Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Suspends American Far-Right Activists' Accounts (theguardian.com)
Twitter has suspended the accounts of a number of American "alt-right" activists hours after announcing a renewed push to crack down on hate speech. From a report on The Guardian:Among the accounts removed were those of the self-described white-nationalist National Policy Institute, its magazine, Radix, and its head Richard Spencer, as well as other prominent alt-right figures including Pax Dickinson and Paul Town. Spencer, who according to anti-hate group SPLC "calls for 'peaceful ethnic cleansing' to halt the 'deconstruction' of European culture", decried the bans as "corporate Stalinism" to right-wing news outlet Daily Caller. "Twitter is trying to airbrush the alt right out of existence," Spencer said. "They're clearly afraid. They will fail!"
It's so hard being a Nazi now a days, for some reason everyone seems to think your a vile repugnant monster.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I've seen news articles about a lot of hate and violent threats towards Trump and others by people, but they aren't banned. Twitter really is as biased as I see in articles, even the ones posted to Slashdot.
They'll now call everything they don't like (and want to censor) "alt-right"; they've already tried it with Gamergate.
"activists" ? Just call them what they are. Racists and hate mongerers.
One account suspended merely replaced the word "black" with "white" to show the double standard Twitter has with race. For instance, someone would tweet "Can't wait for white people to go extinct" and the account would replace white with black. The person using the "white" tweet was never suspended.
In a completely unrelated announcement Twitter has released a statement saying 'We're just not sure where all our users are. We will fail to generate revenue for the Nth straight quarter.'
The Alt-Right millennials have also discovered concurrent, scalable, live chat. While most are unsure how to use it they promise to figure out "IRC" sometime.
So they're saying there can be no safe space for those who derisively use the term "safe space".
What exactly is wrong with peacefully holding an ignorant opinion to one's self? Even sharing it?
I dislike ignorance as much as anybody, trust me. But come on. Censoring that kind of talk just isolates it so it can grow more powerful on its own. We all need to learn to laugh at our differences except when violence becomes an open possibility. At which point we should laugh at that, too, as long as we can before somebody gets hurt.
They banned Clint Eastwoods account. Twitter Staff are the NAZIS. It doesnt matter who you vote for you should be heard. Seek the truth. Criminals like Hillary needed to be outed - Thank God for Wikileaks.
I don't understand. It is the left that is engaging in hate speech, and even physical violence. They are rioting, advocating the assassination of the President-elect, and denouncing democracy in this country. And they are blaming others for their own faults and criminal actions. Sounds like Twitter is going after the wrong people.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
They should not censor the posts, but I understand they are a business , they are in it to make money. If these guys reduce their profit, drop'em.
Going exactly as predicted.
Step two in the downward spiral of insignificance.
Once the full echo chamber is complete, they will turn upon themselves and start the discussion of which particular flavor of politically correct is the best.
Investors, new users, and thoughtful people will not be amused.
On the other hand, competitor startups will be overjoyed.
Hint: don't buy Twitter stock to hold for the long term. Day-trading only.
...but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Is there a handy glossary somewhere? (Don't point me at a dictionary if it was published over ten years ago; you know that's going to be totally obsolete by the rapid change of what these terms mean.) Were the neo-cons absorbed by one of them, or is that still a thing?
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
That *would* be better PR, to remove extremist accounts.
Whatever you think of alt-right (hopefully, not too well), this move by Twitter establishes itself as an arbiter of norms and values.
As a nation we value our freedom of speech. We tolerate even the likes of Westboro Church. We tolerate this because unless deplorable people have the right to speak freely, there could be no freedom of speech. It must be that absolute. Unfortunately, it was made clear that Twitter doesn't share our national values.
So, I see an echo chamber that the far right creates their OWN version of twitter, kind of like how the right created their own "news" organization.
And so begins the true divide in the country, where the fox news people feed their own echo chamber via alt-twitter, and the liberals have msnbc and twitter.
And the two sides never speak to each other.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Twitter is the confetti of the internet.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
In which case, they'll be sucking hind tit. But they're not all that far from bankruptcy as things stand now.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
It's so charming to watch the Liberal Left endorse censorship without the slightest trace of irony.
You guys really DON'T get it, do you? Or do you think the various actors and their sympathies today will /forever/ agree with your personal morality?
-Styopa
Further to your point- If home email servers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have home email servers. If home irc servers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have home irc servers. If home web servers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have home webservers.
I'm *still* waiting for Snowden to give some thoughtful, educating, and insightful commentary expanding on his words that "yes, Hillary's email server is a problem".
