Slashdot Mirror


Gab Wants To Add a Comments Section To Everything On the Internet (cnet.com)

Okian Warrior writes: Free speech social network Gab has launched a new comments platform, Dissenter, which allows users to make comments on every single website on the Internet without fear of censorship or banning. The Dissenter platform, which integrates with Gab as either a website or a browser extension, allows users to comment on any web page in the world, with the ability to upvote, downvote, and reply to other comments.

"A free, open-source utility that allows people to dissent from orthodoxy and express what they are really thinking, without fear of reprisal, is essential in order to wrest control of the Internet and public discourse from Silicon Valley tech giants," said Gab founder Andrew Torba. "Gab.com and dissenter.com lead the way in keeping the Internet free. All people are welcome to use our products to express themselves freely." One example of recent comment censorship was review website Rotten Tomatoes' removal of comments for unreleased movies this week, which the review website claimed was due to "trolling."

308 comments

  1. First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Unless everyone is commenting using Gab or Dissenter ...

    1. Re:First post by davecb · · Score: 1

      I use Hypothesis to track the annotations I have created when "marking up" a series of discussions to use as reference in a paper or argument. It's very uninteresting to anyone else: no-one particularly wants to read my links.

      I expect lots of tiny echo-chambers, and some private sexual discussions.

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    2. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not so funny, how long before creimette takes the platform over with his zillions of suck puppet accounts and his bots?

    3. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notch is my best imaginary friend

    4. Re:First post by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I expect lots of tiny echo-chambers, and some private sexual discussions.

      Also lots of dissent against the orthodoxy. The orthodoxy in question being the "political view" that we shouldn't merder Jews.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:First post by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Lots of tiny echo chambers but when you start with with 7 BILLION, even tiny fractions represent a huge number and each echo chamber will inevitably reverberate with adjoining echo chambers, spreading the most popular tunes across the internet.

      Reality is lies only sell in the absence of truth, in the truth being censored, no matter how isolated that echo chamber, if it contains the truth people will find it and spread it. Exactly what is happening now and why the corporate establishment with the fucking filth of the digital age, M$, Google, Facebook, Twitter et al, wants to censor it to keep their lies alive, the lie they should control the majority of the worlds assets, that they can use and abuse it at will for fun, they are entitled to generate as much pollution as their money can generate, those of insatiable greed, ego and lusts. The more they tighten their grip the more 'people' that will slip through their fingers https://www.youtube.com/watch?... and the more truth that will be revealed.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    6. Re:First post by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The orthodoxy I'd expect to be questioned the most is probably what we consider reality. You know, the stuff scientists and all those other Illuminati and Freemasons force us to believe.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:First post by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but I am not that convinced. Lies sell if they're presented louder and more often than reality. And since people concerned with the truth usually have real jobs that keep them busy, what you get to hear the most is the loudmouths that don't but need a scapegoat to pretend it's not because they're pathetic losers but because the Illuminati and Teh Elitez are keeping them down.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:First post by davecb · · Score: 1

      Or, alternatively, you hear the words of a lawyer who wants to put together a class-action suit and has "convinced" an academic to slant their paper in Nature.

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    9. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lies cannot prevail in the long term against the truth, unless the lies are augmented by censorship, paid shilling, astroturfing, imposter and actual laws mandating prosecution for speech and holding certain opinions.

      This is hampered when people would struggle to find a consensus on a particular aspect of "the truth" even when presented with unlimited amounts of true facts, existential questions and fundamental tradeoffs etc. like "what is the right trade-off between group and individual identity?", "how to weigh freedom vs. equality vs. security?", "how much of human behavior is nature, how much is nurture" and similar all-encompassing topics. The same applies when "the truth" is a construct too big to process.

      But if "the truth" in a particular case is small enough and can be decided on facts, it is not only possible but rather easy to have humans find a common consensus on what "truth" is for that instance, if the humans involved can accept to be wrong or accept a truth that is very very very unpleasant to them or their emotions.

      This has several reasons, the most important of which is that only pieces of "the thruth" can be used to form a consistent world view or a bigger picture. Goedel's incompleteness notwithstanding, the ability to form bigger constructs out of individual true statements in a non-contradictory way is the fundamental difference between truths and non-truths. Goedel's incompleteness will limit this eventually and it will of course be possible to form smaller puzzles with non-truths. But the main takeaway to recognize something true or "more true" is when a bigger puzzle of interlocking, non-contradicting truths can be constructed.

      That's how Galilei succeeded eventually and how we arrived at modern physics. And that's how you recognize those who speak the truth: they are never afraid of bringing their puzzle pieces of "the truth" to the table and sincerely and honestly try to fit them into yours and discard individual pieces that don't.

    10. Re:First post by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Lies cannot prevail in the long term against the truth, unless the lies are augmented by censorship, paid shilling, astroturfing, imposter and actual laws mandating prosecution for speech and holding certain opinions.

      One word answer: Religion.

      Many words answer: "If you work hard, you too can become rich".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Good potential by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The interesting thing will be to compare the comments left via the extension and those left directly on the website. It could be a good way of exposing just how prevalent censorship has become in the modern town square.

    1. Re:Good potential by aitikin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It could be a good way of exposing just how prevalent censorship has become in the modern town square.

      I don't think it would. As, based on my understanding of the tool, one would have to be using "Dissenter" in order to view the comments on it, while anyone can view the comments directly on the website, many people will never see the "Dissenter" comments.

      I foresee it being more of a situation where one side will primarily post publicly and then the other side would post on "Dissenter" and it turns into a twisted echo chamber...kind of like Facebook.

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
    2. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Gab is basically a haven for the extreme right wing who have been cut off from traditional platforms like Twitter. The comments on anything mainstream (even main stream conservative like Fox News) will be foaming at the mouth insanity which won't tell you anything aside from how the people who want to bring back the Holocaust need to start with themselves.

    3. Re:Good potential by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is unlikely. What it's more likely to do is mean that the comments on the Gab version of the forum will reflect the clientelle of Gab.

      Imagine, for the sake of argument, this wasn't Gab's project, but Slashdot's. All of a sudden you'd get comments comparing things to systemd, complaints about the MAFIAAAA with relation to copyrights, and so on. Does this mean that the New York Times is censoring comments about copyright and has some hard-on for systemd?

      No, it doesn't.

      Now look at the type of people who currently use Gab. Are they representative of the nation as a whole? Do you think you'll be able to tell what kind of content gets censored from, say, Breitbart or the Wall Street Journal by comparing the comments sections to Gab's?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:Good potential by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Possibly true, but not all things are political. I know of a particular situation on an old game (EverQuest) where the company is known for blatant, over the top censorship and sock-puppeting. An alternative, well known forum like this would be welcome. Just last week they did a mass ban and lockdown on anyone who disagreed with their particular "rebranding" of a long-awaited, but ultimately bizarrely out of touch pair of servers. After spending two weeks grappling with all the rants and negative feedback, they just started locking things down and banning, while issuing a very slight but inconsequential modification (and changing their words).

      It is quite welcome to have contrasting points of view as up front as possible, quite often companies take a giant shit on something you are paying good money for, and try to silence all opposition. Sure, it undoubtedly will involve a lot of racism, trolling, off-topic posts and namecalling, so some form of meta moderation will be needed to squelch people who just cannot control themselves.

    5. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the great thing about freedom: nobody's forcing you to read it, unlike socialism which tries to force you not to think it or say it.

    6. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone who owns a domain/wiki/forum has 100% control. There's no "bill of rights" on the private site internet from peer censorship. This is a misconception by American Libertarian morons who are uneducated. That is all.

    7. Re:Good potential by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Funny

      Now look at the type of people who currently use Gab. Are they representative of the nation as a whole?

      Gab is representative of the nation as a hole.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:Good potential by jrumney · · Score: 1

      It certainly has good potential to contain the racist trolls in their own echo chamber. But I'm not sure it would work, as it defeats their whole purpose of posting if nobody who sees their comment is offended by it, so I expect they will continue their shitposting in the general comments sections.

    9. Re:Good potential by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Spoilers: It'll only be a good way of exposing your eyeballs to a lot of white nationalist drivel.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the great thing about freedom: nobody's forcing you to read it, unlike socialism which tries to force you not to think it or say it.

      I don't think you understand what socialism is

    11. Re:Good potential by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      I like the idea of this Gab extension. However on a pragmatic level I'm inclined to think that you will probably be right.

    12. Re:Good potential by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      Considering you can still see comments when the "doesn't exist" page appears, I think it may.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    13. Re:Good potential by 1ucius · · Score: 1

      True as far as it goes... but the commentary world collectively decided to centralize on a handful of proprietary* platforms. Obviously, there as been much regret lately over that decision. And, while a few people with well-known existing brands (e.g., David Rubin, Jordan Peterson) have tried to break out, I suspect it would be very hard for 2nd tier and up-and-comers to make the same move.

      *I'm still surprised that proprietary formats won the Internet. 15 years ago, I would have bet the house on open standards.

    14. Re:Good potential by doom · · Score: 1

      He also doesn't understand the problem with "freedom" very much.

      Even when I'm free to think how I like, I get stuck living with other people who are being led around by the nose.

      It hardly matters if I'm capable of ignoring a shill brigade if it throws an election anyway.

    15. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For all that it's worth, my work web filter blocks Gab.com for "Intolerance".

    16. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also own your own cake shop too, faggot. Didn't stop you Fascists.

    17. Re:Good potential by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Google already tried this with a product called "Sidewiki". It failed because few people bothered to install the add-on, and because the comments were unmoderated and unfiltered and sorted chronologically they were a toxic mixture of spam and trolling. Useful discourse was impossible.

      So pretty much like the main Gab site really. All the people booted off Twitter concentrated in one place. The best you can say about it is that it strongly supports free speech, but you don't go there for the quality of the content.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    18. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " but the commentary world collectively decided to centralize on a handful of proprietary* platforms. " - IE, the conservative trope, the free hand of the market. They did so for marketability reasons.

      I'm sure a dedicated Nazi site has its own patronage, but 99% of America isn't going to support that. When Gab is being deliberately and explicitly for-that-reason advertised to nazi groups to use as their platform?

      THAT IS A MARKETABILITY ISSUE. One that isn't solved or exploded completely overnight, it will always be there. Maybe that's a valid experiment, but it's certainly not comparable to the level of discourse MOST would want/expect.

      I do argue with and kick the ass of nazis on this site daily, but that's hardly on the level we're talking about with Gab.

    19. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it is unlikely to turn into an echo chamber inherently, as those using dissenter will probably still make use of comment sections they can access and they will be able to view, and take in views, from both at the same time.Though sites that have comment sections turned off will more likely lead to an echo chamber, with such a small population currently using Dissenter.

    20. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just got shadow-banned from Fox News so I'm getting a real kick out of your comment...

