Slashdot Mirror
Reddit Conducts Wide-Ranging Purge of Offensive Subreddits (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Wednesday, [Reddit] announced a new policy clarifying its rules against content that incites violence. "We will take action against any content that encourages, glorifies, incites, or calls for violence or physical harm against an individual or a group of people," Reddit administrator landoflobsters wrote. Promoting harm to animals is also against the rules. Within minutes, moderators started to ban a long list of controversial subreddits, including /r/Nazi, /r/DylannRoofInnocent, /r/SexWithDogs, /r/WhitesAreCriminals, and /r/PicsOfDeadKids. The bounds of propriety remain fairly wide at Reddit, however. Commenters pointed out that /r/WatchPeopleDie -- which is exactly what it sounds like -- is still around. Landoflobsters said that site administrators have "no plans to remove it for now." The self-explanatory -- and horrifying -- /r/CuteFemaleCorpses is also still active. Evidently, merely depicting violence is fine as long as people in a subreddit don't glorify violence. In practice, of course, the line between these things is pretty thin. A subreddit devoted to merely discussing violent acts is naturally going to attract people who like to promote violent acts -- especially after bans of related subreddits where those people previously hung out. Reddit's new policy seems like the basis for an endless game of Whac-A-Mole as the Internet's creeps search for new places to exchange disturbing content.
Reddit is now a cesspool that essentially has become 4chan. That which is not squarely in the cesspool is banal vapid prattle. When Reddit removes the ability to post these things, it will die the death of kuro5hin, and the lonely echo of "Hello? ... HELLO? Is anyone here?" A moment of silence for Reddit, please...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Finally they get some backbone, can't wait for all the simpering fools on /. to whine abut free speech once against where it doesn't apply
If you want reddit to be a platform for hate you should have no issue with any social media being a platform for ISIS or literal nazis
They banned some small subs, but left out bigger ones like communism, anarchy, hittablefaces, antifa, etc
-]Phreak Out[-
Remember the good AOL wack-a-mole private chat rooms such as audio, WaReZ, and other porn and pirated software trading rooms? Sure your account may be TOS'd but you could just call up AOL and they would reinstate your account ($$$). No different than today, you get banned on Reddit? Simply make a new account.
No, this is the beginning of the end for Reddit. They will have a slow painful death not unlike Digg. Slashdot GNAA will still be around 20 years later.
The "relevant authorities" that have been monitoring crass subreddits are agents of other governments gathering material to blackmail U.S. politicians and people in important industry positions.
Our own government agents couldn't even keep track of a few hundred machine guns it purposefully sold to Mexican drug lords. Where are the advanced government tracking chips the movies all promised us? Sheesh.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
OMG a business is doing what they want with their own platform as is there legal right! Cue the masses of idiots to defend the 1st Amendment where it doesn't apply.
*cough* #realDonaldTrump *cough*
That's kinda implicit in the definition of a "line".
That doesn't mean you can get away without drawing one at all, though. Not indefinitely, at least.
rm -rf *.*
Why won't they delete all Trump-related reddits?
ha. ha.
Amazing Gesture Lock Screen
Doesn't 'cute female corpses' necessarily encompass 'pics of dead kids'? I guess cute male corpses get no love.
Ruff.
:exploring the jewish roots of white supremacy and the statistic of nlack-on-black crime:
Reddit's biggest problem is lack of real moderation system.
Go pick a random programming thread, and you'll find people having meaningful conversations without having the courtesy to upvote eachother. When I find those types of discussions, I usually just upvote everyone in the thread and silently move on to lurk in another thread. They were all contributing, but everyone's trying so hard to be right that they won't give anyone else credit for contributing, even when they're both half right and half wrong, or when they're clearly just stating a valid but unpopular opinion. This is especially bad in r/cpp lately for some reason.
Next, go pick a random frontpage discussion and see people getting thousands of upvotes for literally repeating the parent comment verbatim. Remember the infamous disco ball thread? That still happens every day to a lesser extent.
p.s. I stopped posting publicly on reddit because helping teach someone occasionally results in a downvote brigade for the entire thread. Instead, I just PM help to newbies that posted enough to let me know they're actually trying to learn and not just begging for homework help.
Who is this mysterious "Doland Trump" you speak of?
APK
https://www.reddit.com/r/Peopl...
