> Dark humor about race or ideology can eventually shape the beliefs of impressionable young people, and innocuous memes can be co-opted into symbols of hatred, researchers say.
Immediately following this paragraph is a quote from a researcher:
> “If you’re a young man with no prospects hanging out on 4chan, you’re definitely on some Discords and probably some pretty dark Discords,” said Dale Beran, a lecturer at Morgan State University and the author of “It Came from Something Awful: How a Toxic Troll Army Accidentally Memed Donald Trump into Office.”
> innocuous memes can be co-opted into symbols of hatred, researchers say.
It's beside the point, but does anybody actually see social studies and the like as "science" anymore when people in them get bullied and silenced and have their careers destroyed if they think or say the wrong thing? When things that go against left-wing beliefs don't get published? When an overwhelming majority of them are on the same political spectrum? After the grievance studies affair? I see it more as a propaganda machinery and after all if you tortute the data long enough, it will confess. I basically just ignore their research whenever I see this sort of stuff.
I almost forgot all this nonsense originated at somethingawful. That's really weird thinking back. I still say little jokes I first heard on there once in a while. People playing video games get so mad if you say "Get the power up and win the game!" haha
Hmmm this harkens back to “movies influence kids” “music influences kids”, video games influence kids” etc that many people argued in order to censor aspects of music, movies and video games.
When a reporter wants to insert his or her own opinion, they simply refer to a random "expert" or "researcher" of said subject. So when you see such wording, just think in your head, "I say."
Well they need to throw in the "researchers say" statements, otherwise their articles would almost consist entirely of anecdotal human interest stories!
So that phrase actually means something when you are dealing with real journalistic news organizations like NPR or NYT for example. I believe at the NYT, everything of consequence must be double sourced. And in the case of confidential sources, the reporter must reveal the source to their editor so that there is another set of eyes confirming validity. So it's not quite as nebulous and useless as some make it out to be.
Notwithstanding the New York Times calling 4chan far-right and blatantly editorializing (seriously, if this is a news piece, why is there commentary about Discord's moderation policy?), I am most interested in whether the leaks are true.
Has the White House been grossly over-representing Ukraine's chances? Will Ukraine be unable to protect their airspace after late May?
Well 4chan sure as hell isn't full of Marxist college students quoting theory at each other nor is it milquetoast CNN-style liberals. It is predominantly right wing (in an edgy 7th grader sort of way) to the point of needing kill files to be legible like the old days of Usenet.
At the very least it's not more anarchist leaning like it was 15 years ago.
The only difference between a leak and hack is whether there was one person trusted with the information knowingly involved in the transfer chain to publication or not.
We don't have different words as to motives of those doing the leaking. A leak can be to support the status quo or hostile to it or anything else besides.
During the invasion Crimea Obama refused to send military support because it would just help create a long war of attrition, which Russia has more than enough the ressource to sustain, with the same outcome.
It strikes me as somewhat petty that the Times apparently considers the information in the leak important enough to cover so thoroughly, yet they think so little of the source of that information that they'll interview a 20 year old comedy vlogger (haven't watched channel) in the UK to get some quotes painting that source as some sort of right wing extremist group. Maybe they are, but I did not see evidence of such laid out in this article.
>But the unfiltered, edgy banter in the wow_mao server, which is called the End of Wow Mao Zone, and in many other servers like it, can sometimes veer into darker territory. Those servers are sometimes described as the less venomous cousins of 4chan, the far-right anonymous message board known for sharing conspiracy theories and popularizing QAnon. Many 4chan users split their time between Discord and 4chan, sharing digital memes and chatting with friends.
IRC lacks widespread support for things like roles, reactions, avatars, threads, showing chat history from before someone enters a channel, search history, and having video and voice chat without piggybacking on top of DCC. There also aren't sync issues within Discord that cause things like netsplits which are somewhat common on IRC
I know some newer versions of the IRC spec try to address at least some of these, but as far as I'm aware, they aren't very widely supported
IRC is also just not ready for a multiple device lifestyle. People expect to log in and have the same stats across devices, that’s very hard to do with IRC.
Technology improved, people got Features and Devices, they wanted to use their Features and Devices, and they switched to the service that gave them their Features on their Devices. There's no mystery.