Don't forget to remove accounts from the Far/ "Alt-Left" too. For example, the Black Lives Matter group and all their threatening vitriol they spew. Large sums of college students can be clumped into this as well since they refuse to acknowledge anyone who may have a differing opinion to their own and end up labeling them with an 'ism'. Don't forget the groups who are calling on riots a.k.a protests to occur in major cities.
Just to name a few...
Reminder, you have no constitutional right to post shit on twitter
Twitter decides that black activists calling for various felonies against "the right people" (including minors) is ok, but how dare you espouse white separatism.
Why should we care about the opinions and rebukes of people who live like that? It is precisely how you feel being rebuked about sexual morality by a pastor like Ted Haggard or Jimmy Swaggart. It's how you'd feel if Bernie Madoff self-righteously stuck his finger in your face and said "you're a fucking asshole who deserves to be shot for ripping people off."
The SPLC is nothing of the kind. They are a left-wing propaganda outlet.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
They made a hefty sum for the alt-right. They did try contracting with alt-left, but they have no traffic.
WHY ARE YOU STILL USING SOCIAL MEDIA? They're full of extreme faggotry and fail. Delete, disregard, and deprecate. Go back to using email and (shocking!) meet with people in person and have actual, live conversations. Of all the things some people want to turn the calendar back on, this is the one thing that absolutely should be turned back.
Centralized web information dissemination services that are able to suppress dumbass and hostile points of view.
Meanwhile, I'm sure someone at DoJ is preparing a PowerPoint demonstrating how they "partner" with industry to eliminate hate crime.
First they suppressed the speech of neo-Nazis, but I didn't worry because I'm not a neo-Nazi.
And fighting this is simple: DON'T USE TWITTER, FACEBOOK, or other centralized and sanitized social media.
I'm sorry but tolerating hate is not tolerance, it's cowardice
That's the paradox of tolerance.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Streisand Effect is in full play now. People I've never heard about because they have already been mainly marginalized are not FRONT PAGE of Slashdot.
Excellent work there.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Headline falsely implies that the accounts were deleted because they were alt-right or far-right, when they were deleted because they used hate speech. Not a bias in viewpoint, but a cap on hate speech.
NPI and others like them are jackasses, which is why this should have been done a LONG time ago. This is not Twitter waking up to the dangers of giving them a forum, they already knew that. This is not about social justice, this is about Twitter, Facebook and other companies circling their wagons around their core competency which is to be "influencers". These hate groups and "fake news" sites existed long before this election and were even in full swing before Obama was elected (and were just as much or even more responsible for the birther movement as radio shows). Social media companies did very little about it then so why the sudden and pronounced change? It's because they are media companies and they make their money advertising/selling/pushing ideas. They were fine with it before Trump because they wanted the eyeballs and traffic for advertising. They could proudly point to Obama's election as proof of how effective they are at shaping and controlling "messages". Then Trump won and made it clear that they are not as influential as they assume to be which is going to have a lot of advertisers wondering how much their service is really worth. That's a serious problem.
The simple fact of the matter is the vast majority of people are associating with the own social clique's on social media (hence the name) and very, very few people are going to be swayed to a different opinion by a post online. They are there to affirm their beliefs not challenge them or form new ones.
So, yes this was the right thing to do but don't believe that it's driven by socially minded companies. They're pissed and this is their revenge... just happens to workout well for most of us.
They will honor free speech when they are forced to.
Nobody has to actually listen to what these 'hate' groups have to say- but it's not always a bad idea to listen to what they say before writing them off anyway.
We have this problem in society where nobody listens to what the opposition has to say and often the 'predator' is not what they are made out to be on television, in the media, and in movies. Do you really think every priest is a paedophile? Do you really think every paedophile is a rapist? Do you think every person on the right is a racist murderer that's going to string up black people if elected? We have stigmatized whole segments of society to the point where people won't admit they are part of a given segment even though in reality that segment doesn't actually advocate harm to anyone and the vast majority within are peaceful. Just because a small almost non-existent part of a segment does advocate or do bad things doesn't mean the majority do. We are literally persecuting people for opinion and/or things they have no control over, beyond that they are choosing not to hurt people, but still are getting wrapped up, blamed, and incarcerated for no good reason. It's all FUD.
'hate' crimes are literally being used to persecute peaceful activists too (and not the KKK type- but libertarians, LGBT activists, etc, for example) rather than those partaking in KKK and other similar white supremacist groups (but neither should be legally persecuted for having an opinion that differs, that's censorship or similar, and just as dangerous to democracy, arrest and prosecute for the physical harm and let the rest be). This is why such laws are bad. They end up getting abused to persecute people who are angry and shouting curse words at police rather than people who are actually dangerous.
