consuming [1]. Examples like [1] are many and will only become more frequent as some people succumb to hate and others exploit them. > Let us be clear that inciting violence is criminal and not considered protected speech. Of course it is, but why won't anyone think of the children, wink wink, nudge nudge. If only there was some hero to save us all from those monsters! That line of speech is frequent in certain circles and a certain class has been hearing this on repeat for a few years now. > Less people are dying today than have historically died from hateful conduct. You cannot crush hate out of a society with censorship. I am not keen on crushing anyone, I am keen on continuing living. Being visibly trans in a backwards country with crazy people is terrifying. I do not recommend. > Driving hateful behavior underground only emboldens the extremists. Only through education and the ability for an individual to observe how consensus genuinely rejects their hate can you change such attitudes. What more consensus from broader society does one need than literally telling them that their speech and actions are harmful and they need to stop? > you are appealing to extremes when you take into account statistics and history. The funny thing when you think about statistics is that those events that people conveniently aggregate to cutesy little numbers are happening to real people with real friends and families, with their own dreams and aspirations. For you I am just a statistic, a tiny minority that you can look from afar. But for me, it's my life. [1] https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/05/23/woman-86-beaten-wheelie-bin-trans/ https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/05/23/woman-86-beaten-wheel...

uLogMicheal 3y ago
How do you separate those cases from these cases? https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guilty-next-steps/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guil... A deliberately fabricated hate crime to advance what agenda? > What more consensus from broader society does one need than literally telling them that their speech and actions are harmful and they need to stop? Is algorithmic and incentivized actor driven censorship considered consensus? From your perspective you support one thing through censorship but want to deny what consensus tells you in other aspects of reality. Censorship driven echo chambers support some opinions while they crush others. In some respects, we need more confrontation of opinion in society. Too few are forced to question themselves in current times, emboldened by these digital echo chambers, opinion solidified in thoughts and actions. I genuinely hope that we can find a way to end this age of artificial division. Too many agendas being programmed into brains, too little reality driven truth.
- PartiallyTyped 3y ago
  > How do you separate those cases from these cases? > https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guil https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/us/jussie-smollett-trial-guil... > A deliberately fabricated hate crime to advance what agenda? See, the difference is in one case a person was beat-up, and there's evidence, their life was possibly in danger, and in what you presented you have a hear-say. A false report. The difference is that one has the potential to cause harm, and the other is actual harm caused. > From your perspective you support one thing through censorship but want to deny what consensus tells you in other aspects of reality. From my perspective I fear for my life. This is what is on the line here. Not my ability to commit hate-crimes, not my ability to spew bigotry. Consensus - actual people - on average are understanding. On the other hand, there's a trigger-happy, outrage-addicted, gun-owning, self-proclaimed-terrorist and outright blood-thirsty minority who is angry because the broader society doesn't accept their bigotry. I will repeat, to you, it's some imaginary threat that has the potential to happen 60 steps down the road if you concede that hate-speech is bad for everyone and pushes people to commit atrocities, and to me, it's my life.