Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 9:51:30 GMT -5
Seems rather extreme... I think the bans only make him seen more legitimate. Now he can be this martyr in the war against censorship.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 10:19:46 GMT -5
He's already gone on record to say he was an act, when he had his court case with his ex-wife. TBH, he does more damage to political discourse than helps it, for those in opposition to the far-left, by pretending to be legit. However, he was pretty funny at least. He should have just owned the fact that he was being a comedian. There's tons of liberal comedians that seem to have a lot of influence on peoples' opinions.
Censoring him is a really shitty move. imo It is also a double-standard, considering the vile things some leftist comics make.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 10:28:46 GMT -5
Despite the fact that social media is privately owned, it should be regulated like the gas or phone company. At this point, it is a utility. Imagine if they shut off your heat, or your phone service, based on your political leanings?
This issue of political censorship on social media will most likely make it's way to the supreme court one day. With the SCOTUS choices Trump has made, I'm sure it will fall in favor of regulating these services to back off from censorship of political positions, since right-wingers are being targeted.
I think it is imperative, and even liberals should be on board with this. Why are we letting these mega-corporations dictate what we can and cannot say? One day, if the wind changes direction, it could be liberals who are the ones getting banned. These companies are just following the money, and at the moment, it is most likely more profitable for them to have this facade of Liberalism. There needs to be a safeguard against this.
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,534
|
Post by 40oz on Aug 7, 2018 11:08:11 GMT -5
This issue of political censorship on social media will most likely make it's way to the supreme court one day. With the SCOTUS choices Trump has made, I'm sure it will fall in favor of regulating these services to back off from censorship of political positions, since right-wingers are being targeted. I'm probably going off the rails here, but your response involving the need for government to step in and regulate this stuff kinda reminded me of some sci-fi voodoo that's been on my mind. A few days ago I've been kinda on this thread of ideas -- it's a little on the crazy side, and I know that. But I'm thinking in terms of the ripple this kind of stuff has on society in the next 50-100 years and how things might eventually evolve in the future. It certainly seems these days, with how incompatible people are, and how they are always in direct contact with each other that we are experiencing some serious growing pains for a new future. I certainly seems, at this time, like we do need the government to intervene and mediate all this social unrest. However, I think its a little too late for that. In fact, I think we're on the precipice of a future where technology corporations will replace government, in a way that enables all people to be completely sedantary human beings. People will choose to interface with strictly virtual utopias instead of abide by these ancient laws of our current government system. Virtual reality shopping malls, intergalactic travel, instantaneous communication, and extra senses beyond our basic five, that amplifies our entertainment mediums to a whole new level completely inferior to any tangible things in our real lives. People will select to live in this entirely new supercountry that is seemingly bursting at the seams with virtual people. All of which forfeit their citizenship and rights to their government. Babies will be born into our real life, where they will live their short intermission before being strapped into a hospital bed with a feeding tube and a virtual reality helmet and transported to a land where they can never die. They can manage millions of friends and never work and still make virtual currency to customize their life with exactly the kind of reality they want. The laws, government, finite resources, and societal double standards we live with today will eventually become completely moot. The government will do everything they can to fight the momentum of people putting their faith into the hands of technology companies, but technology companies are going to win. Technology is always going to move forward. The government will stagnate, or move at a glacial pace at best. The government will have no choice but to adapt to this transendental lifestyle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 11:39:31 GMT -5
This issue of political censorship on social media will most likely make it's way to the supreme court one day. With the SCOTUS choices Trump has made, I'm sure it will fall in favor of regulating these services to back off from censorship of political positions, since right-wingers are being targeted. I'm probably going off the rails here, but your response involving the need for government to step in and regulate this stuff kinda reminded me of some sci-fi voodoo that's been on my mind. A few days ago I've been kinda on this thread of ideas -- it's a little on the crazy side, and I know that. But I'm thinking in terms of the ripple this kind of stuff has on society in the next 50-100 years and how things might eventually evolve in the future. It certainly seems these days, with how incompatible people are, and how they are always in direct contact