This is nothing less than oppression of opposing views. The radical left irresponsibly classifies anything they disagree with as hate speech.
The modern left= oppression, tyranny, eugenics.
vs decades of ideological beliefs. Liberals yelling out "I wish somebody would plant Mike Pence & Trump in the ground" didn't really start until the election ended and the fear set in. Until then everybody just assumed they were relatively harmless baboons. A bit of hyperbole is to be expected in the face of what's coming (hope you're health, you're about to lose pre-existing condition coverage unless you're rich enough to pay for COBRA).
The alt-right here have been on a non-stop campaign of hate and fear since day one. They're terrorists, and should be treated as such. People seem to forget what the KKK was (probably because they weren't black and living in the American South)....
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So the left loses the election in a landslide, and many say it is in part to them being in bubbles and echo chambers. Their answer to that: Build bigger bubbles and echo chambers.
This way there are more alternatives to Twitter and we don't see one or two giant systems owning all eyeballs.
that the right has been doing these things non-stop for 8 years, longer if include the KKK which we sorta pretend isn't a thing because the Media has been intentionally ignoring them.
The left is going a bit overboard out of fear. Very, very legitimate fear. If you have friends with life threatening medical conditions and they're not very, very well off they are going to die soon. That's not idle speculation. Their medical care came from the ACA, which is being gutted. If you're under 55 they're coming for your Medicare too. You're going to die in your 60s of something completely preventable. This is all happening. If you're not rich and not scared you're not paying attention.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
We all want a society based on a certain model. "Tolerating" anything else means that no one gets what they want.
Alternative Right.
In one corner, a heaping pile of censorship wharrgarbl! In the other, the right of a privately owned business to do *whatever* the fuck it wants!
Fight!
They are a hate group so why do they not list themselves .. oh confirmation bias and hypocrisy eh?
I'm sorry but tolerating hate is not tolerance, it's cowardice
It doesn't matter, the USA has enshrined freedom of speech in its Constitution. Or is this freedom only good when liberal elites use it to their advantage ?
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that a particular non-government platform has to tolerate your speech on their site.
here it is explained by Randall Munroe: xkcd
(don't forget to read the mouseover text).
.. not bad for 1949.
I'll double down on your acknowledgement of the nuance of details by suggesting that 'hate speech' of some sorts, is an absolutely vital and necessary part of any actually good functioning democracy. To speak about that which you hate, is an utterly normal part of the range of interhuman communication. Of course death threats are within that subset, so clearly an acknowledgement of important differing subsets of 'hate speech' seems the reasonable conclusion to me.
or more precisely:
Winter is here for the alt-white
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I do not like how we are heading down the same road Germany did post world war two. Even though I do not like what they say and do not agree with it. I think they have the right to say what they want.
The evidence speaks for it's self, Neo nazi's are very popular in Germany. Mainly due to them being federally banned. It makes a forbidden fruit appeal to the group. While here in the states many of them had to band together with the dying KKK just to barely stay alive. The difference between the two is that the states never banned their views.
It's like the old saying, cutting out a mans tongue says you are just afraid of what they say. Not that they are a (lair, hatemonger, etc)
They were already banning conservatives, Christians and Republicans for some time now, often without explanation or justification. Their moderators are now justifying after the fact by invoking 'hate' censorship. Meanwhile, SJW types can spew any hate rants they want under the pretense of social justice.
Just Leave twitter and facebook. They are media outlets that purposely swing things to their liking. you do not need to use it.
I sugest using gab.ai a truly free speech social platform. The more that move to this the less power platforms like this have eventually forcing them to allow one to speak freely. Using anything else is subjecting yourself to the rules and regulations of a media source to big for their own good who now control what you can and can not say. That is not good for either side.Truly nothing but a waist of time or a place to go where you will receive no opposition since everyone that is left thinks and acts just how twitter and facebook wants them too. This creates nothing but a mob mentality of like ideas with no one questing the idea.... kind of scary if you ask me. So again gab.ai, sign up, use it, speak freely.
Let me be your guide.
"Immigrants who jump the border and break our laws should be sent back where they came from." - That's a paddlin'.
"We shouldn't be dicking about in Syria because it has nothing to do with us." - That's a paddlin'.
"I don't give a fuck what bathroom you use, I want to be able to own a home, raise a family, and retire." - That's a paddlin'.
"Rape Melania!" - *crickets*
Welcome to a brave, new world of tolerance and understanding.