      It was a bad experiment anyway. I guess I posted about 6 months and the more I read the comments the worse mine became in response and the more I became to be disgusted by the entire Republican party. I don't know what the last straw was. I had recently posted that Israel shoots Palestinian children, but a few weeks ago I posted that "At least Iran doesn't shoot children" in reply to a comment about how evil Iran was compared to Israel. Maybe that one just flew under the radar.

      I was impressed that most of my comments weren't deleted despite being highly critical. I didn't think they did shadow-bans and would just outright ban people, but sure enough after nobody replied to a few comments I opened another browser without logging in and nothing.

      But outright racism and just disgusting hateful posts are often accepted. Posts appear to "disappear" if you report them, but sometimes they come right back. I reported a few who were just spewing hate about Michelle Obama actually being male and they came right back. It's fairly disgusting.

      When Mumia recently got a new trial I commented that Fox had completely left out the fact that the original judge had said he was going to "fry the n*****" with asterisks, it was quickly deleted. So I reposted, but changed it to "[the n-word]". Gone just as fast even though it was actually true.

      On the other hand, Breitbart banned me for posting the First Amendment the first day I commented there.

    21. Re:Good potential by jythie · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but more likely all it will show is the differences between the users of the website and the users of Gab.

    22. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freedom requires responsibility which is enforced upon itself by society, for society's overall good. IE, The Societal Contract. We stick around = we are responsible to see it through personally to the benefit of all, that's the idea.

      Trump is a cancer. The Republicans have metastatized.

    23. Re:Good potential by Z80a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It will get saner as less insaner people get deplatformed by the insane left until twitter start banning people for the mere act of being white and shit hits the fan.

    24. Re:Good potential by tepples · · Score: 1

      I'm still surprised that proprietary formats won the Internet.

      Proprietary commenting platforms masquerading as "social media", such as Twitter and Facebook, won because other comment protocols (Trackback and Pingback) were too spam-prone.

    25. Re:Good potential by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      So pretty much like the main Gab site really. All the people booted off Twitter concentrated in one place. The best you can say about it is that it strongly supports free speech, but you don't go there for the quality of the content.

      No, the best that can be said about it is that, at least in theory, it will keep the people who generate that kind of content busy spewing garbage in a semi-offline, crap-filled cesspool while the rest of us have intelligent conversations on the adult version of the Internet. Whether this will play out in practice or not is another question. :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    26. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not even libertarians. Paid shillfarms like to co-opt the favorite talking points of various zealous groups of americans because once you include the right buzzword "jesus" "freedom" "equality" "minimal government" "sexual violence" "free speech" "neutrality"... whatever take your pick; it will shut down critical thinking for a large number of people who align with said group. You don't even need to do a good job as far as I can tell. I think SJWs and "rape" is a good example "eyerape", "fart-rape". Simply find some behavior that has some effect on others without their consent and you can 'teasingly' call them a fart-rapist or an eye-rapist and then when the conversation shifts just a little start calling them flat out rape and drive home the non-consensual aspect of their behavior.
      Suddenly you can dictate the opinions of a large number of zealous 3rd part observers.

      I was on here and I saw some russian shill trying to say that the "next step" for network neutrality is to force the comments section to respect all comments equally.
      Of course he would be told to say that though...effective moderation makes shillposting much more expensive.

    27. Re:Good potential by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The best you can say about it is that it strongly supports free speech, but you don't go there for the quality of the content.

      Quality tomorrow, liberty tonight! [new Muppet Show theme song]

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    28. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the best that can be said about it is that, at least in theory, it will keep the people who generate that kind of content busy spewing garbage in a semi-offline, crap-filled cesspool while the rest of us have intelligent conversations on the adult version of the Internet.

      Sounds like an ideal setup. Nobody can be held liable for those comments. More than anything, we need protection from the authorities. And it can be potentially used for direct messaging amongst the users without exposing who is sending what to whom. We need a bulletproof internet that can't be censored. We should support all efforts to that end.

    29. Re: Good potential by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      BBC will have to block this.
      There is no way they can let people leave comments like "does that include lifting the sanctions and returning the money you've stolen" when they post an "all options are on the table" Venezuela propaganda piece.

    30. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The potential good from this kind of tech outweighs your irrational fears, It can also be used to expose corrupt and criminal governments if the "leakers" can't be found. No more state secrets! YAY! Fuck your wars!

    31. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot: sucking hard since the turn of the century,

    32. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's hilarious that you think the version of the internet where you scream people down, deplatform them, shadow ban them, and threaten them with violence because they said a naughty word that upset you is the "adult" version.

      It sounds like a fucking preschool, and you're the red-faced fat kid who wants to tattle on everyone.

    33. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol... You actually take yourself that seriously?

      Fucking hilarious!

    34. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhhh... I hate to break it to you, but Michelle Obama literally has a massive dick bulge. It shows when he wears tight dresses or walks into the wind.

      Just do a Google search for "Michelle Obama penis". That's a man, baby!

    35. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its worth nothing, just like your vapid vrtue signaling.

    36. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here? On /.? You are arguing with and kicking nazi ass daily?

      Uh... there are exactly ZERO nazis on /.

      Countless trolls having fun playing nazi. Absolutely zero real nazis. I feel bad for you. You s-end hours a day getting trolled by bored college students killing time waiting for lecture to end.

    37. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could do that.

      Or it could just turn into the latest pile of trolls and their crud.

    38. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh no... words!! ahhh im scared. words = literal violence.

    39. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The site that tolerates nearly anything gets flagged for "intolerance". How ironic.

      I'm guessing it allows facebook and google, which are notoriously intolerant to anything that criticizes the establishment propaganda.

    40. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Supporting freedom of speech has now been labelled as "extreme right wing"?

      WTF has happened to this world? How did people become so hopelessly brainwashed into supporting their own enslavement? I always wondered how shit like communism and other totalitarian regimes we brought into place and how people could let that happen. Now I know. People are inherently weak-willed and easily manipulated.

    41. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a bad sign. You should seriously quit before you get too comfortable.

      It may be too late, though. Your attempt to access Gab has already been logged.

    42. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, not so much. Everyone goes to Mastodon because Gab is a shithole and got caught heavily inflating their numbers. IIRC they only have around 7000 active users. This extension is a Hail Mary from a struggling company.

    43. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thatâ(TM)s actually the exact view libertarians take.

    44. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the great thing about freedom: nobody's forcing you to read it, unlike socialism which tries to force you not to think it or say it.

      I don't think you understand what socialism is

      It's you that doesn't understand how socialism works, asshole. The GP is 100% correct. Yes, socialism is just as much about the social aspect as the financial/governmental. If you don't know this, you don't know what socialism is or you're lying by omission. I find either option to be equally credible.

    45. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freedom requires responsibility which is enforced upon itself by society, for society's overall good. IE, The Societal Contract. We stick around = we are responsible to see it through personally to the benefit of all, that's the idea.

      Trump is a cancer. The Republicans have metastatized.

      The fact that you think "society" is the primary goal is the problem. That's why socialism kills.. The individual is worth nothing.

      When the individual is treated as the primary value of a society, then the general well being of the society naturally falls into place. How can you have slavery if the individual is treated as supreme? It's pretty goddamn easy to have slavery when the individual means nothing as long as the larger society benefits.

      How can you tolerate the "disappearing" of citizens, by the government, when the individual is the primary value? Once again, real fucking easy when you think as you do. The "bad element" simply disappears. What's the point of having trials for people who are valueless?

      There is a reason that the 3 biggest communist countries killed a combined 100,000,000 of their own citizens.. That reason is the mindset you have.

      It's terrifying to think that there are huge chunks of the population that think exactly like you. What's even worse though is how you idiots will contradict yourself as you speak..

      we are responsible to see it through personally to the benefit of all

      That's the opposite of what the left practices. Your whole schtick is that people are a product of environment and community and if someone fails (or simply doesn't want to work) it's not their fault. They're being oppressed by some nameless group and society owes them free food and medical care and [insert arbitrary right here]. Nobody is responsible for their own actions because they're being micro-agressed and triggered by [insert bullshit reason here].

    46. Re: Good potential by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Socialism isn't the only murderous ideology and slavery was a huge capitalist enterprise.

    47. Re:Good potential by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I don't see how screaming into the void of some browser add-on that the EverQuest staff certainly don't have installed is helpful. I suppose it's a way to vent for people who need to let off some steam, i.e. it might reduce the moderation load a bit. I'm guessing that's not what you want though.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    48. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America-haters sure do hate the Bill of Rights.

    49. Re: Good potential by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      and because the comments were unmoderated and unfiltered and sorted chronologically

      Well, Gab is at least fixing 1 of these, maybe 1.5 if you're generous.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    50. Re: Good potential by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      No shit Sherlock. But if you're against witch hunts, you're going to find yourself in the company of a lot of old women with warts.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    51. Re:Good potential by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      In his defense, Twitter does seem to hate white people. Not that I give a shit as I would never use such a horrid platform. Facebook tricked me at first but that ended quickly.

    52. Re:Good potential by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Wow, I didn't even know I live in a socialist hellhole. Despite the country having been ruled by socialists (with a 4 year interruption in the late 60s) from 1950 to about 1999. And looking back, only afterwards it started to come down quite a bit. The capital is still ruled by the socialist party (until about a decade just by themselves, now in a coalition with the Green Party) and has been on the top spot of the Mercer Quality of Living Survey for quite a while now (IIRC about a decade).

      I guess we have very different experiences with Socialism.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    53. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the users on gab are fake.

      Gab has been targeted for takedown. They're not following the global rules.

      So gab is flooded with 'hate speech' and everyone else points to it and says "see how bad gab is! we have to shut that down!"

      And it works. they've already had plenty of hosting problems and payment provider problems. And the only thing you know about them is they're 'bad'.
      Groupthink established.

      You will comply with the global rules. No free speech allowed.

    54. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      man the slashdot system is really easy to game and upvote partisan right wing garbage and hysterics.

      Reminds me of all the right wing subreddits on reddit being known for banning any dissenter or anyone who criticizes any right wing figure. What a bunch of whiny snowflake hypocrites

    55. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So censoring people you disagree with and forcing them into another platform is now a show of "intelligence".

      Brownshirt logic at it's best. Nice to see the left continue their fascist traditions.

    56. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like you did when Hillary lost the election largely due to the Latino vote?

    57. Re:Good potential by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      They are quite sensitive to optics actually. Last year when it became clear that a Russian oligarch was actually the primary owner of their company, they also attempted to retcon the entire purchase history and ownership history of their company when it was acquired from Sony. That was also censored off their forums, possibly more thoroughly.

      They see it, but they would rather make the problem disappear. Having something they can't disappear is valuable. They may still ignore it, that's their choice. But it is going to hurt them.

    58. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know?

    59. Re:Good potential by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I foresee it being more of a situation where one side will primarily post publicly and then the other side would post on "Dissenter" and it turns into a twisted echo chamber...kind of like Facebook.