They didn't go far enough. Period.
After years of prattling on about free speed- yishan, anyone - they finally realised that they'd painted themselves into a corner as far as revenues were concerned.
Enter chairthing Ellen Pao, scapegoat of choice.
Exit chairthing.
"Clean up" subs which don't fit the redditard narrative.
So they've kicked out the "fascists." When will they kick out the terrorists? See the Syrian and islamic subs. Even the overally "moderate" /r/islam sub is full of Islamic fascists who routinely target ex Muslims.
As do some of the mods on /r/religion and friends.
But then, the internet loves islamofascists.
Nope. Not a single one. I am not clicking any link associated with story!
I stole this Sig
the more fun the freedom of speech supporting US competition attracts.
:)
If a site just wants to offer government policy, political press conferences, positive big studio movie review, tourism news..
Whats the point of using a social media site if people don't get to comment on policy, movies, news, history, music, arts, culture, sports?
Users have to stay 100 % positive in how they write about a movie?
Freedom of speech, freedom after speech is what made the internet fun and allowed some US sites to keep growing.
Many nations did not have that freedom to post and respond.
Thats why the US brands attracted so many users.
Freedom is a great product to sell globally. Why alter the only aspect that allows a US social media site to be better and more fun than most of its global competition?
Once a site gets extra boring why return? Follow the fun and rediscover the joy of using the internet on much better sites
Read movie reviews by a section of fun, smart people? Freedom of choice, freedom of expression allows for a fun site.
Read the only movie review that was allowed on a very boring site?
Who gets the clicks? Who gets the views? Who gets the links? The site with the fun, creative and smart people talking about movies?
The boring site with the "approved" review a few approved 100% positive comments...
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Morty, I'm Reddit Rick!
Other than spammers, nobody bothered us when we used alt.binaries.pictures.grotesque for this purpose.
For the record, I was in no way responsible for the "Di Death Pic" hoax... but I know who was, an a.b.p.g regular. It was an accidental hoax anyhow, it was not meant to be taken seriously. We didn't know lurkers would forward it without the disclaimer.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
WPD is about as violence generating as the smurfs. Wait let me smurf that back, the smurfs are the only reason to smurf together and go on a smurfpage!
So much for the 'you don't like it leave' procensorship talking point. https://voat.co/v/announcement...
Teh danger to free speech or liberté d'expression, whichever country you live in, is that today , nobody look at what is not on new media (internet) and the new media is nearly fully private with all its venue with high traffic regulated by private company for their own agenda. Heck even hosting can become in some cases difficult. Soon real free speech , the one from groups I hate, will be relegated to non hosted server, no high traffic townsquare/board like facebook, potentially no indexing. It is like as if you had flyer but were relegated to some small street , and forbidden to go to the high traffic street. The danger to free speech is not the government in western country, but private companies.
What they really do is cull the subs that are offensive *and* expendable because they are low-traffic, or it doesn't suit their tastes. OK... so nazi sub is bad, but communist subs are OK? Even if they want to get rid of commie subs, they know they can't because there are a bunch of them on reddit and ironically they'd lose too much of the userbase and ad revenue if they got rid of communist subs.
But wait, let me guess: the official violence is OK because its makers are not 'little people', am I right?
Reddit is yet another forum for pretentious double talking scum. We western people can not hide from the fact that our nations do bad stuff all the time and we won't stop it from happening. We try these powerless gestures of goodwill thinking maybe these balance out our collective shitty existence.
"So Reddit's been wiped?"
Someone gave the Unibomber access to the internet.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Is still alive and kicking it seems.
...but there's also a bad side to it.
More accurate: "Reddit makes the news because some crazy The_Donald lunatic killed his dad. As a response, Reddit decided to close down several (but totally unrelated) subreddits... again"
Seems to happen every 2 or 3 years. Nothing new here.
...that we should go out, hunt down and kill ISIS members, you would limit me?
1. The folks interested in these things will definitely find other places to congregate, but here's the key: possibly not at reddit. Which is reddit's goal.
2. In terms of it being Whac-a-Mole, it shouldn't be too hard if they implement a user-based reporting / flagging system. Let your users flag suspect subreddits, then every day a reddit employee looks at the top few "most redported" and determines if they meet the criteria for removal. Users who abuse the flagging system lose the ability to flag.