...this ? https://twitter.com/search?q=r...
... to have their own countries.
Don't agree? Please explain why then...
You obviously believe that if non-whites are unable to FORCE themselves into white people's countries, they will have to live around their own kind, in their OWN countries (which you obviously have failed to notice they get to KEEP, while invading white people's countries), and somehow that would be just awful for them.
Why?
Not enough white people to leech off? Not enough white people to provide the 'better life' that these worthless parasites keep telling us they want (and deserve, apparently)...
You therefore obviously believe that white people make BETTER COUNTRIES than non-whites, and you sir, are therefore a 'white supremacist'...
LOL.
White people have the right to have their own countries.
So do ALL other groups of people, whether of race or of religion.
If you wish to be a white minority in a third world country, why don't you cut out the middleman and MOVE to Brazil today? Why wait another ten or twenty years for white people to become a minority in YOUR country, when obviously you want it so much? Why not MOVE to Brazil? Because Brazil is a shitty, third world country, that's why. Which is precisely what every white country on Earth is going to become when the non-whites outbreed us.
Or perhaps you can show us precisely when millions of white people took to the streets in the 1950s and demanded that we open our borders and destroy ourselves.
Good. I'm glad that problem is solved. Since they don't have Twitter, they won't set up their own web site. If they do, we can ban that. Of course they'd never circulate newsletters are mail things. That's totally unheard of.
"I guess I'm just going to have to get along with people now" a local klanner said. "I'm going to find me a n*gger and hug him".
/sarc, and I also find it interesting that the lameness filter won't let me use the N-word, but that's probably got more to do with the GNAA trolls than real racists on Slashdot.
Not that I give a fuck about Twitter or the people they are banning. I do not.
Pretty sure though that when a communications app starts wiping ideas they do not like out of existence, their time of relevance is passing.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
GOP makes heavy use of twitter. If the far-right is taken out, then about 3/4 of the GOP will lose their accounts. That is foolish since ppl really should know what they are up to.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Interesting timing, though.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I mean seriously, let's fight "targeted abuse" with "targeted abuse"... :-\
If I agree with you that Twitter should allow white supremacists under the guise of "free speech", will you in turn fight for my right to not be banned on e.g. Stormfront for suggesting that maybe all black people aren't actually knuckle-dragging subhumans, under that same principle of free speech? Why or why not?
edit Right AND LEFT Wing
Ultimate example of closing the barn door after the horse has run away.
Who did what now?
"right-wing news outlet Daily Caller"
Why isn't The Huffington Post referred as a "left-wing new outlet"?
they would not be, as they would just a be a medium.
Pretty much none of what you said has any basis in fact or law.
- AT&T was broken up because it was a monopoly that was engaging in anti-competitive practices, just like Carnegie Steel. The baby bells are regulated because they operate as public utilities which grants them certain exclusive rights, like right of way for cables. Verizon owns all of the infrastructure in a given geographic area. They are regulated to ensure that they don't abuse these rights (just like your power and cable companies), part of this regulation is laws that prevent them from barring access to this infrastructure (common carrier laws). Shorter version: They aren't regulated because they offer a vital service, they are regulated because they are the only ones allowed to offer that vital service in that area.
- Taxi cab drivers can't discriminate because of Federal (and often state and local) civil rights laws. It has nothing to do with the fact they're driving on a public road. They can and did before the 60's.
- The Internet is not publicly funded. The initial research that created ArpaNet but primary government funding stopped at that point (though some public monies were used through academic investment in the infrastructure). The US Federal government has not spent a dime on building out or maintaining Internet infrastructure in decades.
If any of your statements were true then groceries would be heavily regulated because they're far more vital than any of the utility services and they are transported over public roads. But they're not, companies can charge whatever they want for them (you just don't have to pay it). And they do, in a way, discriminate because poorer people in remote areas (e.g. Alaska) have to pay more for them. They can't discriminate because of color or religion but that's because of civil rights laws (ask any African American who was alive before the 60's).
Hard to believe, but by most measures people with black colored skin were more free post Civil War than they were post Jim Crow era. The "separate but equal" doctrine was largely a result of the eugenics movement, itself the finest example of why science should never be used to dictate public policy.
Smell my Vagina! What I really HATE is FREE SPEECH
Way to go you Twitter Censor creeps. Why don't you do us all a favor ? Disable all the Muslim Extremists ? There's enough chatter.
Also we are not all bleeding liberals you know. I am all for a smaller government. I don't want my hard earned money going to help some illegal alien live in my country for nothing. Why can't we do what Canada does ? You need a sponsor family, a job, and no need of government assistance to immigrate over.
