Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Here's a really good thread about what Musk would face if he bought Twitter.

Idk why Twitter insists on listening to complaints at all. Offended people can go fuck themselves. Seriously. You don’t like what someone said? Okay. Well, take it up with that person. Twitter shouldn’t be playing policeman, at all.

It’s just words on an internet platform. And the offended are just people who are upset. Lots of people are upset at lots of things. There’s no duty for a platform to play referee for these complaints.

I’m sick of the offended. Sincerely, Fuck The Offended. Being offended isn’t a special quality. It doesn’t confer any gravitas or rights. You don’t like something? Don’t look at it. Or tell the person you’re offended. I doubt the offender will give a shit, as he probably intended to offend and by carping at him you’re just giving him what he wants. But if ignoring the offender isn’t enough for you, well, that’s your alternative. Have at it.

But don’t infect my news feed with stories about how offended you are, or try to ban people from offering their offending views to the rest of us who may not be offended by them. I don’t fucking care about the offended. And when they demand attention for being offended, they’re making themselves into something far worse than offensive: Irritating. And when they seek to censor what I can view on a platform, they’re fucking with the quality and quantity of content. That entitles me, IMO, to kick their actual IRL asses. …If only that were possible.

TL;DR: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6k73Rfyu0DI

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Idk why Twitter insists on listening to complaints at all. Offended people can go fuck themselves. Seriously. You don’t like what someone said? Okay. Well, take it up with that person. Twitter shouldn’t be playing policeman, at all.

It’s just words on an internet platform. And the offended are just people who are upset. Lots of people are upset at lots of things. There’s no duty for a platform to play referee for these complaints.

I’m sick of the offended. Sincerely, Fuck The Offended. Being offended isn’t a special quality. It doesn’t confer any gravitas or rights. You don’t like something? Don’t look at it. Or tell the person you’re offended. I doubt the offender will give a shit, as he probably intended to offend and by carping at him you’re just giving him what he wants. But if ignoring the offender isn’t enough for you, well, that’s your alternative. Have at it.

But don’t infect my news feed with stories about how offended you are, or try to ban people from offering their offending views to the rest of us who may not be offended by them. I don’t fucking care about the offended. And when they demand attention for being offended, they’re making themselves into something far worse than offensive: Irritating. And when they seek to censor what I can view on a platform, they’re fucking with the quality and quantity of content. That entitles me, IMO, to kick their actual IRL asses. …If only that were possible.

TL;DR: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6k73Rfyu0DI

Every platform does some kind of moderation because if they don't, things go south and the government (in the broad sense, including the courts) does something. None of them want to do it, because it's expensive and time consuming and a pain in the ass and, as that author says, they would all rather be spending time designing another feature. But they all do it, and they make mistakes, because that's inevitable too.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Every platform does some kind of moderation because if they don't, things go south and the government (in the broad sense, including the courts) does something. None of them want to do it, because it's expensive and time consuming and a pain in the ass and, as that author says, they would all rather be spending time designing another feature. But they all do it, and they make mistakes, because that's inevitable too.

Agreed. The reason the govt, or the platform, must get involved, however, is because some officious people decide They Have A Gripe.

Fuck those people. Or, better yet, let’s all agree to Ignore Those People. And Ignore The People Who Wind Up Those Simpletons.

The rule should be what the rule always was: You’re offended? Turn the fucking channel. Or pick a fight with the agitator. It’s between the two of you, or your tribes, Not The Rest Of Us.

These “I’m Offended” assholes have been chipping away at free speech since Falwell sued Flynt, since Brent Bozell started boycotts decades ago.

Fuck these people. Fuck them all.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Agreed. The reason the govt, or the platform, must get involved, however, is because some officious people decide They Have A Gripe.

Maybe you want to read that thread again, because you're missing the point. You and Elon both think Twitter should just let anything go because so what if a few people are offended. The issue is not that a few people get offended. The problem is that lots of people get hot and bothered and start doing things IRL that have real-world consequences.