with each other that we are experiencing some serious growing pains for a new future. I certainly seems, at this time, like we do need the government to intervene and mediate all this social unrest. However, I think its a little too late for that. In fact, I think we're on the precipice of a future where technology corporations will replace government, in a way that enables all people to be completely sedantary human beings. People will choose to interface with strictly virtual utopias instead of abide by these ancient laws of our current government system. Virtual reality shopping malls, intergalactic travel, instantaneous communication, and extra senses beyond our basic five, that amplifies our entertainment mediums to a whole new level completely inferior to any tangible things in our real lives. People will select to live in this entirely new supercountry that is seemingly bursting at the seams with virtual people. All of which forfeit their citizenship and rights to their government. Babies will be born into our real life, where they will live their short intermission before being strapped into a hospital bed with a feeding tube and a virtual reality helmet and transported to a land where they can never die. They can manage millions of friends and never work and still make virtual currency to customize their life with exactly the kind of reality they want. The laws, government, finite resources, and societal double standards we live with today will eventually become completely moot. The government will do everything they can to fight the momentum of people putting their faith into the hands of technology companies, but technology companies are going to win. Technology is always going to move forward. The government will stagnate, or move at a glacial pace at best. The government will have no choice but to adapt to this transendental lifestyle. Perhaps, but I can only imagine that happening in the first-world if it does. There's still huge swaths of humanity that lack many of the amenities that we enjoy today. Also, there could be enclaves people that will want to live an "Amish-lite"/Luddite lifestyle, where they will resist this change. Technology can improve on society, but it could also cause disruption I also think about the concepts of the future that people in the 19th century had, with illustrations of firemen with wings putting out fires on sky scrapers. I also think about how the internet has transformed our society over time. When I was a child, there's no way I would have comprehended something like it, and now our lives are totally immersed into it. Something big is always around the corner, and it will impact us in extreme ways. I think when labor becomes fully-automated, our concept of the organization of society will change radically, beyond anything proposed by the left-right political spectrum. Right now we're living in a time, where our society has reached a point that we have this massive polarization. But things will change, due to technology. Much like how industrialization radically changed not only the structure of society, but also the political landscape as well. The social reaction to industrialization is what created socialism to begin with. Perhaps we will create a slave-class of automations, that will endlessly serve us, and even eliminate the need of currency. Perhaps even eliminating the scarcity of resources, and we can all be afforded food and luxuries to our hearts' content. All humans could live an Ancient Greek citizen-like existence... Until AI becomes self-aware and exterminate us. Hopefully that last part doesn't happen.
|
|
|
Post by deathevokation on Aug 7, 2018 12:49:59 GMT -5
I hope he opens a court case against them and sues them.. in this day and age where we rely so much on technology and where certain companies own a monopoly on social media platforms.. coordinating and kicking people off multiple platforms like this is almost like taking their voice away. Government getting forced to step in is scary, but not half as scary as endgame we're heading towards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 12:56:40 GMT -5
I hope he opens a court case against them and sues them.. in this day and age where we rely so much on technology and where certain companies own a monopoly on social media platforms.. coordinating and kicking people off multiple platforms like this is almost like taking their voice away. Government getting forced to step in is scary, but not half as scary as endgame we're heading towards. It is ironic that the Right, which traditionally looks at the government merely as a necessary evil, now must call upon it to regulate Corporations, to safeguard their rights. While corporations, are forcing out anything that is not in step with Left-wing political rhetoric. These are crazy, bizzaro world times we're living in. Goes to show, pragmatic use of both private and public means are necessary for a society to remain stable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 13:22:27 GMT -5
A while ago, someone put it into perspective for me:
Big corporations actually LOVE big government welfare programs. Because it's cheaper for them to pay higher taxes, than it is for them to pay their workers a decent wage, and provide them benefits. Especially when the middle class is the one getting hit the hardest on taxes, as society becomes stratified into two classes of poor and rich. And it becomes more apparent as big global corporations push for this idea of a universal flat-income for everyone. A global quasi-communist society, ruled in a de facto way by corporate elites.