My great grandparents did it. They spent a few months at Ellis Island. My great grandfather was a mechanical engineer.. fleeing Italy back when Italy were Nazi friendly. He wasn't Jewish but wanted to help kick the Germans' Ass. He used his engineering skills to help design high powered projectile guns.
Twitter is on it's way down.
But on Twitter you can call for the eradication or killing of white people all you want without anything happening to your account.
People don't remember since is wasn't actual rioting unlike the anti-Trump folks. Sounds like to me you remember an exaggerated version of history and ignore what has become business as usual for Democrats. What's next? People tend not to remember isolated acts that happened years ago. People do tend to remember them when it's happening every other day for months on end. You're comparing a few acts against Obama supporters to a deluge of Democrats assaulting everything with 2 or 4 legs across the nation.
They don't believe anything that Abraham Lincoln didn't support. Back then it was called "colonization" and it was how Liberia was founded. People just don't know fucking history and Twitter, playing the censorship game, has to be pounding the nails into their own coffin. Does anyone use Twitter that isn't a vain, self-absorbed asshole?
Why are you asking us? Is someone saying ALL left-tards are rioting? ALL of them? Really?
The only anti-Obama protest post-election that I ever heard of was at the University of Mississippi where they had 400 young Republicans marching around protesting the election in 2012 peacefully (but stupidly - what are you protesting, the electoral system? - no side has a monopoly on dumbness I guess). No other protests.
The rest of the data is irrelevant. The guy who got beat up in Louisiana probably did get a beatdown because of his Obama sticker, but the guy who did it has a history of being a violent offender back home in Longview, TX. As do his family members. Shall I start linking the Trump-related beating stories from the past few days? The effigy hangings, who cares, that happens every election. Property destruction - happens every day, I could speak volumes on that personally as I got my car vandalized to the tune of $2500 just this last election cycle and I have a film of some woman throwing shit on my property.
So that article is a bunch of horseshit thrown together to defend violent protests that are resulting in deaths and destruction across the country.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Did you read the link? No? Here it comes again:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundi...
Actual violence, rioting and attacks by right wingers, following each of Obama's elections. Don't act like "your side" can do no wrong, because that is objectively bullshit.
Eat the rich.
When you elect a candidate who has run his campaign on racism, hate speech, sexism and intolerance, that's what you get.
Eat the rich.
Your link doesn't relate. It cites one incident with one individual and some various minor events like church fires. Meanwhile, you look to the west coast where mobs of people are marching down the street smashing every window on every shopfront they can find, destroying vehicles, attacking passers-by. They don't compare. They are not at all alike. A church fire is not a riot. One individual assaulted by another in an isolated setting is not a riot. Worse, if the right were truly as violent and revolutionary as many suggest, there would have been mass shootings during riots the likes of which the country hasn't seen since the civil war. That didn't happen, not even remotely close. Some people carried some protest signs suggesting it, but it was protest. Unlike now, with mass destruction of property and violent assaults perpetrated by the angry mobs of protesters.
about those clowns is the utter and complete dismissal of the fact that this isn't rightfully a European nation, either (though point of historical fact: Mexico never had rulership in the continental U.S., either, but for a brief period lasting mere decades. No, it was Spain, and before centuries of that, the Native Americans were here for *tens of thousands* of years). Going in circles, I tell ya. I am of Irish and French descent originally, and even I really wish these types of numb nuts would take their damn liederhosen and get back on the effing boat.
The left is projecting again. They consider every last person who voted for Trump to be an alt-right racist misogynistic extremist to the last man, so of course they assume that every conservative is thinking that every single liberal must be rioting.
So the Alt Right is getting banned on twitter. Great!
Now what about the Alt-Left?
Like SJW's and BLM crazies? The ones that call for the murder of all men, or white people?
Because all I've seen from twitter in the past (and this newest development shows no signs of deviation from this trend) is twitter going after gamergate people and the far right. They aren't being fair, they are silencing those they disagree with under the guise of anti-harrassment.