      What's funny is that you aren't seeing which side is the "it" here ... since these websites engage in so much censorship and promotion of their favored point of view, the "public" side is already an echo chamber.

    60. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone with an actual Gab account, I can tell you that it has become a refuge for artists and freethinkers as well as less-savory types.

      If you like free speech and free thought, give it a try before slandering it needlessly.

    61. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a good way to notice the social political leanings of the gab user base which is probably overwhelmed by white conservative males. Be careful about the conclusions you draw.

    62. Re:Good potential by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      Now look at the type of people who currently use Gab. Are they representative of the nation as a whole?

      Gab is representative of the nation as a hole.

      no, GAB is representative of the nation as AN a-hole.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    63. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a haven for the extreme right wing

      Freedom of speech is not a left vs. right issue. If you think it is, or that it's a concept deserving of mockery, consider how you were brainwashed into believing that to such a degree that you've become a useful idiot parroting it on slashdot, and try to find ways to think for yourself. Sitting back and nodding in agreement while the government and a handful of self-appointed morality police decide what speech is acceptable is a hallmark of an absolute coward.

    64. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the far left, the extreme right wing are now centrists, center left and center right.

    65. Re: Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poe says hi.

    66. Re: Good potential by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Uh... there are exactly ZERO nazis on /.

      Countless trolls having fun playing nazi. Absolutely zero real nazis

      If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

      Generally speaking the 'troll' excuse is about as convincing as the 'just a bit of harmless banter' excuse.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    67. Re:Good potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I reported literal uploaded-to-the-site-itself CP on Twitter two weeks ago (and was there since November 2018 according to the timestamp), put there by an indonesian user who outright called it CP in her language. Yesterday I sent a message to IWF and law enforcement that started with "I reported this to Twitter two weeks ago and nothing was done". Meanwhile white twitter users get banned within minutes for wrongthink.

      This basically means that you can get away with posting literal CP (not explicit drawings, not an adolescent girl topless at the beach, not a baby in a bathtub, literal penetration pornography) on Twitter as long as you're not white.

  3. Truly history repeats itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Any of you old enough to remember VPlaces?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Places_Chat

    It was exactly as the summary describes, except a chatroom instead of a comment section.

    1. Re:Truly history repeats itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      StumbleUpon was more like this service than VP chat.

    2. Re: Truly history repeats itself by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm well old enough, but never heard of it. On its face isn't a bad idea, and I even agree with the stated reasons. But most of the current audience of the originating site have zero interest in open discussion. They want to censor opposing opinions as much as the "tech giants" by shouting down and booing (and doxing) their pet dislikes. I guess if it keeps them off the main comment sections they may become a bit more readable...

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
    3. Re:Truly history repeats itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't recall VPlaces but this latest proposal sounds like a re-invention of Third Voice

  4. That's interesting... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · · Score: 3, Interesting

    YouTube wants to turn off the comment sections on children videos because they attract child predators. All those displaced child predators can now go to Gab to comment on those videos. Unless, of course, Gab's TOS doesn't allow child predators to do that.

    1. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      news flash:
      bad people will do bad things by any means they can

    2. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New flash: Dark web is called the dark web for a reason. No need to make it legit.

    3. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Does Gab TOS conform to US law? I would bet it does. If there's something illegal going on, it is against TOS. If it's gross and offensive to me but not illegal, it should be allowed and in the immortal words of Tyler the Creator, "Hahahaha Nigga Just Walk Away From The Screen Like Nigga Close Your Eyes Haha"

    4. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot terrorism. It works best with both children and terrorism in your comment.

    5. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And bonus points if you can work in Trump.

    6. Re:That's interesting... by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Now people will be able to demonetise and shutdown videos/channels by posting fake pedo comments.
      Progress!

    7. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New flash: OP creimer is called creimer for a reason. No need to make it legit.

    8. Re:That's interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Creimer donated $71 to the Second Harvest Food Bank of Silicon Valley. #SomethingPositive

  5. More freedom by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    To communicate, share, think, comment is always good.
    Not having social media brands use censorship is great.
    The freedom to write, comment, publish and the freedom to keep publishing on any topic.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:More freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, echo chambers are not good.

    2. Re: More freedom by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 1

      I personally don't agree that freedom to sound off on _any_ topic is a good thing, but I'm happy to note the disagreement and not try to change your mind. However, a lot of people these days imagine that freedom to say whatever they want includes from dealing with the fallout if what they said. This is not true, has never been true, and likely never will be. But when they are confronted with said consequences, they cry foul and censorship. I don't have a magic formula or solution, I'm only pointing out that when people get mad at something we say and we lose our job that isn't censoring per se. On the other hand, there's the so called "chilling effect" that makes people afraid to say some things. So the whole thing will always be a tug of war...

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
    3. Re: More freedom by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Freedom of speech and freedom after speech has been working well for the USA for many, many years.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:More freedom by mopower70 · · Score: 1

      To communicate, share, think, comment is always good.

      No! Jesus christ on a cracker, no it's not! The ability to talk unchecked with no consequence for being wrong or inaccurate, is literally killing people. The anti-vaccination movement is driven entirely by the wrong people communicating, sharing, and commenting utter nonsense and people - mostly children - are dying because of it. Communicating, sharing, commenting is only good when there are consequences for what you've communicated, shared, or commented. And sometimes the consequence needs to be getting your big fat mouth shut for you.

    5. Re:More freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a good thing we have you here to tell us who the right and wrong people are.

    6. Re: More freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see nothing wrong with the children of stupid gullible people dying.

      Why do you hate evolution and Darwin?

    7. Re: More freedom by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      This! #RemoveWarningLabels2020 #KillOrTeachTheDumbs!

    8. Re:More freedom by Littleman_TAMU · · Score: 1

      > Communicating, sharing, commenting is only good when there are consequences for what you've communicated, shared, or commented.

      So contrary to the original idea of the internet and how it's functioned for decades, you think we should tie everyone's Internet accounts unambiguously to a person? You should think about how that type of system will be used by authoritarians to kill dissenters. If you're truly worried about Nazis that idea should scare you. You clearly have a proclivity towards authoritarianism, so maybe you buy into that idea because you always think your ideas will be in power and only used against "those bad thinkers". Even if you think "that could never happen" you should consider what might happen if "those bad thinkers" get in power instead and want revenge for your abuses. There's a reason America was founded on the principles of liberty and the protection of the minority against mob rule (aka "the majority").

      > sometimes the consequence needs to be getting your big fat mouth shut for you

      So you think censorship will work to change people's minds who already have some inclination towards conspiracies?

    9. Re:More freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communicating, sharing, commenting is only good when there are consequences for what you've communicated, shared, or commented. And sometimes the consequence needs to be getting your big fat mouth shut for you.

      I'm sure you believe that, which is why you're posting using your real name, and we can easily find your home address. Or maybe your retarded post only applies to people who disagree with you. It's hard to tell, really.

    10. Re:More freedom by William+Baric · · Score: 1

      I'm an adult. I want to be the one who decides if something I read is wrong or inaccurate. I want to be the one who decides who I believe and who I don't. I don't want someone else to think for me and to "protect" me.

      If people are against vaccination, that's their problem. Yes, I know that someone who is sick because he was against vaccination could infect me, but I don't think I have the right to force people to do something they don't want to do simply because it could make my life better.

  6. Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult site? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah we sure need to pay attention to them trying to put unfiltered comments on everything on the internet, what a great fucking {SLUR} {SLUR} {THREAT OF VIOLENCE} the fucking {SLUR} {CONSPIRACY THEORY} {SLUR}'s will have then!

    You {SLUR} {SLUR} {EXPLITIVE} eater.

  7. The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by SmaryJerry · · Score: 1

    Gab has proven not to censor things so far and taken a lot of heat for it.

    1. Re:The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Gab has proven not to censor things so far and taken a lot of heat for it.

      Gab has its own speech rules, and they have banned users over certain speech. For example, no doxxing, child porn, revenge porn, credible threats, spam, or selling drugs or weapons.

      So see, there are always limits. There is no freedom that exists without limits and/or consequences. We can discuss where to draw the line, but there is always a line. If someone tells you that there is such a thing as an "absolute freedom", they're full of shit.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      The ironic thing is in 1941 the Third Reich forgave a man who trained his dog to mock Hitler & the Nazi salute https://www.nytimes.com/2011/0...

      We're not so fortunate today.

    3. Re:The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There is no freedom that exists without limits and/or consequences.

      What in your opinion should be the limits of the right to live, other than the biological / physical ones?

    4. Re:The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      What in your opinion should be the limits of the right to live, other than the biological / physical ones?

      I never said "should", but there are limits on the right to live whether we like them or not. People are killed in self-defense, and there does exist capital punishment.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This "freedom of speech has consequences" faggotry needs to die. I know you're a britfag or some other foreign trash, but please tell us what the fuck you think "freedom" means. Do you think "freedom of speech" means "the physical ability to speak?" Gab's "speech rules" are the same as American law. I don't even use Gab, but it's pretty obvious from the examples that you gave that the entire concept of other people being able to hold different opinions from yours scares the shit out of you. I've been on the internet for a long time, and I've actually come to expect non-Americans to be absolute cowards, but it never gets less disgusting.

    6. Re:The only way this works is if people trust Gab. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Gab's "speech rules" are the same as American law.

      No. Spam is not illegal. Doxxing is not illegal. Gab chose to add those limits themselves.

      I've been on the internet for a long time

      I'll bet you have.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  8. Haven’t wee seen this before? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    I seem to recall some browser add-on from 10-15 years ago which promised the ability to comment on any website.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Haven’t wee seen this before? by Sebby · · Score: 2

      I seem to recall some browser add-on from 10-15 years ago which promised the ability to comment on any website.

      Third Voice.

      --

      AC comments get piped to /dev/null
    2. Re:Haven’t wee seen this before? by istartedi · · Score: 1

      I do too, and I think it doesn't do much unless you have a critical mass of people, or a community that cares. "Pinterest sucks". There. I just made a comment about an arbitrary web site, but you have to be part of Slashdot to see it. Pinterest itself only lives because it has a community that has reached a critical mass... of people who don't care about ruining our search results.

      As somebody who doesn't use Gab, their ability to "comment on any URL" doesn't appeal to me. It's not enough to make me a part of their community. Oh look--I just commented on another arbitrary thing.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re:Haven’t wee seen this before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Annotea, Third Voice, Genius (still up and running with a significant number users), Hypothes.is (still up and running), probably many others I've forgotten about.

      This is an ancient idea that's been tried many, many times.

    4. Re: Haven’t wee seen this before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I worked there. There were a number of pissed off nobody self proclaimed web masters running tiny sites that tried to shut us down but there was no business model and we went out of business because of that. We tried to do ads and sell key words but those failed. After we were gone there were several others, some open source / non-commercial, who tried to do the same thing. All failed. Gab will fail, too. This is a chicken and egg problem. No reason to install the add-on because not enough others have installed it.

