November 17th, 2020, 05:26 PM
[QUOTE=SuperJack;905161]I'm impressed that these threads are still going running around in circles in the pool of liquid shit.
[MENTION=45595]Oberon[/MENTION] please start a topic about right-to-repair. Thats an interesting one.[/QUOTE]
It's interesting because it's a way for me to talk to someone who I normally would never associate myself with, and there's no strings attached. Either one of us can leave at any time with no consequence.
It's a way for me to see a completely different political mindset and I can choose to adapt or adopt the things that I like and I can just laugh at the ones I don't.
He's made a couple of interesting arguments before, and he's making me do my research. If nothing else, I'm educating myself and that's never a bad thing.
Originally Posted by
SuperJack
I'm impressed that these threads are still going running around in circles in the pool of liquid shit.
@
Oberon
please start a topic about right-to-repair. Thats an interesting one.
It's interesting because it's a way for me to talk to someone who I normally would never associate myself with, and there's no strings attached. Either one of us can leave at any time with no consequence.
It's a way for me to see a completely different political mindset and I can choose to adapt or adopt the things that I like and I can just laugh at the ones I don't.
He's made a couple of interesting arguments before, and he's making me do my research. If nothing else, I'm educating myself and that's never a bad thing.
November 17th, 2020, 08:40 AM
[QUOTE=Marshmallow Marshall;904760]Right, mag.
:calix:[/QUOTE]
Ladies and gentlemen we figured out why he changed his name
Originally Posted by
Marshmallow Marshall
Right, mag.
Ladies and gentlemen we figured out why he changed his name
November 17th, 2020, 08:40 AM
[QUOTE=Oberon;904766]I didn’t say that in this thread though. I think theres a serious issue with the state owning that kind of media but its not like they’re not altrady in bed with it. As far as I’m concerned Facebook et al are practically publicly owned in all but name. I just think that nationalizing them could be a temporary solution as long as the government can be trusted not to enforce hate speech laws too liberally. Its just that that comes with all the inherent problems that nationalization has. The other idea is to regulate them - and sure - but if they are to be regulated those regulations have to be very well thought out and very, very clear. There’s no simple solution to that problem as far as I can see it.[/QUOTE]
Someone more informed than me should fact check my post
Wasn’t Facebook reamed out in US court for privacy breaches not just two years ago? That’s where we got all the zuckerberg lizard memes. There’s multiple conclusions we can come to here.
1. The US government was not using this private data for themselves because if they were they would’ve just quietly collected the data and not gone to court over it.
2. The US government does not have extremely close ties to Facebook because if they did they would’ve known about these breaches that existed for years, right?
3. The US government probably doesn’t even like Facebook.
Originally Posted by
Oberon
I didn’t say that in this thread though. I think theres a serious issue with the state owning that kind of media but its not like they’re not altrady in bed with it. As far as I’m concerned Facebook et al are practically publicly owned in all but name. I just think that nationalizing them could be a temporary solution as long as the government can be trusted not to enforce hate speech laws too liberally. Its just that that comes with all the inherent problems that nationalization has. The other idea is to regulate them - and sure - but if they are to be regulated those regulations have to be very well thought out and very, very clear. There’s no simple solution to that problem as far as I can see it.
Someone more informed than me should fact check my post
Wasn’t Facebook reamed out in US court for privacy breaches not just two years ago? That’s where we got all the zuckerberg lizard memes. There’s multiple conclusions we can come to here.
1. The US government was not using this private data for themselves because if they were they would’ve just quietly collected the data and not gone to court over it.
2. The US government does not have extremely close ties to Facebook because if they did they would’ve known about these breaches that existed for years, right?
3. The US government probably doesn’t even like Facebook.
November 17th, 2020, 08:33 AM
[QUOTE=Oberon;904753]Whenever I google something about the coronavirus pandemic, I only find articles that tell me why ‘it’s real’ and why the lockdown is necessary; even if I tailor the search to look specifically for results that would favour my opinion. On DuckDuckGo there still seems to be a bias in favour of pro-lockdown results but I usually do manage to find articles expressing opinions similar to my own. In DDG’s case I do not know if that is the result of inherent bias in the search algorithm or if its just due to what the media is most likely to report. I will try to look for a specific example for you.[/QUOTE]
This seems much more likely to be that the news sources that are widely considered reliable and have a larger following are all pushing for lockdown.
Considering that DDG gave you the same results it seems very irresponsible to conclude that google is pushing an agenda, right? Don’t get me wrong, I really do believe google is influencing our lives. But I don’t think it would be so obvious, and I don’t think it would be at all related to the legitimacy of the pandemic because the pandemic is very legitimate and I’ve been seeing the effects of it firsthand at university.
Originally Posted by
Oberon
Whenever I google something about the coronavirus pandemic, I only find articles that tell me why ‘it’s real’ and why the lockdown is necessary; even if I tailor the search to look specifically for results that would favour my opinion. On DuckDuckGo there still seems to be a bias in favour of pro-lockdown results but I usually do manage to find articles expressing opinions similar to my own. In DDG’s case I do not know if that is the result of inherent bias in the search algorithm or if its just due to what the media is most likely to report. I will try to look for a specific example for you.