Trump is pretty liberal for Republican. Democrats went off the deep end years ago with all the SJW madness and political corruption. The Tea Party collapsed years ago and nobody even talks about them anymore. The reason Trump won is because people like you didn't even realize the real mainstream Republican actually existed. The vast majority of conservatives are ignored since they are not overly political and tend to mind their own business. Most Democrats and Republicans share common values and don't run around like screaming psychotic children. It's people like you that failed to understand what was the core reasons that motivated people to vote for Trump. You ignored what people were actually saying and just substituted the archetypes the media created for you to justify your bias. These same media people were unapologetic cheerleaders for Clinton. People like you just kept screaming "Hitler! Racism! The 1%!." You haven't the slightest idea who these people are. You became the thing you claim to hate. While people like you were hating on straw men you created, they were voting for the lesser of 2 evils out of desperation. This "left-wing vs right-wing" crap is pure BS. Both political parties are run by people who are screwing everyone and both parties thank you for being the sheeple they need you to be.
and hello safe zones were having to actually think outside of your comfort zone is now disallowed. This is one of the reasons that Trump got into power. People are sick of being told what is right and wrong to discuss thanks to the looney left. You can't even talk about Islam or any other ideology now without being called a racist. You can be a gay, jewish conservative with a black boyfriend (Im talking Milo) and the left will call you an anti gay, sexist, racist anti semite (I shit you not). Guess what happened to Milo's twitter account, yes the left leaning loons now in control of Twitter kicked Milo of twitter for being a anti gay, racist. Seriously how obvious do you want it to be that twitter is now run by the looney left. Well the good news is thanks to the looney left and the lack of open discussion people are now leaving twitter.
Uhhh yeah people did riot when Obama was elected and re-elected
Election: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2009/racist-backlash-greets-president-barack-obama
Re-election: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/2088176
That didn't just "happen" to them. They got regulated in exchange for access to a market in which they would exercise a near- or complete-monopoly.
If you want to make an argument that Twitter has a near-monoply on... um, tweeting, or that Facebook has a near-monopoly on communicating among people in general, and you are able to reasonably contend that these things are important to society then you might want to make an argument for regulation and see if you can make it fly.
Both companies use their terms of service to say "you over here can participate, but you over there can't" one way or another, and in a fairly arbitrary manner. They also restrict what you can do if they do let you use their service. And they are both pretty much the only real serious game in town for their respective functions in society. So you might have an argument. But that's the way you have to present it if you want it to even have a chance of flying. Seems to me your chances are overall better with Facebook, as they really do have a stranglehold on general interaction and friendly-to-the-general-public networking, which does indeed affect society in general in a very broad and powerful sense. Tweeting... I don't know. Maybe. I can't see it, personally. If you take my 140 characters away from me, I will just laugh at you. I think I would take being cut off from the vast majority of the people I have met over my lifetime and my extended family much more seriously. If I used Facebook and cared, which I don't, either one. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
What idiot lefty submitted this piece of shit biased Slashdot article. ALT-Right does not equal nazi you idiot. Take your leftie media bullshit and stick it.
But Facebook, notably Zuckerburg, find themselves playing their rules within OUR DOJO, our society, with our rules, the filthy masses that they operate amongst and exploit for their own ends. If we want to change the rules of reality, legislate them into public services, then that's what we'll do. If we went to force them to hire minorities, to support or suppress certain speech, to pay fines for infringements or receive subsidies for public goods provided, then we retain the sovereignty to do so. It's OUR world, our internet, our legislature, our lives. We're allowed to change the rules, especially when the world changes, technologies change, world events occur. It's smart to adapt and respond to a changing world.
We neglect the responsibility to monitor and control such "private" behemoths to our own detriment and destruction.
These companies and their "private fiefdoms" do NOT deserve to be recognised as surrogate humans with human rights, and they do NOT need corporate sovereignty today any more than they needed it yesterday.
Guard your democracy carefully from fascists - they're always at the gates.
Twitter, Google and Facebook are nothing more than arms of the democratic party. Now they are upset that inspite of their best efforts to rig the election they failed. And they realize they are on the way to being an irrelevant scrap in the scrapbook of history.
You're right..alt-right are not being systematically oppressed. However, moderate conservatives are being attacked and systematically oppressed as if they were alt-right. Democrats have systematically demonized all Republicans as racists and crazy people. They've tried to purge normal conservatives from every news media, collage campus, social media and political forum while chanting the magic words "Hate" and "Racism." Liberals haven't the slightest idea what the average Republican really thinks...and wouldn't care if they did. They'd just ignore the truth and go back to attacking straw men and ideas rather than real problems in the real world. Republicans got tired of the lies and corruption. They got fed up with an army of illegals running across the border. They got fed up of watching race riots being encouraged for political reasons while cops and whites were being attacked. They got tired of watching the nation falling apart while black Jesus played golf and watched the world burn. Then, you liberals backed Clinton? She was their worse nightmare come true. After 8 years of watching the SJW Nazis act like rabid dogs, people finally decided to vote and you really can't understand what just happened.