      Good luck to them. Maybe they can succeed where so many others have failed.

  9. Wrest control from the tech giants by mark_reh · · Score: 0

    and put it in the hands of the trolls. Great idea! I can't wait to see the result...

    1. Re:Wrest control from the tech giants by magarity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and put it in the hands of the trolls. Great idea! I can't wait to see the result...

      No need to wait. Browse this site at -1 and you'll get the idea pretty quick.

  10. Internet Explore by Gabest · · Score: 1

    IE had something like this built-in. I've never seen it working, It was always an empty panel when I turned on.

  11. There's a reason Nazi cowards are censored. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/10/gab-alt-right-platform-tree-of-life-synagogue-shooting

  12. I hope it takes off by mea_culpa · · Score: 1

    The censorship going on right now is scary.

    1. Re:I hope it takes off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Being called out on your shit ideas and being shown the door for being an asshole is not censorship.

    2. Re:I hope it takes off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your ideas are shit and there's the door, asshole.

      We can all play that game, too.

    3. Re:I hope it takes off by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      Sargon of Akkad was actively criticizing White Nationalists and was deplatformed from Patreon. The fact is, those in power are abusing their power and there are documented cases of this happening. In addition, people are going around calling everybody they disagree with a Nazi and it is ruining discourse.

    4. Re:I hope it takes off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If you're a nazi you should live in fear, yes.

      Everyone you don't like is a Nazi... we get it.

      > Hardly anyone who isn't making overt calls to violence against minorities (or very related stuff, propagating that) is actually being censored.

      Are calls for violence against non-minorities acceptable then? Sure a lot of Tweets out there advocating violence against the Covington kids... how many people got banned for that again?

      > Milo, for example? Look it up.

      Nice fake news you've got there.

      > Doxxing people gets anyone censored.

      Again, only when it's someone on the right doing it.

      > If you're a nazi, you deserve to be censored, and you deserve to live in fear of your secret anti-social kkklub being exposed and you being held brutally accountable for it in its entirety.

      Ends justify the means... that sounds just like what a Nazi would say.

    5. Re:I hope it takes off by jdschulteis · · Score: 1

      It's funny that Trump can't block people on Twitter because that would infringe on people's rights to communicate but somehow Twitter can ban whoever they like and that doesn't infringe on those exact same rights.

      A bit of an inconsistency there.

      There is no inconsistency. A judge ruled that replies to Trump's tweets were protected by the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech". Twitter is not the government, they are not bound by the First Amendment, only by their terms of service, to which every user must agree. The terms of service unsurprisingly say users get to keep using the service only so long as they conform to Twitter's rules.

    6. Re:I hope it takes off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Congress shall make no law..."

      So what law was made by congress when Trump blocked some users?

    7. Re:I hope it takes off by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Trump isn't Congress.
      Or did I miss the part where the 3 branches of U.S. Government got merged into two?

      Legislative: Congress, Senate, House of Representative
      Executive: President (Trump), Vice President, Cabinet
      Judicial: Federal & Supreme Court

    8. Re:I hope it takes off by tehcyder · · Score: 2
      Sargon of Akkad is a misogynistic, homophobic UKIPpy arsebiscuit who lives in Swindon.

      If he happens to criticise White Nationalists, it just shows that no one is 100% bad.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  13. Take Two by Mandrel · · Score: 2

    Genius tried to do the same, allowing you to use a browser extension to add annotations to any website text. Their extension was banned (for "interfering" with content?). As Gab expects, they will be banned as well.

    1. Re:Take Two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that is what forks are for.

    2. Re:Take Two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't looked into it besides seeing the screenshot, but it looks like the comments are made on a separate system and are only visible to users of that system - so it does not make any changes to the actual website (which I firmly agree would be bad).
      Don't want to see the extra conversation, don't use the app.

    3. Re:Take Two by Mandrel · · Score: 1

      No, the Genius extension couldn't change the actual websites. But it did allow its users to see changes outside the websites' control, which Google couldn't abide.

    4. Re:Take Two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the Genius extension couldn't change the actual websites. But it did allow its users to see changes outside the websites' control, which Google couldn't abide.

      IIRC, google were working on a similar service 10 - 15 years back.

    5. Re:Take Two by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You can side-load add-ons in Chrome and Firefox, so it's really impossible to ban Gab's little project. Same with the Gab app.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Take Two by Mandrel · · Score: 1

      Invisibility and install hoops make for an effective banning.

    7. Re:Take Two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does it even need to be a browser extension? Just use good old frames straight in the browser. The site you're visiting wouldn't even know.

    8. Re:Take Two by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Failure to assist is not censorship or banning.

      Also note that Fortnight, the incredibly popular game with millions of Android users, deliberately chose to use side-loading to avoid giving 30% to Google. It's clearly not that onerous.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Take Two by Mandrel · · Score: 1

      For Windows users to install a non-Play extension on Chrome, one must download the extension, unpack it, enable Developer Mode, load the extension from disk, and put up with a warning bubble every time they start the browser.

      To install a non-Play Android app one has to change one setting.once.

    10. Re:Take Two by nnull · · Score: 1

      Apple users are all screwed however.

    11. Re:Take Two by nnull · · Score: 1

      I don't see this doing the same thing as Genius, as it changed the content of the website. Dissenter is more akin to someone handing you an article at a lunch table and having a discussion over it. But on the other hand, they've been banning Gab on every platform, meanwhile, allowing Chinese spyware and malware all over.

    12. Re:Take Two by Mandrel · · Score: 1

      Are Fortnite in-app prices 30% higher on iOS, or are Epic pocketing the difference? That is, are iOS or Android users getting screwed?

    13. Re:Take Two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a big difference between "failure to assist" and "active obstruction", but I wouldn't expect you to see it through your programming when the polarity is out-of-phase for you.

  14. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Mod up, informative.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/10/gab-alt-right-platform-tree-of-life-synagogue-shooting (Yes, nazi cowards, you will be exposed and taken to Hell one by one)

  15. First thing? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    Didn't we already have something like that in the late 90s? With the "page" running in n iframe or something similar....

    --
    bickerdyke
    1. Re:First thing? by sheramil · · Score: 1

      Discus? I can't tell, because while I can log into my Discus account on their site, I can't make comments on any of the sites that use it. I've contacted their support, but that was two months ago, and so far, nothing.

  16. Propaganda sites should be very very afraid by nwaack · · Score: 1

    HuffPo, Vox, InfoWars, etc. could be hurt really badly by this if it takes off. Personally I would love to see that happen...could be a really good way to fight fake news.

    1. Re:Propaganda sites should be very very afraid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And ID nazis in a single platform, hmm... excellent. Leaky API you say? Excellent. At last, appeasement ends.

    2. Re:Propaganda sites should be very very afraid by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      I'd +1 you for balanced list if I could. There's trash on all sides.

  17. quality by doom · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "Not enough freedom" is not actually what comes to mind when most people think of internet commenting-- nearly everyone is interested in better quality and/or improving the tone or direction of on-line discussions.

    There's a certain kind of nerd that thinks the freedom to shout [censored epithets] is just what the world needs... most of us feel like we can live without it.

    (Slashdot's "lameness filter" prevented me from citing actual examples of epithets in the last paragraph-- ironic infinite loop detected, aborting

    1. Re:quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem with stating you want to improve quality without giving full details of what you believe that encompasses leads to all sorts of interesting nonsense round and round arguments. For some people improved quality would mean being able to debate points without it turning into a shitfest, while for others improved quality can only be achieved by clearing out any opinion that differs from their own. And there are way too many of the latter involved in online discussions at the moment.

    2. Re:quality by Bryansix · · Score: 2

      Have you read most of the comments on this post? They consist of mostly anonymous people calling anybody who supports free speech of being a (Nazi, racist, xenophobe, bigot, part of the patriarchy) etc. Maybe the problem isn't where you think the problem is. Go watch a couple hours of Dave Rubin's youtube channel and get back to me.

    3. Re:quality by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Go watch a couple hours of Dave Rubin's youtube channel and get back to me.

      Well, there's a compelling argument. "Go watch some random person spout garbage on Youtube that they were too lazy or incompetent to write down." Sure, I'll get right on that.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    4. Re:quality by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Yes those labelled as the heretics spouting witchcraft and the devils words must be silenced.

      Like for example Meghan Murphy who got suspended on Twitter for saying "Women aren't men".
      Dear lord, the horrors!
      The ministry of truth is gravely needed. Of course, I will be the sole member deciding what comments "we can live without". Because I say so.
      Only the enlightened's world views shall be heard.
      I know what's best for every one and I shall decide what people hear.

    5. Re:quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Question, have you ever actually watched and listened to any of his content? Or do you simply disregard it because your echo chamber told you?

      What I'm going to recommend is not only you actually watch it, but regularly. I'm not saying you should agree with it, simply that you should be familiar with it. Why? Because it removes you from your echo chamber. It forces you to hear what "the other side" is saying, and not what you're friends are saying the other side is saying. Basically, I'm saying expose yourself to differing view points so at least you can be certain if the garbage you're spewing is actually relevant to what the people you disagree with are actually saying.

      It's sort of like AOCs whole dancing thing. If you looked around on twitter, what you saw was a bunch of liberals talking about how much conservatives hated it, and conservatives by and large not caring.

    6. Re:quality by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      I'm asking you to watch Dave because of one very specific reason; he has liberal guests on and because of biases, you will take them more seriously than if I just tell you this stuff myself. The main takeaway is this; the radical left doesn't argue in good faith. They pigeon hole huge swaths of the population, make up things that didn't happen and control the narrative. This is from liberals saying this stuff. There is also a huge attack on free speech. Again, if you don't believe me, watch the videos.

  18. Wow ... assholes R us ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Why does this summary absolutely scream that this is about unleashing the raging assholes of the internet?

    allows users to comment on any web page in the world, with the ability to upvote, downvote, and reply to other comments

    So, screw the ToS of the sites, screw everything, we want the ability to go anywhere, say anything, and have no accountability for it.

    Sounds like some epic-assholery to me.

    Here's a hint, snowflake, you don't get unlimited freedom of speech wherever you go, because it's not the job of site owners to ensure your speech.

    1. Re:Wow ... assholes R us ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the actual fuck are you talking about? Free speech is saying what you want. Site owners dont have to facilitate but they cant stop it either, which is why there's an extension.

      people are meaner on the internet because its anonymous and doesnt have consequences but people did just fine with decades of shouting at each other in games and it all turned out alright

      looks like the real pussy here is you if you cant handle some comments that you wont even see without the extension. grow the fuck up.

  19. But if non Gab users can't see it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the point?

    And how is it any different to just talking about a page and posting a link?