[A]t Certain Times, given Certain Circumstances, humans will Behave Badly when confronted with Certain Ideas, and if you are The Main Platform Where That Idea is Being Discussed, you cannot do NOTHING, because otherwise humans will continue behaving badly. ...

Because the problems are NOT about politics, or topics of discussion. They are about all the ways that humans misbehave when there are no immediately visible consequences, when talking to (essentially) strangers, and the endless ingenuity they display trying to get around rules.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Maybe you want to read that thread again, because you're missing the point. You and Elon both think Twitter should just let anything go because so what if a few people are offended. The issue is not that a few people get offended. The problem is that lots of people get hot and bothered and start doing things IRL that have real-world consequences.

That's not Twitter's responsibility. That's not anyone's responsibility except for the nuts doing crazy things IRL.

The duty to "Combat misinformation" should not belong to platforms. They should be allowed to ban what they deem abhorrent or with which they do not desire to be associated. But they should not be compelled to act as "information quality control" for some ever shifting definition of society's best interests.

If people want to believe nonsense, that's on them. If they act badly as a result, we have law enforcement to address that.

This idea of pre-emptive avoidance of bad behavior via manipulation has a Huxley/Orwell stink to it. A kissing cousin intellectually to China's "Social Credit" policy. I think invoking Orwell is a Godwin's Law violation of sorts (not Huxley, who I think isn't appreciated enough), but here, that smell is so pungent its apt.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's not Twitter's responsibility. That's not anyone's responsibility except for the nuts doing crazy things IRL.

The duty to "Combat misinformation" should not belong to platforms. They should be allowed to ban what they deem abhorrent or with which they do not desire to be associated. But they should not be compelled to act as "information quality control" for some ever shifting definition of society's best interests.

If people want to believe nonsense, that's on them. If they act badly as a result, we have law enforcement to address that.

This idea of pre-emptive avoidance of bad behavior via manipulation has a Huxley/Orwell stink to it. A kissing cousin intellectually to China's "Social Credit" policy. I think invoking Orwell is a Godwin's Law violation of sorts (not Huxley, who I think isn't appreciated enough), but here, that smell is so pungent its apt.

Which Orwell book are you referencing? Coming Up For Air? Keep the Aspidistra Flying? Down and Out In Paris and London?

I can’t think of a single thread that will tie those three.

Or do you mean Animal Farm and 1984? Because if that is what you mean than you are as poorly read as Ty himself.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Which Orwell book are you referencing? Coming Up For Air? Keep the Aspidistra Flying? Down and Out In Paris and London?

I can’t think of a single thread that will tie those three.

Or do you mean Animal Farm and 1984? Because if that is what you mean than you are as poorly read as Ty himself.

Why I Write Some editions include “A Hanging.” You’ll get everything I said in one place perhaps, in under 100 pages.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's not Twitter's responsibility. That's not anyone's responsibility except for the nuts doing crazy things IRL.

It's cute that you have your own ideas about who should be responsible for such things, but so do governments, and what Twitter and other internet companies have found is that they need to do some policing or the governments decide to step in.

eta: BTW, that idea is core to the Twitter thread I shared that kicked off this exchange, and then I repeated it, but you still seem to have missed it completely, so I am repeating it again. Each time shorter, to help you follow. Maybe you got emotional on this topic and had a hard time dealing with the logical arguments being made?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It's cute that you have your own ideas about who should be responsible for such things, but so do governments, and what Twitter and other internet companies have found is that they need to do some policing or the governments decide to step in.

eta: BTW, that idea is core to the Twitter thread I shared that kicked off this exchange, and then I repeated it, but you still seem to have missed it completely, so I am repeating it again. Each time shorter, to help you follow. Maybe you got emotional on this topic and had a hard time dealing with the logical arguments being made?