If you think about it, that's what the Chinese gov't and Trans-national corporation relationship is on a smaller level. They're pushing for that to be the standard of the whole world.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 15:05:28 GMT -5
This is good, ban all Brutal Doomers from the internet
|
|
|
Post by hardcoregamer on Aug 7, 2018 15:19:25 GMT -5
What concerns me is the fact that ALL of the big tech companies banned him at the same time. This proves that big tech is basically a gang. They should be regulated more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 15:20:59 GMT -5
You needed proof?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 18:30:55 GMT -5
01100100 01000010 01101011
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 5:55:47 GMT -5
These were two Australian dudes, one nearing 60 and another nearing 50. There's no hope for people is there? No wonder the elite look down upon us regular folk.
The internet has evolved at a very fast pace but most of the people weren't ready for it, and still aren't. Devices like PCs and smartphones became more accessible and then there's the proliferation of social media. Who weren't familiar with the internet, especially older guys, now can easily access the net and be bombed with huge ammounts of information in the current climate where everything is so polarized and sensationalized.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 6:01:05 GMT -5
64 42 6B
|
|
|
Post by hardcoregamer on Aug 8, 2018 8:46:25 GMT -5
My God, this is an actual conversation that I just heard in my work carpark while having a smoke between two of the fruit delivery guys a few doors down: "Did you hear Alex Jones is banned on YouTube, Facebook" "Yeah I did, how crazy" "China is now dictating to YouTube what can and can't be done on the internet" "It's crazy" "I liked Alex Jones, he told the truth and wasn't scared to tell it" These were two Australian dudes, one nearing 60 and another nearing 50. There's no hope for people is there? No wonder the elite look down upon us regular folk.
To be honest, if Alex is so full of shit then why did all of big tech feel the need to gang up on him? And even if he is completely full of shit doesn't the fact that big tech can choose to just erase somebody from the internet (and yes, being removed from all social media is the same as being removed from the internet for the most part) concern you at all? Do you think Alex will be the last person to suffer this?
|
|
|
Post by joe-ilya on Aug 8, 2018 9:00:46 GMT -5
I think the bans only make him seen more legitimate. Now he can be this martyr in the war against censorship. Absolutely not, he's a godamn joke and I couldn't care less about how he's treated.
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,534
|
Post by 40oz on Aug 8, 2018 9:12:54 GMT -5
Absolutely not, he's a godamn joke and I couldn't care less about how he's treated. I don't pay enough attention to Alex Jones to know about whether the stuff he reports is legitimate or sensationalized or any of that, but you and I both know that being banned from something has nothing to do with legitimacy. To be honest, if Alex is so full of shit then why did all of big tech feel the need to gang up on him? And even if he is completely full of shit doesn't the fact that big tech can choose to just erase somebody from the internet (and yes, being removed from all social media is the same as being removed from the internet for the most part) concern you at all? Do you think Alex will be the last person to suffer this?
If I'm understanding the article correctly, it seems like there is a suspected growth in the nazi party with radical alt-right people and trolling, and these kinds of people find their support with other fans of Alex Jones. I agree completely that a prolification of fascists is a bad thing, but I also know that echo chambers and thinktanks are generally a bad thing for any kind of direction of thinking. Check out the multitude of Anti-fa videos for example. People need to have their beliefs challenged. I think its fucked that Alex Jones is taking the heat for it. It's not like John Romero is taking credit for all the great things the Doom community has done, or taking the heat for any of the terrible things that come from the Doom community. The same should be applied to Alex Jones. I think he might have a case here because these technology companies are siphoning a serious source of revenue from him.
|
|
|
Post by joe-ilya on Aug 8, 2018 9:57:57 GMT -5
lol 40oz , that guy's a meme, his "Outrageous!" kind of behaviour of speaking and bullshit stories are a must see and hear. Here's the meme in question :
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 10:06:44 GMT -5
I rammed his van once. My car came off slightly second best but it was fun to see him get the shits. The cunt should’nt have parked over my reserved car park when there was whole empty car park to park in heh. He doesn’t park there anymore. Why does this not surprise me?