The average person doesn't care about federation or an open protocol or whatever. They probably don't even understand those things and they don't want to understand them. They just want to chat with their friends and send emojis and not get upset that things don't work. IRC, by all accounts, fails to do—out of the box—all of those things (well).
Me too. Judging by Discord's tendencies toward speech policing and censorship there will be plenty of groups staying out of it though. A large part of the previous subculture will probably be banned promptly on Discord.
The notable bit was the killed in action numbers from the conflict: 17k Russian troops, and 70k on the Ukrainian side. Estimates from US and European leaders have been all over the map, some in this neighborhood, but others saying more Russians were KIA than were Ukrainians.
Those numbers are edited. Someone basically flipped the order of the digits, eg from 17k to 71k Ukrainian KiA. This is easily confirmed by the Russian aircraft losses; Oryx has many more visually confirmed losses than the edited number claims, and by its very nature Oryx's list is an underestimate.
How can you even tell what actual info was leaked? How can you tell if the info leaked in real?
We have entered into a era where the difference between real and fake is almost impossible to distinguish. Deep fakes and LLM's are going to change propoganda forever.
In an article about leaked documents, they sure don't talk alot about the documents that were leaked...
Is it some kind of psych-op, LLM going on in the comments? No one's interested or curious about the documents and are spamming the page with 4chan shit?
Readit News
http://web.archive.org/web/20230412204156/https://www.nytime...
Immediately following this paragraph is a quote from a researcher:
> “If you’re a young man with no prospects hanging out on 4chan, you’re definitely on some Discords and probably some pretty dark Discords,” said Dale Beran, a lecturer at Morgan State University and the author of “It Came from Something Awful: How a Toxic Troll Army Accidentally Memed Donald Trump into Office.”
Researcher, perhaps, but seems to not be what his credentials or college role is about.
https://www.morgan.edu/screenwriting-and-animation/faculty-a...
CNN and reddit arguably did more than 4chan to get trump elected. They couldn't shut up about him and they have way more reach than 4chan.
It's beside the point, but does anybody actually see social studies and the like as "science" anymore when people in them get bullied and silenced and have their careers destroyed if they think or say the wrong thing? When things that go against left-wing beliefs don't get published? When an overwhelming majority of them are on the same political spectrum? After the grievance studies affair? I see it more as a propaganda machinery and after all if you tortute the data long enough, it will confess. I basically just ignore their research whenever I see this sort of stuff.
"The most dangerous creation of any society is the man who has nothing to lose." — James Baldwin.
And then, when the hotpot they ve been steering for a generation boils over, its all clutching pearls and "how could this happen".
Deleted Comment
Has the White House been grossly over-representing Ukraine's chances? Will Ukraine be unable to protect their airspace after late May?
At the very least it's not more anarchist leaning like it was 15 years ago.
Often it's political, and political messaging particularly about war is propaganda.
We don't have different words as to motives of those doing the leaking. A leak can be to support the status quo or hostile to it or anything else besides.
The New York Times has published, by my count, 15 articles on this leak in the past 7 days.
>But the unfiltered, edgy banter in the wow_mao server, which is called the End of Wow Mao Zone, and in many other servers like it, can sometimes veer into darker territory. Those servers are sometimes described as the less venomous cousins of 4chan, the far-right anonymous message board known for sharing conspiracy theories and popularizing QAnon. Many 4chan users split their time between Discord and 4chan, sharing digital memes and chatting with friends.
Emphasis added.
So... they fear NYT? Does this count as a publication threatening the government?
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
I know some newer versions of the IRC spec try to address at least some of these, but as far as I'm aware, they aren't very widely supported
The average person doesn't care about federation or an open protocol or whatever. They probably don't even understand those things and they don't want to understand them. They just want to chat with their friends and send emojis and not get upset that things don't work. IRC, by all accounts, fails to do—out of the box—all of those things (well).
https://twitter.com/AricToler/status/1644139100407054336?cxt...
Deleted Comment
We have entered into a era where the difference between real and fake is almost impossible to distinguish. Deep fakes and LLM's are going to change propoganda forever.
Is it some kind of psych-op, LLM going on in the comments? No one's interested or curious about the documents and are spamming the page with 4chan shit?
Deleted Comment