    It'll only exist to people using gab, but that's like that now anyway.

    The heading makes it seem like , "OMG. Websites will be flooded with comments that can't be censored!!@!#!@$$"

    Except they will, because none of these gab add on comments will be seen outside of the gab add on. This seems redundant.

    1. Re:But if non Gab users can't see it... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Be good for DRM, crypto, politics, faith sites.
      What a nation can't/won't publish in any detail can be seen and commented on.
      No comments allowed? Now people have the freedom to comment again :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  20. What's old is new again! by jlv · · Score: 3, Funny

    What's old is new again! This is the 4th or 10th iteration of something like this.

    1. Re:What's old is new again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to the people who created Slack.

    2. Re:What's old is new again! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's just Gab trying to be relevant. They were hoping a lot of people would migrate from Twitter, following people like Carl Benjamin and Milo Yiannopoulos who got booted. But it didn't really work, not least because much of those characters' appeal was the drama when interacting with other people on Twitter, and the other people had no interest in going to Gab just to get more abuse.

      In fact, Carl in particular tries to sneak back on to Twitter at least three or four times a year.

      Which gave Gab an idea. What if they could be on every popular site, and no-one could stop them?

      The flaw in this plan is that they will still be largely ignored, except by other people already in the echo chamber who bothered to install the add-on.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:What's old is new again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The flaw in this plan is that they will still be largely ignored, except by other people already in the echo chamber who bothered to install the add-on.

      No, the flaw was the heavy handed bannings that Twitter and the like started issuing to political opponents.

      We still don't know what got Carl Benjamin banned from Twitter, however apparently attacking white nationalists is enough to get you kicked off Patreon.

      Milo's banning for disagreeing with an approved voice and reviewing a movie in a not a nice way (it was a bad movie). Never forget that Leslie Jones was the one engaged in targeted harassment, not Milo.

      The result is then places cropping up where disaffected voices can still communicate, all because of the left's initial attempt at creating their own safe space/echo chamber.

    4. Re:What's old is new again! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We still don't know what got Carl Benjamin banned from Twitter

      Oh, we do. It was tweeting porn at people.

      Milo's banning for

      harassing and mobbing was just the last straw after a long pattern of flirting with the ToS, trying to martyr himself.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:What's old is new again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > tweeting porn at people

      How progressive, banning people expressing their sexuality. Good thing Twatter isn't in charge of banning people at gay parades or similar events right?

      > mobbing

      How do you "mob" someone online, as an individual? Was Milo using bots to harass people?

  21. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Bryansix · · Score: 3, Informative

    Gab doesn't filter who registers there. It isn't a "Insert any description" platform. It is simply an OPEN platform.

  22. The only entity that could actually pull this off by dandv · · Score: 1

    ...is Google, via a feature in Chrome to share comments across all Google users. I don't foresee that happening any time soon. As others have pointed out, there have been quite a few comment layers over arbitrary web pages, but none of them reached critical mass.

  23. Re:There's a reason Nazi cowards are censored. by Shotgun · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And you are using Vanity Fair as a news source?

    While you're giving such a balanced, well though out opinion, what did Pop Sugar or Vox have to say? Sheesh!

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  24. Most people don't want to listen to clowns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What prevents a modified Dissenter client that moderates all the trash comments down to -1?

  25. Re:So the more important question is this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What?

  26. Make Internet Fun Again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make Internet Fun Again! This thing is going to be HUGE! The discussion will be much better on this overlay comments section.

    I for one welcome our new Gab overlord!

  27. Re:Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, this is the template that will be used for these shitty comments no one will be bothered to see.

  28. Re:There's a reason Nazi cowards are censored. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So google it if you want a different source, nazi coward apologist, but the vanity fair article encompasses the scope of the problem quite well. You need to defend it, that's on your worthless soul. Correct the article as you can.

    We'll wait.

  29. Finally by technosaurus · · Score: 1

    A way to post comments to slashdot containing unicode characters

    1. Re:Finally by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      A way to post comments to slashdot containing unicode characters

      That only you and three neo-Nazis will ever read.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That only you and three neo-Nazis will ever read.

      Why would neo-Nazis use unicode? Unicode is created to accommodate for all those languages from those non-white non-western peoples!

  30. Hello, recursion? by pz · · Score: 1

    Can gab.com be use to comment on gab.com? And can that process continue to recurse?

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  31. They need to step up their naming game! by ToTheStars · · Score: 4, Funny

    Come on, using an actual word? Real tech start-ups make creative (and trademarkable) misspellings by dropping vowels and stuff...I would take them much more seriously if they called it "Dissentr".

  32. Is this new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wrote an extension for firefox 10 years ago that let you share comments with other users and even draw over the page, maybe I should dig it out again

  33. Reminds me of Third Voice by Sebby · · Score: 1
    --

    AC comments get piped to /dev/null
  34. wow so exciting! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All 3 incel-pedo's on gab must be super excited!

  35. That actually sounds interesting by sbrown123 · · Score: 1

    Can't say I've been drawn to Gab (or Twitter for that matter) but having the ability to comment on any site without having to worry about the site censoring it sounds rather awesome actually.

    1. Re:That actually sounds interesting by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Someone pointed out it'd be great to fight fake news (on any side).

      I have to agree, even without outright lying "news" outlets are often very selective in which facts of any stories they let out and delete comments from so-called "trolls".
      I don't mind sifting through a majority garbage comments for nuggets of info that the site conveniently (for them) left out.

      In some case It'd be also nice if we could look up the comments without actually going on articles that stink of clickbait before clicking the link and feeding the trash.
      Because otherwise by the time we've figured it was indeed (less obvious) clickbait garbage it's too late: They made their money.

  36. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gosh, you seem so angry. U mad bro? All those years of work getting Silicon Valley to toe your mental illness disguised as an ideology, and it's all wiped out by a simple application in an instant.

  37. Third Voice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sounds a lot like Third Voice

  38. We've seen this before... by Dwedit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We've seen extensions letting you comment on any webpage before. The obvious downside is that you need to inform a third party of what URL you are visiting in order to fetch the comments.

    So it's basically spying on users, and it would be very hard to implement this in a way that does not spy.

    1. Re:We've seen this before... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be pretty trivial to just hash the URL and comment against the hash, no?

    2. Re:We've seen this before... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These you are always being spied upon if you are online.

    3. Re:We've seen this before... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It only loads the comments when you click on the toolbar button to activate the window, so you only send URLs when you want to see the comments.

      This is significantly better than, say, your ISP who know every web page your visit, or Google who know a lot more.

    4. Re:We've seen this before... by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      Let me introduce you to DHT from BitTorrent. (Although with your 6-digit ID though, you probably already know this. So let's start a discussion.)

      Basically, think of a website. Strip the leading // from it, and then md5sum (pick your poison, I like double ROT-13) the rest, producing a long number. Store all comments by that number.

      That's a trapdoor function. Give the site you can easily generate the number. Given just the number you CAN'T generate the originating site. You could get lucky and watch particular pages/sites [ curl www.genius.com/md5/$(echo GooGle.com | tr 'A-Z' 'a-z' | md5sum) ] but you can't figure out a site JUST from the number.

      Yeah, the comments might give the site/page away but unless you've got the hosts data files, you can't directly search them, only fetch info from certain numbers that reflect certain pages. GIVEN those files though, you could scan for quotes from the source page and search for that, and the hosting server probably has IP addresses as well.

      Gee, it's almost like you've got to trust the actual servers giving you data. How does the line go? "Two can keep a secret as long as one of them is dead." If it's a secret, don't tell anybody.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    5. Re:We've seen this before... by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Absolutely true. Using a 2nd browser for checking out the comments on demand could greatly limit the 3rd party stalking but it's not worth being called a solution.

      But there's eventually going to be an alternate version of the plugin to anonymize the data.
      Accessing it randomly through Tor or something similar, maybe?

    6. Re: We've seen this before... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can spy/stalk user reviews on Google. You can view all the stores they shop at.

  39. Done Before -- Third Voice by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

    This has been done before by a place called Third Voice. However, because they really didn't have any ability to make money from it, they wound up closing their doors.

    How can Gab make money from something like this?

    1. Re:Done Before -- Third Voice by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Simple: Ads.

      Gillette deleting comments on their man-bashing garbage advert?
      I'm sure Dollar Shave Club would love to put ads between the Gab-Dissenter comments.

  40. How's that working on YT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the Adpoclops 2.0; hows that working for you?

  41. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Bryansix · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's been cultivated as a free speech platform. They don't control who registers and posts except to ban people for committing actual crimes. People have been deplatformed due to speech off of the platforms they were kicked off of. There are many documented cases of this. What Gab attracts in the user base isn't directly influenced by anything Gab has said or done except to state that they are for free speech.

  42. On the Website or About the Website by andywest · · Score: 1

    It is not clear if the comments are on a Website itself or are merely about the Website.

    • If they are not on the Website, the owner of the site can disavow the comments.
    • If they are about the Website, the owner can just ignore the comments since they are not on the site, just as if they were on Facebook or Twitter. That is how some news sites hive off comments so that they do not have to deal with them.

    If the comments are not a physical part of the Website, I do not see how they could matter, since the owner(s) of the site are not responsible for them.

    --
    --- Andy West http://andywest.org
  43. Huxley you're an illiterate moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, hate speech and calls to violence, intentional threats have never been in accordance with "freedom of speech" in this country. You don't know many, many years of jack shit about this country's laws. You're a moron.

    You have no right to speak on anyone else's private platform either, you fucking moron. That 1st amendment only protects you from Government censorship, not Facebook or anything else. Pull your head out anytime.

    It's a bright sunny day in Putin's America, you twat. Smell the roses.

    1. Re:Huxley you're an illiterate moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your whole diatribe is based on the straw man that everything you disagree with is "a call to violence or threat".

      Sane people notice this shit and it's why the left come off as a crew of psychotic liars circling the drain. Their desperation for power and relevance will be their own downfall as they resort to an ever-escalating series of illegal and immoral acts until at some point even the most tolerant of people will have had enough of their insanity.

  44. Re:There's a reason Nazi cowards are censored. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes we get it, the book burner is calling Gab Nazis.

  45. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's an open platform that largely gets used by right-wing nutjobs. I gave it a shot once. I gave up when I checked the "Popular" section and saw a post with the Fourteen Words in it.

  46. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It actively has been cultivated by the reich-wing nazi contingent as an alternative platform to those who kick people off for threats of violence, doxxing minority activists, genocidal content, that sort of thing.

    Stuff non-nazis live quite comfortably without, fuck you very much coward.

    If you can't say your piece without doxxing, threatening, or advocating genocide on a minority, you probably deserve to have your face smashed in by society rather than an unlimited sanctioned platform to spread that bullshit.

    The rules aren't being tripped lightly, we are actually facing a nazi propaganda machine organized in a country supporting that for discordance purposes.