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,534
|
Post by 40oz on Aug 8, 2018 10:33:26 GMT -5
He's done millions of hours of broadcasting. You're not going to convince me that a 7 second clip will tell me everything there is to know about him. I know he's a ridiculous character, but its part of his entertainment spiel. I saw him on an interview where they had a guy looking up all the stuff he was making claims about and there were always reputable sources to back it up. When he is being genuine, he can be really well informed, and when he's acting like a madman, it should be understood that he's being entertaining.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 11:14:09 GMT -5
-.. -... -.-
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 22:34:32 GMT -5
You have to defend your property at all costs or you might as well give it up. Nine tenths of the law are based around this principle... Somehow I think defending your home and land against a robber or marauder is a bit different than hitting another person's vehicle because they parked in a parking space reserved for you, but then again what do I know. Regardless, I'm glad it turned out well for you sir.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 22:51:51 GMT -5
01100100 01000010 01101011
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 2:51:10 GMT -5
Normally I'm against deplatforming people just because they espouse unpopular opinions which something we've seen a worrying amount of lately from the Social Media Overlords, but Jones admittedly goes pretty far past simply holding unpopular views - He literally (not figuratively!) accused everyone even remotely related to the Sandy Hook massacre of being 'crisis actors', he played video of heartbroken family members crying over the loss of their loved ones and was just like "DERE ALL ACTORS!!!! I'M TELLIN THE TRUTH, FOLKZ" on many occasions despite overwhelming evidence that Sandy Hook was 'legitimate' (don't like the use of that term but it's definitely appropriate here). That goes way beyond the pale, well into the territory of defamation of character and slander. Most of the people silenced by the Social Media Overlords aren't nearly as popular as Jones/Infowars so a lot less people are aware of how common it is for individuals promoting unpopular ideas to simply be banned and swept under the rug. When you've got 10,000 followers or less, the stink is so small that the vast, vast majority of users don't even know it's happening. I'm not talking about insane white nationalists or known lie-factories like Infowars either - I can at least see some argument for silencing these people since a lot of what they say is literally a legal affront.
No, the far more commonly censored voices are just small channels/profiles/etc that dare to say things against the grain, against the current social norm. For me, that's when it crosses the line into being fucking disgusting and to see these wolves in sheep's clothing who dare to call themselves 'open minded and liberal' championing the right of a few very wealthy, very powerful people to decide what is and is not allowed to be thought or said is frankly disturbing. It's completely fucking antithetical to social progress. The best way to destroy pervasive-yet-dangerous ideas is to expose WHY these ideas are awful, not to just silence them. (NO SHIT, SHERLOCK!) When you silence these people, you fucking feed their persecution complex and indirectly breed radicalism.
This shit is so goddamn obvious, I can't believe how relatively few people are saying it. Every argument I see that even vaguely pertains to this topic ends up an e-screaming match that's much ado about nothing without actually addressing the 'meat' of the issue. Fuck me sideways. Honestly, I could not possibly agree more with these statements.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 3:39:58 GMT -5
To be honest, if Alex is so full of shit then why did all of big tech feel the need to gang up on him?
I'll tell you exactly why: To test the waters, to see how the greater public will react. It has nothing to do with Alex Jones telling the "dark, scary truth" (ROFL, perish the thought) or anything of that sort.
See, corporate media does not like independent media, they want to be able to spin their own yarn and cannot stand to see others doing it in a more lucrative way than even they can. There is no altruism or genuine concern for public wellbeing in their decision to silence certain entities despite them (obviously) wanting to put that spin on it. As I said above I think there was actually a pretty strong case against Infowars in this instance but ultimately, near as I can tell anyway, this is legacy media and it's younger partners (the majority of social media) flexing and throwing their weight around just to scare any other fringe/independent creators who are currently saying things that they don't deem appropriate for discussion. That's how I read this situation, anyway.
(I wanted this to be part of my previous post but adding quotes to edited post requires some sort of black magic that I've not yet mastered)
|
|