Does slashdot now censor posts based on uncomfortable points of view that contain no negative content whatsoever?
So now Twitter gets to decide who gets to have their 1st Amendment rights now huh? Hate speech? Oh but the "left" don't have hate speech right? Ok, yeah, whatever! That's ok Twitter is having financial difficulties anyway. I hope they go under! It will serve them right! Something else will just take it's place.... Look at MySpace. MyWho you might say - exactly.
The Truth is a Virus!!!
when he back pedaled on that. See here. Specifically this part:
But he, Vice President-elect Mike Pence and House Speaker Paul Ryan have provided some insights into how Republicans would handle the thorny issue of insuring the sick.
They would set up a two-track system: one for those who maintain continuous coverage and one for those who don't. And they would replace the subsidies with a tax credit or deduction to help people pay their premiums.
This is exactly how it was when I was a kid. Any gap in coverage and you're screwed. Tax subsidies are worthless to someone who's chronically ill. You've probably just lost your job. Best case you're on FMLA with no money coming in to pay for anything. Tax cuts don't help when there's no income to tax.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
unless he breaks with what his VP Pence and Paul Ryan are saying they're going to do then they're going to put it back to what it was when I was a kid. Any break in coverage and you're screwed. States will have a high risk pool that's either underfunded or not funded. People will die with completely treatable illnesses.
Like I always say: You can do anything to anybody with these 5 simple little words: Who's gonna pay for it?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You're referring to Hillary "I don't feel no ways tired" Clinton? "Bring them to heel"? "Super-predators"? Trump, on the other hand, received votes from groups that the left said would never vote for him. Even college educated women voted Trump, against a woman candidate. That has to hurt.
Do the same for people posting from the koran.
Yes, Pluto is a planet.
There is nothing wrong with censorship itself, it's a necessary evil in any society. The problem is how it is applied.
Going after the "alt-right" something which is a barely defined group is an absolute misuse of the tool. Most of the people in the alt-right are just plain nationalists, which is necessary for any healthy society. The groups you really have to watch for are the ones that specifically go out of their way to spread divisiveness. You see a lot of this with the types of people obsessed with identity politics. In some ways the recent outburst of white nationalism is just identity politics taken to its logical conclusion. Also, where exactly is the "Alt-Right" going to go after you ban them from twitter? It's not exactly like they're going to suddenly decide to give up expressing their beliefs, or quit the internet because twitter banned them. Instead it will have the opposite effect, spreading them out to places like Slashdot.
Now if I was going to start censoring the internet I'd start with the left leaning communist groups. If you follow any of those types you'll see how they constantly use people's worse emotions to spread envy and hate against groups they see as "successful". It's destructive, terrible, and naturally results in a backlash against the people they are spreading their type of bile in the name of, such as blacks, latinos or whoever. You may think this is an over-exaggeration, but watch for this pattern, it happens over and over and I believe it is one of the main thing hurting race relations these days. After they were gone I'd move on to the extremist Muslims types spreading hateful ideology, not the moderate ones, but the more extremist ones who talk about defending their right to practice their religion with violence if necessary. You simply cannot have that on the internet, anyone advocating violence cannot be given a platform. Finally I'd move on to the Jews with their sneaky money grubbing ways. They're the worst, literally every bad thing in society can be traced back to the jews, which is why I would require a little sticker to be placed on each and every one of their posts on the internet. This may sound crazy, but just imagine, just imagine if you had a little sticker identifying terrible posts on the internet. The sticker wouldn't have to be anything offensive to anyone, it could be as simple as an anime avatar or a cartoon frog, or a post marked with AC, just imagine. Point is, as unpleasant as it is you need to use censorship and practices that are seen as heavy handed if you want to create a brave new and improved society.
How is this the fault of the right and conservatives?
Mirror check!
Oh boy, the Godwin's are really flying today on Slashdot.
It's okay for Twitter the bigots are compliant leftists, such as Leslie Jones, the SPLC or the BLM, but not OK for anyone else.
This is why Twitter is losing cash - they're putting ideology before everything else.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
So all you have is reductio ad administratum, or an argument only supportable by shutting everyone else up.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
It's so hard being a [black racist | leftist] now a days, for some reason everyone seems to think your a vile repugnant monster.
FTFY.
Explain why it's OK to be racist towards white people while pointing out said racism is to be purged.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Judging by the support of known bigots like the BLM and SPLC, Twitter's being supported and run by fascists.
It's easy to call it not-censorship if a government entity winks and nods while the private entity carries out the deed.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
The difference is that Twitter openly supports and defends a certain political thought from any criticism.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
We all want a society based on a certain model.