    Pretending doxxing, threats and advocating genocidal hate are "free speech that can't be censored by society" is to misunderstand the 1st Amendment, and society. You apologize for nazis again, you will get the 2nd barrel.

  47. oh like the metacomments firefox plugin from 2011? by recrudescence · · Score: 1

    (which CommentNow has superceded since plugin messed up its plugin system, but, yes, not a new idea at all)

  48. Already exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Already exists with doke.li, SOLID, and ActivityPuib which are all compatible.

  49. Back to the roots by MS · · Score: 1

    Original NCSA XMosaic supported annotations, but was dropped on the way.

    Here some discussions about this feature from 1993: http://1997.webhistory.org/www...

  50. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't live or work in silicon valley, sorry nazi faggot. You're pseudo-doxxing the wrong strawman, good luck with that Gabby. Tell me how Putin's cock tastes so I can imagine it like you do.

  51. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Bryansix · · Score: 1

    >Everyone I don't like is a Nazi and has violent tendencies >If you disagree "Insert threat" Pick one

  52. Gab by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    So basically they want to be able to target any site on the internet. But it's the sites that are the problem, not them.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  53. And... it's gone. by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Or at least it will be. Unless the article on this just neglected to mention such an important fact, I'm going to assume this isn't decentralized and relies on some central infrastructure somewhere? If so, it will get pushed off host and provider after host and provider until it falls completely off the net entirely. If someone really wants to do this, it's got to be decentralized.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  54. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not necessarily Nazis, but people who advocate for genocide and single-race ethnostates are the biggest blubbering vaginas on the planet.

  55. This is an idea a long time coming. by whaleh8er · · Score: 0

    I love this idea! Major news outlets have removed comment sections because people kept fact-checking their articles. I love the idea of getting our voice back. I'm downloading the extension right now. Score one for the Free Speech.

  56. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Bryansix · · Score: 1

    I don't disagree with you. I'm simply stating that not all user on Gab fall into that category.

  57. oh sweet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    whoa dude sounds like I totally ought to check out this totally rad and hip new platform that all the cool kids are using, according to an article submitted by one of the biggest white supremacist limpdicks on Slashdot

  58. Not learning? by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

    Have people learned NOTHING about the internet over the past 2 decades?

    There is a reason a lot of the comment sections on website have been shuttered. They are abused. They become troll platforms, spam platforms, a place for the most disgruntled among us to make a whole lot of nonsense noises.

    This is a monumentally foolish idea. We need more moderation of this stuff, not more free-wheeling comment sections for the worst of us to spew their nonsense.

    1. Re:Not learning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your Trotsky-slut tyrannous spew needs to be moderated into the same gutter as your face. Yep. See ya in-the-street palsy ....

    2. Re:Not learning? by jythie · · Score: 1

      The problem is people do learn from history, just not always the same lessons. Moderation tends to produce better results for most users, but the trolls, spammers, and harassers have been getting increasingly upset and have turned it into a "F"reedom cause.

    3. Re:Not learning? by rv6502 · · Score: 1

      Have people learning NOTHING about the world over the past century?

      Yes, those sub-human animals should not be allowed to spew their nonsense.
      Better yet, we should send them back to the plantation, the DPRK work camps, Siberia, or wherever we send dissenting sub-humans only worthy of contempt.

  59. slashdot analogy by DavidMZ · · Score: 1

    It's basically like having comments filter set at -1. Who wants to do that, especially on Gab which advertises itself as "free speech" but is in effect a favorite of far-right or alt-right users who have been banned or suspended from other service.

  60. false by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    Gab has proven to censor things, and isn't taking nearly enough heat for that.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  61. as mentioned elsewhere in this thread by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1
    this has been done before
    • StumbleUpon, before it morphed into something closer to facebook, was exactly this but with a 'random' button sending you to a random part of the web. It was wonderful while it lasted.
    • CoComment, after StumbleUpon started going downhill, operated under a similar principle but had better comment threading, but for whatever reason didn't catch.
    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  62. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by HiThere · · Score: 1

    Well, it claims to be an open platform, though I haven't checked it out. But it advertises itself as a haven for neo-nazi extremists. I think that if you wanted it to appeal to anyone who'd already heard of it, you'ld need to rename it, and give it a separate interface. It's not clear whether this "Dissenter" is such an attempt or not, though, on the face of it, not.

    This is a problem, however, that all "free speech" mechanisms have. A lot of people will use them for socially unacceptable purposes, whether actively criminal (at the moment) or not. TOR has the same problem. The essence of the problem is that when you hand someone a megaphone, and say "anything you shout into this can't be blamed on you" the ones who want to use it are the ones who normally don't dare say what they want.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  63. Re:Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep. Rahm those unfiltered comments right up yo Trotsky-slut azzwhole. Boy that's gonna hurt ... like ya spent the last 6-weeks in SanFran .

  64. Gab should be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gab is a bad website and it should be outlawed.

  65. sites need not fear this. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    Totally unmoderated comments, with unlimited up/down votes.

    This will degenerate to devastated torched landscape by never ending flame wars. Any one remember soc.men and soc.women in the good old usenet? That happened when usenet users had quaint notions of netiquette, and Bjorne Soustroup himself was participating in comp.lang.c++ . In this day and age? It will be trolled to death

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  66. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    True, the rest is even *worse*

  67. Re:People are TOS'ed legitimately more than not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nazi's want to be victims, they want to be martyrs, and more countries than not are happy to oblige. Win-win

  68. Re:Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what those (((moderators))) don't want you to see!!

  69. Feed that outrage machine by adfraggs · · Score: 1

    Got to love the hypocrisy. Let's be honest ... everyone is just trying to make a buck and neither the filtered niceties nor the unfiltered gutter trash is about anything more than getting people to join whatever shit heap social platform they're trying to flog.

  70. Re: Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep. You totally need censorship. Humanity isn't able to handle unrestricted speech.

  71. Oh shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we can see useless Cremier ads on every site, oh joy.

  72. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has never advertised itself as what you described. You're literally just making shit up.

  73. Annotea, But Neither Open Nor Distributed by Feneric · · Score: 1

    This is like a proprietary, non-distributed version of the Annotea project (circa 2001): https://www.w3.org/2001/Annote...

  74. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Care to cite a source for how it advertised itself as Neo Nazi? As far as allowing free speech that isn't "(at the moment)" criminal, we usually just call that legal free speech which ironically you are taking part in right now. I do know the owner of the website worked quickly and had a faster response time in working with authorities when it was found out that a criminal mass shooter had posted there than the other social sites where the same shooter posted (Twitter, Facebook).

  75. Pass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I already know what climate deniers, 9/11 truthers, marxists, fascists, and anti vaxxers think. It is not interesting at all.

  76. Dear God by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 1

    Oh God Please No. How does that help anything?

    --
    I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    1. Re:Dear God by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      They get to enjoy the freedom offered by an untamed wilderness. You get enjoy seeing less of them around.

  77. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never said all did. But they have to have a stronger reason to support it than you gave, because if you're not doxxing, genocide-enabling or threatening, you haven't been kicked off any major platform for "no reason" - in all likelihood.

    And it's not hard to make a fake account on Youtube/google for example, if you really "had to show your tits on the internet" and couldn't stand being censored because they're covered in swaztikas.

    The by-catch is small. The reason people are going to Gab as a sudden shift of "chat traffic" out there is not because there's a bunch of Constitutional scholars upset about the infringement of their duly dealt rights.

  78. Re: Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot a few strawmen.

    If you cant win on the battlefield of ideas, you cant win.

  79. Troll forums. by jythie · · Score: 1

    Ugh. I can recall years back trolls, when they couldn't bug people directly on sites, would actually message people with 'hey, you should come over to XYZ instead and see all the horrible things they are saying about you!' and keep trying to taunt people into visiting forums they controlled. This strikes me as just a somewhat easier to use version of that... which given the company already courts the 'we are so oppressed!' white nationalists community, will probably just be more dumpster fire that they want other people to be able to see.

  80. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by jythie · · Score: 1, Troll

    Any time a community or platform talks loudly about 'freedom', they usually have some specific set of speech in mind. In this case, alt-right content is what Gab had in mind. That is the community they courted, that is the safe space they have built for them, that is the "F"reedom they defend, and that is the target audience they bend over backwards to keep happy.

  81. Don't laugh, it worked against movies by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Cue lawsuits arguing they are infringing copyright of the displayed page.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  82. Imagine a world without Internet... by TigerPlish · · Score: 1

    ...where people would have to congregate in say, a church, or a town square, or a stadium to meet people of like inclinations and have discussions in civilized tones, a healthy ruckus of many voices speaking.

    Imagine, then, that another group with opposing views invades the former's space and start yelling and using bullhorns to say things that the former group can't or won't tolerate.

    What do you think would happen? I think the word "Riot" covers it fairly well.

    I'm firmly convinced that because the internet allows loud-mouthed know-it-alls convinced of the righteousness and truthiness of their own opinions to invade and poison the others' discussions with naught but a downvote / downmod, we haven't taken that next step of Intolerance: Cracking skulls with baseball bats, hurling rocks and Molotov cocktails, and ultimately shooting at each other.

    We are headed for Civil War in this country. An old boss of mine, a prepper, was convinced nearly 20 years ago this was the course of our next 50 years. I thought he was slightly off his rocker. He never could tell me why he thought this, he just strongly felt it was coming. An intuition.

    I don't think that anymore. I think we're headed for war within ourselves. Not make-believe war, but actual shoot-you-in-the-face-before-you-do-me-in war. You know, like in the 1860's.

    And somewhere, in Russia, China, Germany and England, and many other places, their leaders will be laughing like mad dogs watching us slit each other's throats.

    That's what reading /. at -1 has taught me. We stopped listening to each other long, long ago. Today's utterly shambolic Cohen "hearing" or whatever that circus was supposed to be depressed me to no end. We're non-functional. Not just dysfunctional like the Simpsons or the Bundys, we're non-functional as a country. We don't make anything anymore, almost no one's making enough bank to survive on their own... and the few that do at the very very top are undoubtedly actively encouraging this split.

    So, while I welcome the opportunity for discourse and dissent, the sheer amount of fuck you nazi faggot / fuck you liberal twat has gotten to the point where I don't think any kind of dialog is possible.

    It's like the old joke: When you first get married, you have sex everywhere. As the marriage ages, you only have sex in the bedroom. As the marriage dies, you only have hallway sex: you yell Fuck You at the top of your lungs to the other, and they reply in kind.

    So, fuck everyone's comment systems, none of them will work anymore because we, the users, are broken.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    1. Re:Imagine a world without Internet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couple of points. The 'leaders' of Europe are already slitting each others throats so I doubt they'll laughing so much at us *doing* it as us having fallen into what they're currently doing if it happens.

