Technology and Dissenting Opinions

[crustBrother]

Where did I say you had any interest in discussing something?

Sorry. I misunderstood what you meant by "I'm sure you can find a place online willing to host election results discussions. It's a big internet."

Your point was that just because google shuts down a conversation doesn't mean that the conversation can't happen elsewhere?

 

[StuAzole]

I have no interest in discussing election results. I am interested in discussing who decides what information the public has widespread access to. Also interested in finding out how many other people share my interest.

The platforms decide.

They own the platforms. You agree to their terms when you join the platform.

There's always another platform.

If Twitter has shown us anything it's that Parler, Gab or whatever the fuck else can easily step in to fill the void.

 

[StuAzole]

Sorry. I misunderstood what you meant by "I'm sure you can find a place online willing to host election results discussions. It's a big internet."

Your point was that just because google shuts down a conversation doesn't mean that the conversation can't happen elsewhere?

When has google shut down conversation?

Regardless, it's their platform.

 

[StuAzole]

When you say "we", who do you mean?

The host.

"They" can do as "they" like.

There are many avenues available to discuss topics.

Election fraud, for instance, had 60 courts, twitter, youtube, parler, gab, facebook, tiktok, IG, reddit, among thousands of others. If after 60 court cases Twitter decides there was no fraud and that they don't want that circulating anymore, it's their platform.

 

[test_article]

Even if one considers social media a public accommodation, protected classes don't apply to ones and zeros. Ownership has the last word?

 

[test_article]

Sorry. I misunderstood what you meant by "I'm sure you can find a place online willing to host election results discussions. It's a big internet."

Your point was that just because google shuts down a conversation doesn't mean that the conversation can't happen elsewhere?

People should read their Bible carefully too.

(You follow, donuts?)

 

[crustBrother]

Ownership has the last word?

Yes. But there are alternatives to this model. We can run social media on peer-to-peer technology where there is no centralized ownership and control. Like cryptocurrency.

But is freedom to communicate without moderation something we want? I get the feeling that at least half of the people would say no.

 

[crustBrother]

Most people are only uncomfortable with it when it goes against their politics.

And I think that most people support censorship when it confirms their bias.

 

[test_article]

Yes. But there are alternatives to this model. We can run social media on peer-to-peer technology where there is no centralized ownership and control. Like cryptocurrency.

But is that something we want? I get the feeling that at least half of the people would say no.

Yes. But there are alternatives to this model. We can run social media on peer-to-peer technology where there is no centralized ownership and control. Like cryptocurrency.

But is freedom to communicate without moderation something we want? I get the feeling that at least half of the people would say no.

I wouldn't know. My brother has been browbeating me over election fraud, the Capitol attack by antifa, faith healing, etc. I told him I would rather he not discuss those topics with me. We should have plenty of other topics to discuss. He insisted though. I consider it browbeating because I don't do it to him. How can one argue with a demon spotter and why should one?

C'mon, it's the internet. Try to have fun. Take it at face value at your own risk.

 

[grapedrink]

Big tech owes no one a platform.

Ok FecalFace. Nobody is making that argument.

 

[crustBrother]

C'mon, it's the internet. Try to have fun.

Fair enough. Here's a joke I made up on new year's day.

Q: What do you get the day after the sherpa eats the tiger?
A: Kathmandu



LOL I kill me.

 

[grapedrink]

I have no interest in discussing election results. I am interested in discussing who decides what information the public has widespread access to. Also interested in finding out how many other people share my interest.

Big Tech went to great lengths to squash anything negative pertaining to Hunter Biden in the weeks leading up to the election.

 

[mundus]

Big Tech went to great lengths to squash anything negative pertaining to Hunter Biden in the weeks leading up to the election.

Still blaming the refs, boi?

 

[grapedrink]

Still blaming the refs, boi?

No. Do you really think big tech was impartial in their coverage of crackhead Hunter

 

[mundus]

No. Do you really think big tech was impartial in their coverage of crackhead Hunter

The story got out and the laptop stuff was complete BS, he is currently under investigation. What more do you want?

 

[grapedrink]

The story got out and the laptop stuff was complete BS, he is currently under investigation. What more do you want?

Social media networks vowed to squash the story and anyone entertaining it before it even had a chance to be hashed out.

Yes, I agree that the "dude where's my laptop" story was nonsense, but the photos of him posing with a crackpipe weren't.

 

[Ifallalot]

Im not sure how many levels of loaded-Ness there are to this question, but I’ll take the bait.

Yes, the tech companies have way too much control and the American public has become way too lazy and too fast to take the easy route with respect to information acquisition.

Hey. that's too nuanced and insightful for the erBB

 

[StuAzole]

Big Tech went to great lengths to squash anything negative pertaining to Hunter Biden in the weeks leading up to the election.

Lol.

 

[afoaf]

Social media networks vowed to squash the story and anyone entertaining it before it even had a chance to be hashed out.

Yes, I agree that the "dude where's my laptop" story was nonsense, but the photos of him posing with a crackpipe weren't.

it was already well known that the candidate's adult son has/had a drug problem

I struggle to see the relevance

I would like to see evidence of the social network vow....the claim sounds oddly fantastical

 

[grapedrink]

On second thought, I have no doubt that if the same story was released with Don Jr in Hunter's place, that the social media entities would've handled the situation exactly the same! You betcha!