The alt-right's capacity to gather all the young hot white homosexual betas in one place has been asstounding. Finally, /. has the answer to what has been going on over at 4chan all these years.
"Tolerating" anything else means that no one gets what they want.
Milo has shown what you 'want' to 'tolerate' is a thick cock pressed into your anus from a 200 pound muscular man. Clearly the main ethos for the alt-right "movement" is how do we get big hot muscular men to pound our asses? and it looks like your efforts are being rewarded.
I'm not a fan of either candidate.
You can be anti-Trump without being pro-Hillary.
Eat the rich.
No. It is all talk. Both are exercising their first amendment right.
Jeez, you make it sound like they're bombing abortion clinics, or shooting up Planned Parenthood "for the babies".
So then why does the right get so offended when Colin Kaepernick exercises his freedom of speech? Wassamatter? You fucking delicate snowflakes can't handle it?
Its almost as if you came sooo close to grasping the concept of freedom of speech and protection thereof... then you lost it.
/gasp/ paying for it themselves.
Groceries ARE regulated. Ever hear of the FDA... the FOOD and drug admin? Hmm?
Freedom of speech is a civil right. It was just so damn important it was added directly to the constitution.
You are wrong on cab companies. They are regulated because they are using public roads and thus CAN be regulated under the interstate commerce clause.
Most of the Internet is built upon public funds. The US alone gave billions (and still does) to ISP to build the internet... that is what makes what Google and GoogleFibre so radical as they are
In the general election, we had a choice between two candidates. Yes, there are third parties and such, but voting for them accomplishes nothing in our system. So if you're against him, you're for her. That is unless you're like half the rioters and decided not to vote at all.
Just like that the stable doors were slammed shut, after all of the horses escaped.
I'm glad someone is talking about this! LA is nothing more than a pile of rubble. It's shocking. My home in Mar Vista, gone, and some mustached guy wearing a bandanna is sitting on the pile, tossing a child's skull in the air. I just barely got away with my life. Thank god I have a Range Rover, because (in 4-wheel drive) it can drive over the craters in the street. Just saw a nun in flames followed by a mob of AA men... And, yes, I do mean they are in Alcoholics Anonymous. I'm shocked to the core. My whisky and cigars are... gone. Just gone. I don't know where I can get gas anymore, since they've made it illegal if you don't work for the State.
A church fire is a minor event???
Oh! Just church fires? Well, I'm glad that falls under the category of "who gives a shit."
I hope you know also that according to the police, the protesters and the rioters are separate groups of people. They have seen this sort of thing with the G8 and G20 summits, the WTO summit protests, and a few other mass-crowd protests. anarchists unaffiliated with the protesters come, covered to hide their identity, and there aren't enough police to actually catch them. They use the protesters as cover, like the terrorists in Benghazi did, and they violently attack protesters who try to interfere.
If the liberals are the left and the Republicans are the right and the right just had it's accounts suspended, did they include Donald Trumps account as well?
Just saying...
That is precisely the mindset people need to break out of.
Eat the rich.
http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...
Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.
Look at the vile hatred that was spewed from one side in particular.
Eat the rich.
Just like the programme I wrote for my employer isn't mine. The cake belongs to the customer, and your work is to put on the cake what the customer wants. If what the customer wants is illegal, you can refuse, and the customer is the one who is in trouble, but if it's entirely legal, then you have no right to refuse to do the work for your employer: the customer.
Don't like that? Don't open a business to serve customers and take the job of employee in someone else's business. Nobody FORCED you to be a baker.
No, it's not. Our system doesn't support having parties with significantly overlapping mission statements. If you have three equally popular conservative leaning parties and one somewhat popular left leaning party then the left leaning wins even though there were more people voting for the conservative leaning ones. That doesn't work. We would have to change how we do voting in order to escape this, and that's a tall order for a divided nation.
I live in the US.
On the one hand, I am against hate speech.
On the other hand, I am for freedom of speech.
Does fighting hate speech warrant a limitation to one's freedom of speech? No, it does not.
Fortunately, this is Twitter, not the US Government. While free speech is in the first amendment, there is nothing that I know of in the US Constitution or derivitvie laws that says that a social media business has to allow free speech on its platform. Blocking someone from Twitter does not block them from speaking out in other ways: verbally, self-publish their own web site or book, etc...
Also, while there is freedom of speech, there is not freedom from the social consequences of speech.
You need to begin supporting coalition governments, rather than just Winner Takes All.
I know it's a tall order, but it's necessary for a functioning democracy.
Eat the rich.