The default to "you're missing the point" is old, Ty. The point you're referencing cannot be missed. My point, which is in response to it, is that no platform should be engaged in such policing, period. Whether compelled by posters on it, or by the govt. If I was not explicit, or expansive, enough, my position includes (necessarily, but apparently this may not be obvious to you) the argument that under no circumstance should a platform or the govt be engaged in culling content to weed out "misinformation."

Bullshit and manipulative lies have been with us forever. If people are susceptible to them, well, that's the price of living in a country that values free expression. And that price includes me having to suffer the behaviors of the deluded and manipulated. I'd much prefer that over policy makers or corporate sorts determining what is and isn't appropriate for people to read.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's not Twitter's responsibility. That's not anyone's responsibility except for the nuts doing crazy things IRL.

Sure. Sounds great for its stock price.

They should be allowed to ban what they deem abhorrent or with which they do not desire to be associated.

Which they have done. What are you on about?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's not Twitter's responsibility. That's not anyone's responsibility except for the nuts doing crazy things IRL.

The duty to "Combat misinformation" should not belong to platforms. They should be allowed to ban what they deem abhorrent or with which they do not desire to be associated. But they should not be compelled to act as "information quality control" for some ever shifting definition of society's best interests.

If people want to believe nonsense, that's on them. If they act badly as a result, we have law enforcement to address that.

This idea of pre-emptive avoidance of bad behavior via manipulation has a Huxley/Orwell stink to it. A kissing cousin intellectually to China's "Social Credit" policy. I think invoking Orwell is a Godwin's Law violation of sorts (not Huxley, who I think isn't appreciated enough), but here, that smell is so pungent its apt.

The question for twitter is very commercial - what kind of a product do they want to offer?

I happen to like a product that is not full of all kinds of bots and where people follow the relatively few simple rules of the forum. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-an.../twitter-rules I think Twitter has discovered the hard way that enforcing its few rules and keeping bots contained are really essential to what they do. Somewhere Kate Klonick did a history of rules on social media that is quite good and that tracks how the big platforms discovered that the bro-culture free-for-all sucks and creates a hellscape that becomes a truly bad product, and how they learned to love the light-handed content moderation they all now do, because it keeps them alive and functioning.

If you or Elon want a different product, there is always Truth social (oh, wait, no, they banned people the day they opened up for saying mean things about Trump and Trumpers). Or maybe Parler (answering the question of whether if a racist screams in forest and no one hears him, is he truly a bigot?). Or, if all else fails, invite Elon on to lawtalkers with you.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The question for twitter is very commercial - what kind of a product do they want to offer?

I happen to like a product that is not full of all kinds of bots and where people follow the relatively few simple rules of the forum. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-an.../twitter-rules I think Twitter has discovered the hard way that enforcing its few rules and keeping bots contained are really essential to what they do. Somewhere Kate Klonick did a history of rules on social media that is quite good and that tracks how the big platforms discovered that the bro-culture free-for-all sucks and creates a hellscape that becomes a truly bad product, and how they learned to love the light-handed content moderation they all now do, because it keeps them alive and functioning.

If you or Elon want a different product, there is always Truth social (oh, wait, no, they banned people the day they opened up for saying mean things about Trump and Trumpers). Or maybe Parler (answering the question of whether if a racist screams in forest and no one hears him, is he truly a bigot?). Or, if all else fails, invite Elon on to lawtalkers with you.

I've no objection with culling bots and marketing spam within Twitter. Where it gets sticky is culling a doc who questions vaccinations, or a newspaper running a now verified story about a politically relevant person's laptop.

That's massaging facts, controlling narratives, attempting to craft consensus. Somewhere, the ghost of Edward Bernays must be laughing like Monty Burns.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Idk why Twitter insists on listening to complaints at all. Offended people can go fuck themselves. Seriously. You don’t like what someone said? Okay. Well, take it up with that person. Twitter shouldn’t be playing policeman, at all.