      That old joke is a dark joke and not reflective of your average person. I personally know a number of couples who have aged their romance well and are not shouting "Fuck you!" at each other. Dysfunctionals tend to project rather heavily.

    2. Re:Imagine a world without Internet... by TigerPlish · · Score: 1

      The 'leaders' of Europe are already slitting each others throats

      Yep, they got far more experience than we do... but the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. I bet we could make a pretty much unbroken chain of events backwards from today's middle-eastern strife to WWII to WWI to Napoleon to the French Revolution and on and on and on and see how one event directly fueled the next. Europe has been at it far so long, much longer than we've been living here in this continent.

      I personally know a number of couples who have aged their romance well and are not shouting "Fuck you!" at each other.

      As do I. But the joke, and the State of our Union, remains. I didn't write it. I heard or read it once, decades ago. I forgot the source, and frankly, don't care enough about it to do the research. I thought it is illustrative of how things are in this country today.

      Would you not agree that collectively, as a nation, we're just in that late-stage now?

      Shutting up either side won't help. So what to do.. what to do.

      Maybe it's time I leave the US.. but to where? And then what? Watch it fall from afar? I'd rather help fix it. But that sounds fucking exhausting and I still doubt it can be fixed. So what do we do as a nation? The solution will not be technical in nature. I think tech is just making everything worse, as far as dialog goes.

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
  83. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Z80a · · Score: 2

    It's impossible to actually monitor speech without turning the world into a 1984 esque hellhole.
    But if its open, you can monitor it, and if you can monitor it, you can stop it.
    Do you know what needs to happen to a nazi that plans to kill a jew? the same thing that should happen to anyone planning to kill someone.
    Be arrested for attempted murder, and that should apply to you too if you attempt that, even if your target is a self proclaimed nazi, because you see, murder is a crime on any decent country.

  84. From the web 1.0 days by virtig01 · · Score: 2

    Yeah, but I think it was more like 20 years ago. Called Gooey I think. IIRC, it was more like graffiti that you could put on any website, seen only by others using Gooey.

    1. Re:From the web 1.0 days by Orrin+Bloquy · · Score: 1

      dudl.me, but it requires https support now and their cert expired in 2015.

      --
      "Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on /. and I must look smart."
  85. You have please Gay Judo Boss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would you fuckers go back to drinking furniture polish and being totally not gay... quietly.
    We thought it would be good if you joined the rest of the free world but now we see you had isolated yourselves for our sake. Please just turn off the internet and go back to whatever you were doing before.

  86. Re: Everyone I disagree with is Literally Hitler by rv6502 · · Score: 1

    [...] which won't tell you anything aside from how the people who want to bring back the Holocaust need to start with themselves.

    The first thing you need for a Holocaust is to make it socially and morally acceptable to point at racial or ethnic groups as the evil undeserving privileged oppressor, as all benefiting from the oppression of others, make it acceptable to dehumanise an entire racial or ethnic group over some arbitrary criteria of a few members.

    Guess what AC, the right isn't the side that's pushing to make open hatred toward the "oppressive" entire-demographic-du-jour socially acceptable today.

    And once this becomes the socially accepted "woke" value all it takes is one guy to point the acceptable hatred at some "privileged" ethnic group, say, with lots of bankers/Hollywood/business owners, kind of like the National Socialist party did.

    They took advantage of the already accepted oppressor/oppressed relativistic morals and society "Punched up" toward a certain ethnic group.

  87. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The dithering is palpable. captcha : eunuch BTW - Did you see Trump's impeachment get sealed as a deal today? Enjoy.

  88. Just to see what Gab is like, I just joined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a real name and a temporary e-mail, but it's not all extremist groups. There's one for Cats, as if they we need more cats on the internet. And Crafts.

    Oh, here it comes. "Reclaiming Our Culture", "QANON", "Beware the Needle - Anti-vaxxers", "God Emperor Trump's Dank Meme Stash" which is introduced with this post:

    It has come to my attention that some users are not following the rules, and that others are posting enough cancer that I need to make more rules. Good job twats you've made me add more rules. Here we go;

    So there are rules?

    I found a news section with this as the top story:

    Tommy Robinson banned from Facebook and Instagram

    But nobody has commented on it. In fact there are no comments on any of the 5 news stories I clicked.

    I was thinking it was getting a bad rap until I found the "Popular Posts" section. Okay, that's where all the most extreme racism, homophobia and anti-semitism is.

      And I just closed those windows - including my temporary e-mail address's inbox.

    1. Re:Just to see what Gab is like, I just joined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same AC here...I just noticed that temp e-mail was still active and 2 people had followed me despite not having posted anything at all.

      I hadn't even "liked" anyone's comments.

      I looked around some more and it really is a vile cesspool.

      I made one post in response to a comment saying the Hungarian Foreign Minister "destroyed" Amanpour in an interview. I watched the whole thing. The FM was mostly doing a good job until he started saying shit like Hungary isn't authoritarian despite restricting free speech,

      So my response was that EVERYONE except Hungarians would be glad to see them leave the EU. Hungarians currently have freedom of movement within the EU and they are an EU welfare state.

      I'd be glad to see Hungary behind a new Iron Curtain. I think there are a few other countries that would love to join them too.

  89. YES.. by pigsycyberbully · · Score: 0

    "Professor Moriarty 3 minutes ago
    Freedom of speech freedom of expression is a basic human right it is why we are all here on this planet today. I hate to admit it but I do remember the open Internet and the freedom everybody had a "homepage" And linked to each other all expressing opinions. The little Hitler is at the moment are dying and they are the old media or as they like to refer to themselves as the traditional media.

    The prison the Internet finds itself in at the moment with the likes of Google YouTube Facebook Twitter and the British government cannot last. As Ronald Reagan would say: Tear down this wall! "

  90. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of people will use them for socially unacceptable purposes

    So what? It's a perfect way to test how robust the platform is against censorship and state/corp control. We can't dwell on the sensitivities of the frail mind. We must simply build the machines that can withstand the onslaught of popular fascism. The tears of the tyrant are sweet indeed!

  91. Nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing scares a liberal more than free speech. Witness the effort they put into shutting down speakers everywhere.

  92. Re:Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Libtard NPC.

  93. Great! by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    Turn the entire internet into usenet or reddit or 4chan or 8chan.

    What could go wrong?

  94. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously? A known liar, convicted of lying, going to jail for lying, says nothing impeachable about Trump all day long and ... dude... are you going to hurt yourself when Trump is elected again in 2020?

  95. Re: There's a reason Nazi cowards are censored. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah its so much better not knowing who the Nazis are and what they intend to do. Youre basically a genius.

  96. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 0

    One need merely look at the tweets Gab is making as a company from their own corporate Twitter tag (example) to realize the "free speech" thing is just a cover for their actual agenda.

  97. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Leftists who can't argue with facts resort to drowning out opponents by screaming, name-calling, and censorship. When they kick those people off "their" platforms, they think they've won. They can't stand it when those people find another ball and play their own game. They simply MUST try to shut that down as well, including more name-calling and dishonest labeling of the new platform.

    I thought people grew out of this attitude after elementary school. Apparently not. The childish nonsense continues for a lifetime in some.

  98. The bad posts drive out the good by Jeremi · · Score: 1

    The usual formula applies: with a laissez-faire commenting policy, the trolls will proliferate to the point where the forum's content is too toxic and offensive for anyone else to dare to participate.

    Then the trolls will eventually realize that the only people left to troll are each other, and they will abandon the platform for greener pastures.

    Then the forum will be deserted, except for the occasional "is anybody still here lol" tumbleweed. Finally, the hosting company will realize that they are paying IT people to keep an empty forum running, and decide to shut it down.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  99. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

    In this case, alt-right content is what Gab had in mind.

    Citation needed.

    Gab didn't court anyone. Gab attracted people who were being deplatformed by indiscriminately calling them alt-right around election time.

    Any time a community or platform talks loudly about 'freedom', they usually have some specific set of speech in mind.

    Yes, because they are human beings?

    Gab would have failed if it only courted racists. Its survival in the face of sustained attacks is proof how corrupt the left has become.

  100. Re:Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I see you're still thinking about male/male anal sex for 24 hours a day.

    For fuck's sake, just go buy a male hooker and do it.. Nobody on the entire internet still thinks you're straight at this point.

  101. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know exactly what it tastes like you lying cocksucker. You don't have to imagine anything.

  102. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by jpaine619 · · Score: 2

    Ah, the old "anything that anyone says that I find highly offensive must be silenced because it's not real free speech. Only the speech I find "acceptable" is free speech. Everything else is hate speech."

    The fact that you don't get why that mind-set is the problem IS THE FUCKING PROBLEM you asshole.

    Believe me, if I was running things, I'd have you shot for your offensive words. You'd be dragged into the street and your stupid speech would be read to you as you were shot in the face.

  103. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy fuck.. Are you actually making the argument that only Nazis are vocal about their freedom?

    Jesus H. Christ... There's no hope for assholes like you.

  104. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

    That's not true, Gab actively promotes itself to people being kicked off other platforms. Since most of those people are being kicked off for extreme far right views and/or trolling, Gab fills itself with the far right and trolls as a matter of policy.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  105. Sounds great for Doxing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The next generation of Neo-Nazi's and doxers I bet will be pleased.

    I can't think of anywhere this helps. In cases of censorship because it will harm the company or sponsors, everyone just finds somewhere else to go and complain where they can't be censored.

    For racist comments, their comments disappear.

    This platform are primarily intended to target and benefit from ultra-right-wing trump supporters.

  106. This code - is best self moderator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slash code is probably the best option for most sites

  107. Walled garden or Virtual Prison for Trolls? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is essentially a walled garden for trolls, though some might say a virtual prison where trolls can troll each other and the rest of the world can forget about them.

    Given the modern incarnation of trolls are largely morons,compared to the early days were trolling was at the expense of the morons, I'll not be shedding many tears over this latest development.

  108. Re: Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes you can. Colt proved that pretty quickly.

  109. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > most of those people are being kicked off for non-far-left views and/or trolling

    Fixed that for you.

  110. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, conservative isn't nazi. That title belongs to you leftist idiots. That's why Latinos voted heavily for Trump.

    But hey, keep showing your intolerant Brownshirt tactics. It's fun pointing them out.

  111. Re: Gab, the reichtard supremacist infowars cult s by Vintermann · · Score: 1, Funny

    {Unsolicited opinion on Israel?!?}

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  112. shut it down at all cost! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The overlords will not be pleased.

  113. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm always hopeful that it's Russian chaos initiative and not actual citizens of USA posting about anti free speech and anti free will...

    Can you imagine the level of adolescence required to not appreciate how history has given you everything and that you've got all the potential in the world because of this?

    And to destroy that for future generations because you wanted to win a game on the internet?