Why are people interested in seeing corpses or deaths? Honest question
Please stop being a glorified pussy. Life is hell, we stabilize things for ourselves, not others
...."Offensive" according to WHO? We're turning into China or North Korea folks. Little by little. Remember "freedom"? We're losing it little by little. It's the pussification of America.
I adblock reddit.
Freedom of speech is quite fragile. It is also something to be cherished. I reject that "classic unalienables" (sic) should be taken as exceptions. As despicable as I find NAMBLA, I choke down my revulsion and resist the call to censor them. But if they arrange/facilitate pedophilia, that is not free speech. There is a line between speech and criminal acts. Hate crimes laws muddy criminal acts. To beat a gay man, tie him to a fence and leave him to die in the Wyoming cold is a crime for their acts, not because they were homophobes. To drag a black man to his death chained to a pickup truck in Texas is a crime for those acts, not because they were racists. There is no need to clasp at our pearls, swoon, and define exactly what are the "classic unalienables" to be exceptions.
was once an unpopular opinion.
libertarians, who would prefer a corporate dictatorship with no government oversight.
Nice Strawman. It is exactly wrong too.
Unfortunately, it's not a strawman. It is the elephant in the room for libertarian philosophy. Governments limit corporate power. Without governments, there would be no limits on corporate power. Once corporations own everything that can be owned, this is dictatorship. Game over: corporations own everything, you do what they tell you.
Remember who grants Corporate Charters? It isn't the Corporation, it is the Government.
Exactly. Governments are the limit on corporate power
As a Libertarian, I have a simple solution to Corporate malfeasance, the Corporate Death Penalty.
Show me one citation -- just one single citation-- to a libertarian source suggesting that "the corporate death penalty" is something that is considered a good idea anywhere in libertarian philosophy.
But: a citation to somebody other that yourself.
Lawful speech people don't like is still free speech.
Announcing a new policy is fine.... disrupting communities and purging content within hours of the announcement is not.
The proper thing is to allow those subs time to modify their rules and require submissions to conform to the new policies or
decide to move elsewhere WITH REASONABLE NOTICE, As in 30 days notice, not 5 minutes notice.
Its been interesting to read that apparently some of the limits reddit instituted last time (amid much controversy and gnashing of teeth) were in reducing hate speech.
The take-home to me is that groups online should define and enforce their standards; doing so will determine what sort of people participate and whether the site is a "cess pool". Seems obvious now.
I don't think you even are a libertarian, or for that matter even know anything about it; it just gives you an excuse to troll on the internet.
They should move to Canada. This isn't how we do it here. We're not fucking pussies afraid of words.
is just a bunch of people dying in accidents and such. It's not really glorifying violence or self-harm. These people aren't trying to die, they just happened to die terribly
Comment removed based on user account deletion
At some point, it'll just be a few niche communities and corporate-approved content. Just like Digg 4.
"Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
Don't say "one of my trolls"
Say "a tokyo cafe maid that I tried to dox"
The idea that government can compel people to participate in a free and open economy (Obamacare) isn't liberty, it is fascism. Because once a government can compel people against their own conscience is a violation of the basic tenants of liberty.
Is Obamacare 'Slaver' as a Libertarian would claim, or is it a commons? If people are truly able to opt in to every aspect of society, then there really no such things as commons.
Take a park as an example. A public park is paid for by taxes collected from everyone, and is available to be used by everyone. Buy if you allow people to opt in to each and every government program ala cart, isn't then the park owned by the select few that chose to allocate their 'tax' money for it? Moreover, unless there are rules that prohibit non-contributors from using a commons, then what incentive is there to personally fund anything? Why not just let others fund it, and use the commons for free? If only the contributors can use each commons they give to, haven't you just in effect created a corporation that owns private property?
Public healthcare is the exact same thing. If you aren't getting everyone to contribute to lower costs, then you are just creating another private health care plan. Libertarian idiots howl about taxes being slavery, they are not, UNLESS you have no option to choose another society to be a part of. You can renounce your citizenship at any time you wish and emigrate to a country where the rules are more to your liking. Slaves do not have that option.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Nowhere is (self-) violence against rednecks more glorified and "physical (self-) harm against an individual or group" more celebrated!
Just junk food for thought...
Make sure you clear your cookies if you click that link.
