DominikR (u/DominikR)

DominikR commented on Facebook Said to Create Censorship Tool to Get Back into China nytimes.com/2016/11/22/te... · Posted by u/virtuabhi

DominikR · 9 years ago

Who is "we Austrians"? I'm an Austrian and I have no problem with Facebook not censoring that video!

Just so everybody here knows why the Austrian government wanted it banned: It showed how Muslim immigrants beat up a 16 year old girl and broke her jaw, reportedly as punishment because she dared to pull the veil off a Muslim girl.

That doesn't sit well with our government that wants to invite all of the Middle East here!

And probably the same is true for jakobegger, who enjoys freedom of speech only when it is an opinion that he isn't offended by, otherwise censorship is very much appreciated.

DominikR commented on Obama bans new oil drilling in Arctic Ocean bbc.com/news/world-us-can... · Posted by u/jonbaer

finid · 9 years ago

Well, you can be sure that it will be discarded, because the person most likely to be responsible for energy is either S. Palin or some other oil companies-friendly professional.

Republican administrations tend to be "good for business", which translates to "bad for consumers", so get ready to be shafted.

DominikR · 9 years ago

> "good for business", which translates to "bad for consumers"

I know it's trendy to be left leaning so you easily get away with such generalising statements but ask yourself these questions before hating on all businesses:

Would you buy an iPhone or a laptop designed and built by a government agency? A car? How about a pair of shoes or pants. Would you prefer sending your children to private or public schools. Same goes for universities. Would you rather participate in evil Capitalism to earn a living or live under government social security regimentation, possibly even with a job provided or forced on you by government.

Is there even anything where you would prefer the government option over something offered by private businesses?

If you don't want private businesses to offer products and services, and government products and services suck, then who is going to provide this?

DominikR commented on Automated Pro-Trump Bots Overwhelmed Pro-Clinton Messages nytimes.com/2016/11/18/te... · Posted by u/CapitalistCartr

d_e_solomon · 9 years ago

> No, there is no responsibility whatsoever. Users are free to not use the service if they don't like it.

I own private property. It's true that I'm free to paint my house an obnoxious color and let it fall into ruin. It doesn't mean that I don't have a responsibility to my neighbors and community to provide upkeep to my house and ensure it's aesthetically pleasing.

Similarly, I believe social media and the media has a larger responsibility to our civic discourse even if they are a private company. Is that a legal obligation? No, but it's a moral obligation.

DominikR · 9 years ago

> It doesn't mean that I don't have a responsibility to my neighbors and community to provide upkeep to my house and ensure it's aesthetically pleasing.

Can your neighbours sue you if you paint your house in an obnoxious color? No? Then there is no responsibility.

Why is it that I, for whom English is only my 4th language has to explain to you what the English word responsibility means?

If for you responsibility is just a fuzzy term with some feelings attached then we don't need to discuss this matter as FB can't be held accountable to that kind of responsibility anyways.

> Similarly, I believe social media and the media has a larger responsibility to our civic discourse even if they are a private company

I do not doubt that you believe many things, but first you have to show what responsibility actually exists and then show if and how that applies to Facebook if you are going to make such an argument.

DominikR commented on Automated Pro-Trump Bots Overwhelmed Pro-Clinton Messages nytimes.com/2016/11/18/te... · Posted by u/CapitalistCartr

grzm · 9 years ago

"a third party forcing FB to censor or me to shut up is censorship."

Would you expand on this? I don't follow how a third party other than the state could force Facebook to censor?

DominikR · 9 years ago

I'm not going to answer such a question pretending you are a 3 year old that really doesn't know how media + government collude and operate to control society.

You are incapable of seeing how it poses a threat to freedom of speech when all major media combined call for censorship? There's no point for me to engage in a discussion with you.