    Nazis don't exist friends. They were scattered to the winds after their party was destroyed. Don't allow their legacy to seep into your mind, as lucrative as power and control may be, the left leaning side of the USA is slipping deeper into the grasp of its insanity and hardly seem to realize it.

    It's difficult to understand why they can't see that it's only the left wing side of US politics being torn apart by this stuff. You don't have to be right wing to see it, you simply need to be self aware.

    There are no Nazis and there are hardly any right wing extremists in the USA.

    Proof: This is easy to research and there are tons of examples if you look and compare sources.

  114. Re: Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anything, the left wing is the reincarnation of the nazi partys core agendas and ideas.

    Compare and contrast and see the truth for what it is

    The right wing in the USA has nothing in common with Nazis, and is obviously and openly againt their ideals (abortion, epigenetics, tampering with children, powerful centralized power, control over other people's, control over thought and expression, anti free speech and pro indoctrination)

    Weirdly enough the left aligns with a lot if these ideas and thinks they're anti nazi.

    What a world.

  115. *CNN.com starts sweating profusely* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hehehehe

  116. Gab blocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just have to build some code into the website to block Gab infested browsers

  117. Hard pass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I realize the audience here likely doesn't care given the average slashdot user's political leanings, but while free speech is good, I don't agree that there needs to be a comment section for everything.

    The worst trend to develop on the Internet, and I fully acknowledge the irony in what I'm about to say, is how all users have been given the impression that their opinion is important and/or deserves to be heard. This is not the case. There's a reason why I've stopped using the majority of social media, why I've stopped visiting comment sections, and so on. The signal to noise ratio is absurd.

  118. And thus... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And thus... The internet was demonitized. We had a good haul folks.

  119. I'm old by TJHook3r · · Score: 1

    I value freedom of speech, but only if it is mine! I don't want to visit sites and find that it's covered in graffiti

  120. Islamaphobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More like Islamonausea

  121. keep your fucking comments to your fucking selves by bigtreeman · · Score: 1

    go fuck yourselves somewhere else
    not interested in your fucking comments
    keep your fucking comments to yourselves
    young fucking no brained fuckwits
    or fucking grumpy old men

    --
    Go well
  122. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Awwww, port widdle alt right incel is triggered, show us on this doll where the leftist hurt you. Your tears are so sweet.

  123. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by jythie · · Score: 1

    No, but only nazis are vocal about the freedom to push nazi rhetoric on whoever they find to harass.

  124. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by jythie · · Score: 1

    Gab only succeed because it courted racists, otherwise it would just be yet another forum of no particular note. There was less and less tolerance for their rhetoric and harassment, so Gab saw an opportunity to snap up a community already angry at not being allowed to control everyone around them.

  125. the i15y fumble-finger impasse by epine · · Score: 1

    This is the level of baitshit we have reached, ladies and gentlemen. Twitter banning white people is "insightful" and not just some far right race-war conspiracy bullshit now.

    I totally agree with you. But you're slightly misconstruing what "insightful" means on slashdot.

    It means "I think intersectionality sucks fetid donkey balls, but I'm typing on a damn phone so I can't actually manage to write 'intersectionality' and 'i15y' hasn't caught on yet among the Black Panther set."

    [*] No argument here on i15y sucking fetid donkey balls.

    Humans are flexible organisms. When one form of communication fails (typing articulately), there's always the mouse-driven moderation system to take up the slack.

    Furthermore, you've misconstrued the word "white". There are two types of white people: people of many gifts, and people where whiteness is their only gift.

    The ionized adjective "white" is rarely used to refer to the former, and always used to refer to the later. This later group does experience exclusionary prejudice on a routine basis, especially the incel subclique, who are so far from being endowed with many gifts, that they willingly wind their entire self-identity around their inability to wow any woman with their sense of humour, anywhere, ever.

    All it takes is three incels with moderation points to boost any comment on slashdot into the lamelight.

    [*] I see your "baitshit" and raise you a "lamelight".

  126. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    The other problem, as any Usenet veteran knows, is that allowing completely free speech leads to the destruction of forums. The best rule is to allow people to create forums, and allow forums to regulate their use.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  127. how i join the illuminati brotherhood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WELCOME TO GREAT ILLUMINATI WORLD! WHATSAPP MR SCOTT +50766943614 TO JOIN THE ILLUMINATI BROTHERHOOD TO GET RICH AND FAME,THE GREAT TEMPLE ILLUMINATI WORLD WIDE. Are you a politician, business man/woman,musical artiste, student, footballer or whatever occupation you do, and you want to be rich, powerful and famous in life. Illuminati will grant you all your heart desire..Illuminati will support you both financially and materially to ensure you live a comfortable life....

    BENEFIT GIVEN TO A NEW MEMBER WHO JOIN THE ILLUMINATI

    A cash reward of $300,000 U.S Dollar a new sleek dream car valued at
    $120,000 U.S Dollar a dream house bought in the country of your own choice
    one month holiday (fully paid) to your dream tourist destination.one year and many other whatsapp +50766943614 if interested

  128. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

    The other problem, as any Usenet veteran knows, is that allowing completely free speech leads to the destruction of forums. The best rule is to allow people to create forums, and allow forums to regulate their use.

    Mostly I agree with that. But, I am unsure how we deal with de-facto monopolies. Yes Facebook is a private company and yes people can go elsewhere.. But, they aren't... Acknowledging that things are rarely yes/no, black/white, or private/public is part of the issue.. We have shades of grey here... Facebook is private but it's got a massive amount of users.. More than any other social network has ever had... We have to address this.. If we're gonna kick off the Nazis (who are actually few and far between) then we need to give the boot to the extreme left too.. One company (Facebook) swaying the political opinions of billion(s) of people is not a good thing..

    We know they're doing it.. Deliberate or not is besides the point... Social media is rapidly turning into an echo chamber... You have an idea, you meet others with the same idea, and all you get is positive reinforcement.. Doesn't matter how fucked up your ideas are, you're going to have a huge audience of like-minded people reinforcing your political/social bias.

    Right now it's the left that has control of Facebook, I think that's pretty obvious.. But we know shit flip-flops in this country.. Do you want conservatives like me having all the power at some future date?

    I don't like the idea of single party politics.. I go ultra conservative on some things and mildly liberal on others (pro gay marriage for example.. They should be as miserable as the rest of us :) ) I'm aware that having anyone influencing huge chunks of the population, with no opposite view, is a bad idea. It'd be just as bad if Facebook was leaning ultra conservative and was kicking off liberals..

    I don't know how to fix it... Maybe we bust facebook up into two chunks... Or maybe 3...... We have to do something though.. I think one of the main issues is that the freaks (left and right) are given way too much voice, proportionally, at this moment in history..

    It wasn't like this before.. Politics wasn't like this... Society wasn't like this...

    Regardless of someone being pro-trans or anti-trans, how the fuck did 0.1% of the population get this loud of a voice? I can't go a day without hearing about trans people.. I don't hate them (honestly)... But how does 0.1% of the pop get a voice this loud? When have we EVER bent society to the demands of 0.1% of any people?

    Even the anti-vaxxers have managed to form huge groups where they sit around all day telling each other how bad vaccines are.. Nobody to dissent.. They'll kick 'em out of the group... So all they hear from is other anti-vaxxers... That's not a good idea.. And don't even get me started on the Flat-Earth assholes...

  129. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    Usenet was destroyed by the web, not by the trolls. I agree that trolls were annoying, but most newsreaders implemented black lists and filters to deal with those.

  130. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    Calling people names only show your will to harass people. Supporting censorship only show your will to control everyone around you. Don't you realize you are what you claim to hate?

  131. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    I just created an account on Gab because of Dissenter. The platform is surprisingly tame. I was expecting a lot of anti-Jew comments, as well as a lot of foul language, but the vast majority of posts were as civil as everywhere else. Of course, since I'm guessing you are extreme far left, I'm sure you would happily label three quarter of the population as extreme far right, but maybe you should realize that the problem is your own bigotry.

  132. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

    Let's have a look at the "Explore" page right now...

    First post: "There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with Whites being pro-White"

    Second post: "REVOLUTION The Story of QAnon and the 2nd American Revolution"

    Third post: "YouTube is now censoring content from all the creators and sources mentioned in the Alternative Influence Network report..."

    Yeah, it's not an alt-right shithole at all.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  133. Re:Good potential - TO ID NAZI COWARDS FOR LATER by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    Here's what the "Explore" page gives me right now (I show only the first 10 posts) :

    It turns out the “wage gap” is real, it’s just opposite of what Feminists thought.

    This is a post about an article showing that men are paid less than women for the same job in IT. This is obviously an anti-feminist post, which means it can be qualified as on the right, but it's not "alt-right".

    And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes...

    This is some Christian guy preaching and quoting the Bible. Now I'm an atheist, I'm not a fan of religions, but I also believe that there should be some religious freedom. Again, right-wing, but this has nothing to do with the "alt-right".

    Come and take it

    This is a post about a picture of a woman showing a sign where it's written "we are coming to take away your guns. Personally I don't have guns (even if I know how to use a lot of weapons since I did my mandatory military service), also I'm not American, but the right to own firearms is part of the American constitution. I agree the post is right-wing, but not alt-right.

    #dissenter changing the Internet

    This is a post about Dissenter itself. It's neither on the right nor the left.

    Are you serious guys? 20,000 people have joined our group?

    This is a post about people joining a "Gab group" called "Free Speech". I didn't check what this group is about, but simply by the name I can tell it's not about the alt-right ideology (both the far right and the far left are anti-free speech).

    As a Somali, Ilhan Omar doesn't belong in America, however what she's doing by exposing the Zionist control of congress is invaluable.

    Ok, this one is from an idiotic alt-right who believes in his conspiracy theory about Jews.

    Paedophiles believe that they should be part of lgbr community and we believe they should be hung by their perverted necks until dead.

    This is about pedophilia. This has nothing to do with the alt-right.

    I think Katie Hopkins has hit the nail on the head with this tweed tonight

    This is a post about Katie Hopkins tweeting that Britain is tumbling inexorably into even darker times. Katie Hopkins is definitely on the right, but she's not alt-right at all.

    This same article, written slightly differently each time, gets passed around Slate, Salon, Vox, HuffPo, etc

    This is a post about a Slate article asking if pedophiles are too sick for punishment. Again, this is about pedophilia. It's not about the alt-right ideology.

    Not many years ago you could go to most stores and get a gun without a background check.

    This is another post about the second amendment. Again, right-wing, but not alt-right.

    So in summary, out of ten, only one could be qualified as alt-right.

    Now about the articles you quoted, I remember the one saying that there is nothing wrong about white people being pro-white. When I posted my initial comment, it was already toward the middle of the page. This means that when you looked at the explore page, it was certainly not the first post. This means you are simply lying in order to push for your far left agenda.

    You are a despicable person. More than that, since you want an authoritarian regime where people have no freedom, I'd even say you are a dangerous person.