This seems much more likely to be that the news sources that are widely considered reliable and have a larger following are all pushing for lockdown.
Considering that DDG gave you the same results it seems very irresponsible to conclude that google is pushing an agenda, right? Don’t get me wrong, I really do believe google is influencing our lives. But I don’t think it would be so obvious, and I don’t think it would be at all related to the legitimacy of the pandemic because the pandemic is very legitimate and I’ve been seeing the effects of it firsthand at university.
November 16th, 2020, 01:12 PM
[QUOTE=Oberon;904739]The narratives they attempt to push all the time are the same as the ones major political parties are in favour of. Facebook and Twitter are heavily pro-lock down. I just can’t help but wonder if the people running those businesses aren’t somehow connected to influential politicians.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but can I have some specific examples of this? I'm asking you for sources of this, not additional generalization.
[QUOTE=Oberon;904740]Look up something on Google about Trump or the coronavirus and then look up the same thing on DuckDuckGo. You will get some verybdifferent results; it will be much easier to find something ‘centrist’ or conservative on DuckDuckGo than on Google.
YouTubr has the same problem. People criticizing the lockdown have gotten censored.[/QUOTE]
I have actually just done this because you've interested me. I picked "trump corona update" as my search term. In my extremely anecdotal searches I've come to the conclusion that google values recency higher than duckduckgo.
Of the top 5 articles google offered me, 4 of them were made in the last week. Only one was from October. DuckDuckGo offered me more dated articles from a wider variety of sources. I don't pretend to understand how search engines work, but could this not potentially just be that the two algorithms are coded differently? It makes sense from a corporate perspective. Google is the most used search engine in the world, millions if not billions of people use it for research every day. Would it not be within your company's best interest to have the most up-to-date information be the most accessible, perhaps at the cost of it being less objective?
Originally Posted by
Oberon
The narratives they attempt to push all the time are the same as the ones major political parties are in favour of. Facebook and Twitter are heavily pro-lock down. I just can’t help but wonder if the people running those businesses aren’t somehow connected to influential politicians.
Yes, but can I have some specific examples of this? I'm asking you for sources of this, not additional generalization.
Originally Posted by
Oberon
Look up something on Google about Trump or the coronavirus and then look up the same thing on DuckDuckGo. You will get some verybdifferent results; it will be much easier to find something ‘centrist’ or conservative on DuckDuckGo than on Google.
YouTubr has the same problem. People criticizing the lockdown have gotten censored.
I have actually just done this because you've interested me. I picked "trump corona update" as my search term. In my extremely anecdotal searches I've come to the conclusion that google values recency higher than duckduckgo.
Of the top 5 articles google offered me, 4 of them were made in the last week. Only one was from October. DuckDuckGo offered me more dated articles from a wider variety of sources. I don't pretend to understand how search engines work, but could this not potentially just be that the two algorithms are coded differently? It makes sense from a corporate perspective. Google is the most used search engine in the world, millions if not billions of people use it for research every day. Would it not be within your company's best interest to have the most up-to-date information be the most accessible, perhaps at the cost of it being less objective?
November 16th, 2020, 09:08 AM
[QUOTE=Oberon;904204]Google and Twitter are indeed private corporations but the way their interests align with the State’s so often nowadays really has me wondering whether they are in bed with them. There is no easy answer in my view to the problem of Big Tech companies overstepping their boundaries to such an extent. Nationalizing them gives the government the ability to control what censored and what doesn’t. Regulating them is another story that already comes with its own set if problems.[/QUOTE]
You've really made me curious here. What are some examples of Google and Twitter or other electronic media giants having their interests "align with the state's" since it happens so often?
Originally Posted by
Oberon
Google and Twitter are indeed private corporations but the way their interests align with the State’s so often nowadays really has me wondering whether they are in bed with them. There is no easy answer in my view to the problem of Big Tech companies overstepping their boundaries to such an extent. Nationalizing them gives the government the ability to control what censored and what doesn’t. Regulating them is another story that already comes with its own set if problems.
You've really made me curious here. What are some examples of Google and Twitter or other electronic media giants having their interests "align with the state's" since it happens so often?
November 12th, 2020, 09:07 AM
[QUOTE=Zedus;902621]Yes, France people realy knows what democracy is, I totally agree with this without any irony.[/QUOTE]
All hail Philippe Petain
Originally Posted by
Zedus
Yes, France people realy knows what democracy is, I totally agree with this without any irony.
All hail Philippe Petain
November 11th, 2020, 02:40 PM
renegade more like renegay
renegade more like renegay
November 9th, 2020, 11:35 AM
[QUOTE=Oberon;901881]My apologies. I meant to say that I was talking to one.[/QUOTE]
I won't interrupt your prostitution zoom call then. Have fun!
Originally Posted by
Oberon
My apologies. I meant to say that I was talking to one.
I won't interrupt your prostitution zoom call then. Have fun!
November 8th, 2020, 08:53 AM
WAAAAAHHH I NEED TO VINDICATE MY ANGER WITH PICTURES OF CLINTON SUPPORTERS CRYING 4 YEARS AGO
WAAAAAHHH I NEED TO VINDICATE MY ANGER WITH PICTURES OF CLINTON SUPPORTERS CRYING 4 YEARS AGO