Good job Reddit, that'll really give those NAZI's a black eye. ....wait.
I asked for a citation showing that this is a libertarian position, and you respond with an essay justifying your personal opinion.
You missed the part where I asked for
But: a citation to somebody other that yourself.
But, OK, so you have an ad-hoc, jury-rigged fix to corporate power suggesting that a very powerful corporation could have its power curtailed by individual citizens suing in court, nonwithstanding that the corporation has, to first approximation, roughly a billion dollars to spend on lawyers, and thus the only "people" who could possibly afford such a suit would be other corporations. So, in your lawyertopia we have corporation-to-corporation death battles, with the most well-funded corporations killing the smaller ones. I don't think this is much of a fix for anything, actually, but the main point is that this is your opinion, not anything in libertarianism (other than the fact that I have often heard libertarians suggest that lawsuits are the way to solve most of the world's problems).
By the bye, you said earlier that libertarians want less government, but I'll point out that the "corporate death penalty" doesn't currently exist, and thus you're proposing expanding the power of government, not shrinking it. You just happen to propose expanding it by making lawyers more powerful.
Can you? I don't think you can cuz you are not skilled enough to have it done only or unless you are a skilled personnel trained to have it done, I was in need of a way to solve the above question until I saw an endorsed post about Bianca, I almost ignore this post but my intuitive reaction won't let me.
Well the post later worked for me, so I decided to endorse her too on my own way. by advising you to talk to Enrique Lewis
Enriquehackdemon11@gmail.com
Or text
+1(628)203-7005
Since I'm doing this as a method of endorsement, please tell Bianca I recommend
Tumblr going to remove the numerous rape videos they're hosting?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
(I think you may be confusing conservatives with libertarians, who would prefer a corporate dictatorship with no government oversight.)
"Corporate dictatorship" is an oxymoron. If an organization is behaving as a dictatorship then they are either a government (if they are claiming "legitimacy") or a criminal organization, not merely a corporation.
Why do you say that? Libertarians say that on my property, I am allowed to require you to obey my rules. If "my property" expands to include the areas you are trying to live in, I become a dictator. That's not an oxymoron.
What, you say you can just move somewhere else? You're making an assumption that other places will always continue to exist, and won't get swallowed up by corporations. And you're saying you have the resources to move elsewhere.
The first rule of money is that people with money use it to get more money, and people with more money use it to control essential goods and services. The more essential goods and services become controlled by monopolies, the less liberty individual people have. In the end case, corporations control all the essential goods and services, own all the property, and individual people control nothing, own nothing, and have no rights other than what corporations grant them.
A perfect dictatorship-- one person owns everything-- is also a perfect libertarian society.
The end result of libertarianism (if it can somehow avoid degenerating into feudalism as it always has before) is one corporation (or possibly even -just one single man) owning literally every square inch of land on earth, and every resource within it - and all of humanity effectiely enslaved to the one true owner of all, and since property rights are absolutely sacrosanct in libertarian thinking - absolutely no way to ever change that situation.
Coincidentally - it also provides the perfect thought experiment to the question of whether it's good to limit levels of economic inequality. Not unless the idea of living in a world where one person owns everything that exists sounds like a bad idea to you. After all if THAT level of inequality is not tolerable - then you've conceded that there IS an intolerable level of inequality - and now we're only arguing about where that level is, you can no longer argue that it doesn't exist.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
The Galaxy better watch out! The monkey boys from Earth are starting to colonize the Universe!
Corporate power depends entirely on the government enforcement of their artificial rights. For example, no monopoly could exist without a government protecting it from competitors entering the market.
Good lord, learn a little bit of economics beyond that bare-bones summary you got in high school social-studies class, please. Even Adam Smith knew better than that, and he wrote his book 240 years ago.
Some monopolies can be made by government enforcement, but by no means all. Economies of scale, for example, create natural monopolies: a smaller entity can't compete against a larger one if the cost of production is dominated by an expensive factory and the marginal cost per unit is small. (Note that in the decreasing cost to scale case, free-markets aren't even Pareto efficient!)
And, even WITHOUT economies of scale, large corporations use their power to drive small competitors out of business by selling at a loss until the less-well-funded entities go bankrupt (they then make their money back after they have driven everybody else out and can charge monopoly prices).