It’s just words on an internet platform. And the offended are just people who are upset. Lots of people are upset at lots of things. There’s no duty for a platform to play referee for these complaints.

I’m sick of the offended. Sincerely, Fuck The Offended. Being offended isn’t a special quality. It doesn’t confer any gravitas or rights. You don’t like something? Don’t look at it. Or tell the person you’re offended. I doubt the offender will give a shit, as he probably intended to offend and by carping at him you’re just giving him what he wants. But if ignoring the offender isn’t enough for you, well, that’s your alternative. Have at it.

But don’t infect my news feed with stories about how offended you are, or try to ban people from offering their offending views to the rest of us who may not be offended by them. I don’t fucking care about the offended. And when they demand attention for being offended, they’re making themselves into something far worse than offensive: Irritating. And when they seek to censor what I can view on a platform, they’re fucking with the quality and quantity of content. That entitles me, IMO, to kick their actual IRL asses. …If only that were possible.

TL;DR: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6k73Rfyu0DI

You are the most offended person I know. Between the woke libtards complaining about perceived transphobia and the MAGA dunces complaining about CRT in math books, your hair is ALWAYS on fire. Now you’re so offended you want to go out and beat some people up? Sit the fuck down, snowflake, and quit your fucking whining. Nobody cares about your endless grievances.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

You are the most offended person I know. Between the woke libtards complaining about perceived transphobia and the MAGA dunces complaining about CRT in math books, your hair is ALWAYS on fire. Now you’re so offended you want to go out and beat some people up? Sit the fuck down, snowflake, and quit your fucking whining. Nobody cares about your endless grievances.

I'm irritated. There's a difference. We irritated are a different breed, responding not to perceived slights but to generally dumb behavior, or things that are corrosive to a more enjoyable or amusing discourse.

When I'm reading something that's provocative, I enjoy that it causes me to think. Maybe it causes me to disagree with it, or reconsider what I'd previously thought about the subject. If comments follow the article and they debate its merits or lack thereof, that banter is welcome.

But when someone responds with, "I'm offended," or worse, then seeks to ban the author of that which offended them, they've added nothing. All thinking ceases and the argument becomes a grievance and possibly a blunt exertion of power to shut down something or someone.

"I'm offended" is not thoughtful but emotive. It's like saying "This makes me sad," or "This makes me happy." Does this add anything to the conversation? Congrats. You've emoted. And the content value of that ejaculation is: 0.00.

But yes, I think I should be able to Will Smith most of the offended. But I also think that if they find my denigration of them or irritation with them offensive, they can do the same to me. Quite honestly, allowing people to beat the shit out of each other might be the cure for stupid behavior.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'm irritated. There's a difference. We irritated are a different breed, responding not to perceived slights but to generally dumb behavior, or things that are corrosive to a more enjoyable or amusing discourse.

When I'm reading something that's provocative, I enjoy that it causes me to think. Maybe it causes me to disagree with it, or reconsider what I'd previously thought about the subject. If comments follow the article and they debate its merits or lack thereof, that banter is welcome.

But when someone responds with, "I'm offended," or worse, then seeks to ban the author of that which offended them, they've added nothing. All thinking ceases and the argument becomes a grievance and possibly a blunt exertion of power to shut down something or someone.

"I'm offended" is not thoughtful but emotive. It's like saying "This makes me sad," or "This makes me happy." Does this add anything to the conversation? Congrats. You've emoted. And the content value of that ejaculation is: 0.00.

But yes, I think I should be able to Will Smith most of the offended. But I also think that if they find my denigration of them or irritation with them offensive, they can do the same to me. Quite honestly, allowing people to beat the shit out of each other might be the cure for stupid behavior.

Being offended is “emotive” but being irritated is “thoughtful”? I’m not buying it. The only difference is that, instead of saying, “This makes me sad”, you are saying “This makes me angry.” Irritation is an emotion. Adds nothing to the conversation. Congrats. You’ve emoted.