DominikR commented on Automated Pro-Trump Bots Overwhelmed Pro-Clinton Messages nytimes.com/2016/11/18/te... · Posted by u/CapitalistCartr

d_e_solomon · 9 years ago

A private company censoring the content on their platform is not a violation of freedom of speech. I believe that the point being argued is that they have a responsibility to filter out automated messaging.

DominikR · 9 years ago

> A private company censoring the content on their platform is not a violation of freedom of speech

It's not, but a third party forcing FB to censor or me to shut up is censorship.

> I believe that the point being argued is that they have a responsibility to filter out automated messaging.

No, there is no responsibility whatsoever. Users are free to not use the service if they don't like it.

If you see this different then we have different views on what private property is.

DominikR commented on Automated Pro-Trump Bots Overwhelmed Pro-Clinton Messages nytimes.com/2016/11/18/te... · Posted by u/CapitalistCartr

simosx · 9 years ago

The question is, should Twitter, Facebook, or Reddit work harder to identify those networks and publicise those attempts to game the social networks?

These companies have all the tools to figure out orchestrated efforts.

DominikR · 9 years ago

Well I would say that is up to Twitter, Facebook and Reddit shareholders to decide since it is their property.

You don't get to cancel property rights because you don't like the reporting there. You also don't get to cancel freedom of speech because you don't like what someone is saying.

DominikR commented on Automated Pro-Trump Bots Overwhelmed Pro-Clinton Messages nytimes.com/2016/11/18/te... · Posted by u/CapitalistCartr

DominikR · 9 years ago

This is the second NYT article I see here today that is calling for more censorship because of some unsubstantiated claims. These people must be completely out of their minds.

DominikR commented on Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache nypost.com/2016/11/17/fac... · Posted by u/SQL2219

krige · 9 years ago

"FB investigated FB and found FB not guilty"

DominikR · 9 years ago

So what? That's what FB can do when they find an issue. You are free to sue them if you feel that you have lost money because of this. Go ahead, that's what courts are for.

But I guess what many really want is for government to step in and use government force to punish FB until people feel that some kind of justice has been done. (burn the witch!)

That's why democracy is fundamentally incompatible with liberty.

On a side note: The media is attacking FB because they feel that FB doesn't censor and steer public opinion in the way they would like it to be. They are all up in arms claiming that Trump is FB's fault after they themselves have reported 24/7 on Trump. (but so biased, even Stalin would have cringed) That's the only reason why this article even exists.

DominikR commented on LinkedIn is now officially blocked in Russia techcrunch.com/2016/11/17... · Posted by u/DyslexicAtheist

zzzcpan · 9 years ago

> Which is a good reason to let them continue collecting them indefinitely?

Which is not something your government can forbid or even verify, they have no way of enforcing anything under other jurisdictions. Whatever company says it did or didn't do there - the government has no choice but to believe them.

DominikR · 9 years ago

Look, I'm a Libertarian as I stated before, I do not even want a government to exist as they are oppressive by nature but I recognise that there's brutal geopolitical competition among world powers.

I can't say with the little information I've got if it is necessary or not but I understand the rationale whereby someone might implement this because they are not willing to bet the survival of their people or their nation on the goodwill of others.

DominikR commented on LinkedIn is now officially blocked in Russia techcrunch.com/2016/11/17... · Posted by u/DyslexicAtheist

zzzcpan · 9 years ago

They already have the passwords. Also, Russia doesn't and won't force any company to store users' data exclusively under their jurisdiction, as this would not allow any foreign company to operate in Russia, making your arguments incorrect.

DominikR · 9 years ago

> They already have the passwords

Which is a good reason to let them continue collecting them indefinitely?

> Also, Russia doesn't and won't force any company to store users' data exclusively under their jurisdiction, as this would not allow any foreign company to operate in Russia, making your arguments incorrect.

You state this as if it was a fact, but there is great uncertainty among lawyers and businesses if the law requires data to be stored exclusively in Russia or if that's not the case. In any way you'll have to ask for permission which they might never grant you if you are a company like Facebook that's storing very sensitive information.