yew

10 ms·

61.
by yew 6y ago
Meh. Child indoctrination has always been the price of entry into the elite. And of course sometimes it'll be uncomfortable - cultural imperialism doesn't work without some kind of force behind it. But how else can you ensure on
62.
by yew 6y ago
There's a reason fascists keep showing up in the comments. Not that the moderation is likely to do anything about it.
63.
by yew 6y ago
I wouldn't call expunging racism from society "radical" or incompatible with any inquiry worth making free. If conservatives need to "allege" about that, what more do you need to hear?
64.
by yew 6y ago
It certainly makes following the conversation more difficult, but you needn't feel obligated. I don't mind watching the total go up and down with the tide... Edit: but as my answer (including quote!) below has been flagged, I thin
65.
by yew 6y ago
If the ideology that produced these books survives to take power, we will have failed as a society. But I'm not worried - we're better positioned than ever to hunt error to the farthest corners of the world, if need be.
66.
by yew 6y ago
Exactly! Children are very vulnerable to unsound ideas - this thread is full of proof of that fact. Allowing them to be exposed to just any content while they're still developing their own perspective is simply inhumane.
67.
by yew 6y ago
We mustn't forget the history that resulted in these racist books. At the same time, it's important to ensure that children aren't exposed to such material. Removing them from public spaces is a good first step - eventually w
68.
by yew 6y ago
> No society can police everything all the time, least of all a democratic society. A healthy society rests on a consensus about what is a deviation and what is normal. We venture out from the norm, but we know the difference between the
69.
We can have democracy or a surveillance society, but we cannot have both(nytimes.com)
53 points by yew 6y ago|15 comments
70.
by yew 6y ago
"We the people" have never possessed that quality, and direct democracy is a terrible idea for precisely that reason. Our democratic norms are intended to filter that irrationality into something more functional - though the elect
71.
by yew 6y ago
> Like the experts who said the virus wasn’t a problem and also that masks are useless? This being a wonderful example of the right-wing propaganda so prominent (though I won't say universal) in this mess. Cause a problem, then blam
72.
by yew 6y ago
Experts are usually vetted by regulators and other experts, not random members of the public. As anyone is presently free to say whatever they please, I see no reason to share my personal information with the world.
73.
by yew 6y ago
It's simply irresponsible for so-called "independent journalists" to cover material that neither they nor their audiences are in a position to understand. We've seen what several decades of totally unregulated broadcasti
74.
by yew 6y ago
Breaking up monopolies sounds good in the abstract. (At least, it does to me. Presumably that doesn't go without saying around here.) But these particular monopolies have the potential to make a serious positive impression on the wor
75.
by yew 6y ago
There's quite a lot of this kind of admiration for authoritarianism tucked away in nooks and crannies of the tech community. It survived mostly off the rationale that people should always be free to express their conscience, even in th
76.
by yew 6y ago
A few years ago Silicon Valley was populated with (and run by) people like Brendan Eich. We've spent the intervening time replacing those people - now it's time to finish the job. I wouldn't call it unfocused.
77.
by yew 6y ago
The no-fly list is an important element of suppressing terrorism, foreign and domestic. It exists to prevent precisely this sort of situation - very few of these people were from within driving distance of Washington (or each other). Whethe
78.
by yew 6y ago
There's no need to ban email. It's unencrypted plain text, with a small number of majority providers. Filtering extremist content at that level should be easy enough.
79.
by yew 6y ago
Anyone using the place is a fascist by definition. If they haven't been involved in politics until now, their perspective doesn't deserve to be heard.
80.
by yew 6y ago
Correct. You can't falsely shout "fire" in a crowded theater, you can't obstruct an existential war, you can't spread anti-vaccine propaganda during a pandemic. These are all legal arguments with a well-established
81.
by yew 6y ago
Don't they get most of their hardware off eBay these days? (Not that I'm incredibly familiar with that space - I'm more interested in serious redundancy for small important files.) Anyway, the government has plenty of experie
82.
by yew 6y ago
All forms of extremism, regardless of political valence, should be deprived of air. Is that consistent enough for you?
83.
by yew 6y ago
Not if we know their names and shame anyone who sells them hardware, they won't be.
84.
by yew 6y ago
If you have family members who use the site, you have family members who are fascists. I'd recommend cutting ties before that catches up with you.
85.
by yew 6y ago
Government agencies are, if not precisely incapable of sedition, at least going to have trouble engaging in it.
86.
by yew 6y ago
Precisely. The question is misconceived. Formalizing the authority of the government to suppress domestic terrorism would be, not "Orwellian," but necessary in the face of a threat that only failed due to the incompetence of its e
87.
by yew 6y ago
No one is being censored. Deplatforming isn't censorship. They've merely shown a disagreeable customer out the door.
88.
by yew 6y ago
It's hard not to notice that reporting always treats the dangers of swatting as a kind of force of nature, in which hackers are the only party with agency. Given the difficulty of stopping people from making fake phone calls compared t
89.
by yew 6y ago
Both this and the previous article https://adalytics.io/blog/tens-of-thousands-of-news-articles... are more interesting than the domain and page design would imply. They seem to be developing a browser extension for &q
90.
by yew 6y ago
It's interesting that both the left and the right are abandoning the ACLU, for much the same reasons. Though of course members of both groups also join the ACLU to (attempt to) influence it. Contrast with the days when "freedom of

More ›