facetube

18 ms·

151.
by facetube 10y ago
Never said it did. However, Trump brings dangerous aspects with him that other leaders have lacked: (i) he's willing to engage in direct personal attacks against the media, the judicial system, and electorate as a whole (i.e. "che
152.
by facetube 10y ago
We're planning on emigrating away from the US. We're out of stocks entirely, and are doing as much as we can to avoid directing money to the US government while these serial liars have it in their grasp. We're not buying thin
153.
by facetube 10y ago
Finally, a real Catch-22: give the password, you violate the Facebook ToS and potentially the CFAA as a result. Don't give the password, you get held by DHS (and possibly sexually assaulted in a "strip search") as punishment
154.
by facetube 10y ago
There's some surprisingly-literal survivorship bias here.
155.
by facetube 10y ago
On July 27th, Donald Trump asked for the assistance of a foreign power under US sanctions. Specifically, he asked for assistance in performing opposition research. This is fundamentally wrong IMO, and arguably a foreign emolument in and of
156.
by facetube 10y ago
You are so wrong it's practically dangerous. And not about Clinton. Seventeen US intelligence agencies [1] have joined in a consensus opinion that Russia, under Putin's command, ran a targeted campaign aimed at opposing Hillary Cl
157.
by facetube 10y ago
Here's a previous HN post along the same lines – the foreboding letter to the future, if you will, from an ex-Google design ethicist: https://medium.com/swlh/how-technology-hijacks-peoples-minds... .
158.
by facetube 10y ago
With a stated intent to ban Muslims. Donald Trump and his advisors have gone on record for months stating that their intent is to ban Muslims. Many of his staff have asked publicly if there was a legal way to ban Muslims, and stated that th
159.
by facetube 10y ago
People often support the ACLU because they believe that threats to free speech and free assembly are systemic and have potentially catastrophic future consequences. Doing so does not imply an absence of action in other arenas, and IMO it&#x
160.
by facetube 10y ago
You're constructing a strawman. Nobody has said they don't care about black people. The absence of protest attendance or action does not mean people don't care – it may mean they've judged that their talents are best sui
161.
by facetube 10y ago
You will always be able to come up with another problem to use in a "where were you all when..." scenario, because any given organization's resources are finite and cannot address all problems. Further, the ACLU is a civil li
162.
by facetube 10y ago
Pretty sure we're in violent agreement here. The claim I took issue with was that the left is somehow an order of magnitude worse. I think it's a shared problem.
163.
by facetube 10y ago
If they're individuals and you've done the research to support your claim of their individual non-criticism? Sure. If you're seeking to demonize a large group based upon the behavior of individuals with no material connection
164.
by facetube 10y ago
A common rightist tactic was also to claim that that the president of the United States was an ineligible non-Christian non-citizen, despite all evidence to the contrary. This was done by elected leaders and representatives of a major polit
165.
by facetube 10y ago
It's a common tactic on the right too. It's a common tactic on social media, period. If you haven't observed similar behavior from the self-described right, get an account on gab.ai or join a few pro-Trump groups on Facebook
166.
by facetube 10y ago
I have not linked to a domain in that post. Ask PG to pull the edit history if you want; I don't know where you're getting your impression from. Everything you said is also true of Hitler comparisons – anyone with the resources to
167.
by facetube 10y ago
Here's a great example of depravity from the right, found in two minutes on Twitter with a search for "MAGA". This is using images of a senator's children and proposing a hypothetical rape of them in service of a politic
168.
by facetube 10y ago
That's a misread then. I'm reporting what I witnessed being deliberately promoted by a group of people that self-identified as "conservative" and/or "alt-right". Simply put, and with no other judgement – I
169.
by facetube 10y ago
Or they're following a newsfeed algorithm that's determining their information-seeking proclivities for them. I honestly find that much more subtly disturbing and manipulatable than willful ignorance – people have ceded control ov
170.
by facetube 10y ago
It's definitely not experts making these claims, and that's part of the problem. These are just masses of mindless reshares of unsourced "facts" from strangers. But people bite. People appear to comment by the hundreds i
171.
by facetube 10y ago
Yes. I've seen recent allegations that this weekend's airport protests are "terror-tied", which is obviously false and politically-motivated on its face. There was a neverending sea of false anti-Obama material throughou
172.
by facetube 10y ago
You're penalizing an abstract political opinion based upon the actions of individuals that bear no special ambassadorship or ownership of that view. This is a step down the road to collective punishment. One could easily use this logic
173.
by facetube 10y ago
Like the echo chambers that were (and still are being) ruthlessly exploited by Bannon-backed Cambridge Analytica and Macedonian-registered ad-laden fake news sites? There is an intense echo chamber on the far right that you've failed t
174.
by facetube 10y ago
US intelligence officials have evidence of Russian disinformation and interference [1]. This is not normal. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ODNI_Stateme...
175.
by facetube 10y ago
The only moral code here is fact: contrary to the administration's claims, the September 11th attacks did not originate in – or have a material connection to – these countries. Citing the September 11th attacks as a reason to restrict
176.
by facetube 10y ago
It is an unusual affront to democracy. Democracy depends upon a well-informaed public making rational decisions. It cannot and should not be gamed by for-profit "market makers" at the expense of the American taxpayer and the Ameri
177.
by facetube 10y ago
I am not asking for opposition for the sake of opposition; I am asking for opposition because the claims of the administration are factually, demonstrably false.
178.
by facetube 10y ago
Thanks, point taken.
179.
by facetube 10y ago
To oppose those who would intentionally conceal and obscure objective fact from the public. The administration has publicly claimed a connection between these countries and the attacks of September 11th [1]. This is demonstrably false. 1:
180.
by facetube 10y ago
I agree, but I believe it is well-sourced.

More ›