Next Generation Emulation banner

1 - 20 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
So I saw the video the dude livestreamed of the shooting in NZ. I don't know why I watched it, but I did.

The first thing I see when I flip on the news is some dude saying that facebook shouldn't allow live streaming because people are going to broadcast stuff like that. This annoys me. I'm sick of the idea that we should give up freedom because some bad shit happens. It's the same bullshit thinking that makes me wanna drive 15 hours to go on vacation rather than fly to not have to deal with post-9/11 airplane security.

Of course, I do find it... interesting... that the ability for horrific events to be photographed/videos/livestreamed is in everyone's hands. Not limited to shootings like this, either. The other day I seen a video of this girl's last moment. She was just doing a little vlog about getting ready for a cheering competition or something when a gas line in her house exploded, killing her instantly. These kinds of things kind of take away the detachment to the reality of these events. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not, but I certainly don't think we should give up our freedoms to prevent it.
 

·
Not a new member
Joined
·
237 Posts
Yeah I agree. There's too much authoritarian interference in our lives already.


Thanakil:
"Video unavailable
This video is unavailable."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,834 Posts
I'd add that removing the ability to livestream these attacks might make people slightly more unsafe. At least when someone live-stream this, it lets people see how they did it, how they acted, and in rare cases might even help save a few lives while it's happening. It won't help us to wear a blindfold.

Something else to consider is that freedom also means having the freedom to remove live-streaming if for some reason Facebook wants to. If they're the ones who want to do it, that's their right. I highly doubt they'd remove livestreaming since it's a big moneymaker, but it's not like we have a right to livestream on FB, Youtube, Twitch, etc. I'm only mentioning this because I've previously seen people treat access or usage of those websites as some kind of right they believe they have. As if they were some type of public service they were legally entitled to.

But as far as banning stuff because of violence or anything else, I agree that I personally don't believe in it. It just reminds me of people being afraid of rock n roll and saying we have to think of the impact on the kids. Websites are terrified of allowing nipples once more, because companies stop advertising if there's any type of nudity shown. It's annoying. It's also annoying how censorship seems to happen not because people asked for it, but because advertisers don't want their brands associated with anything "risky". Gotta censor your website otherwise coke won't give you that sweet ad money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,834 Posts
Yeah I agree. There's too much authoritarian interference in our lives already.


Thanakil:
"Video unavailable
This video is unavailable."
I forgot what it was. I think it was a livestream (hey!) to a Hockey game. Must have been removed because... Well it was an illegal livestream.
 

·
Not a new member
Joined
·
237 Posts
I can't figure out this nipples thing. If a female wants to show it, and other people want to see, then what's the problem? I mean, men have nipples too, and nobody worries about that.

It seems so sexist that a woman can't show her nipples, but a man can show his.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I'd add that removing the ability to livestream these attacks might make people slightly more unsafe. At least when someone live-stream this, it lets people see how they did it, how they acted, and in rare cases might even help save a few lives while it's happening. It won't help us to wear a blindfold.
Yep. As far as saving lives go, in this video this guy is broadcasting himself driving to the place for six minutes before the shooting actually takes place. There is a possibility that someone could find themselves watching that livestream, recognize where he is driving, and report to the authorities that something might be about to go down. I know it didn't happen in this case, but it's not impossible to imagine.

Something else to consider is that freedom also means having the freedom to remove live-streaming if for some reason Facebook wants to. If they're the ones who want to do it, that's their right. I highly doubt they'd remove livestreaming since it's a big moneymaker, but it's not like we have a right to livestream on FB, Youtube, Twitch, etc. I'm only mentioning this because I've previously seen people treat access or usage of those websites as some kind of right they believe they have. As if they were some type of public service they were legally entitled to.
I dunno. I'm a free speech absolutist so long as what you're saying isn't actually illegal - and in the US that's a very small set of things. Yeah, I know they are private businesses and have the right to moderate their platform however they please and I don't really have an issue with that, but they are pretty much quasi-monopolies. You can start your own platform, but then you run into problems with payment services banning you so you can't make money from it (see: gab), which I do have a problem with. Until we get a government-provided online transaction service (or cryptocurrency becomes more realistic to use as an actual currency), I do take offense to private payment platforms regulating transactions that aren't illegal.


I can't figure out this nipples thing. If a female wants to show it, and other people want to see, then what's the problem? I mean, men have nipples too, and nobody worries about that.

It seems so sexist that a woman can't show her nipples, but a man can show his.
The hilarious part about is that generally they don't care so long as them nips are covered. A woman can display her whole breast with a band aid covering the nipple and nobody cares. That little piece of skin is whats corrupting our children!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
To kind of continue my thoughts videos of these things kind of take away the detachment from these events, it really does. Text and newscasters speaking don't convey the travesty of these sorts of events. The video I linked of the girl who died in a gas explosion.... If you see a headline that says "Girl dies in gas line explosion" it's kind of like, "Yeah, that's unfortunate" and then you continue on with your life. When you see that video of an innocent little girl being excited about getting ready for her cheering event before an explosion takes away her life it makes it easier to imagine "Well, damn. That could be my daughter/sister/wife/whatever" and it really breaths a lot of humanity into it. And it makes you more inclined to do something about it - if nothing more than having the gas line going into your house inspected or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,834 Posts
But breasts and nipples are okay IF the woman is breastfeeding in public. As long as the person feeding on them is young enough to make it okay.
Until we get a government-provided online transaction service, I do take offense to private payment platforms regulating transactions that aren't illegal.
Cryptocurrency is better than a government-provided service in that regard. It's already impossible for someone to prevent you from paying someone else if you both use it to make transfers. The large broker exchanges could choose not to do business with you, but you don't need them. The point of crypto is specifically to have power over what you do, it gives more freedom than any other service, and would be safer/give more liberty than something handled by the government.

With that said when both companies and citizens start cutting off ties with your website, it's probably time to ponder why no one wants to spend their own ressources supporting you.

Sometime it's not about censorship, it's about "nah I'm leaving".
Edit: to be clearer, we shouldn't FORCE people to leave (by censoring), but we also can't force people to stay. Sometime people just don't want to deal with someone else's crap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Cryptocurrency is better than a government-provided service in that regard. It's already impossible for someone to prevent you from paying someone else if you both use it to make transfers. The large broker exchanges could choose not to do business with you, but you don't need them. The point of crypto is specifically to have power over what you do, it gives more freedom than any other service, and would be safer/give more liberty than something handled by the government.
Yeah, you're probably right there. But as it stands right now crypto still seems like a foreign concept to many people, myself included. And the rapidly changing values of cryptocurrency doesn't help.

Salesman: "That will be 0.4 BTC"
Buyer: "$0.78 BTC??"
Salesman: "That's right, 1.28 BTC"

Okay, maybe not that extreme, but you'd need crypto pegged to the dollar or something for it to makes sense to consumers.

But breasts and nipples are okay IF the woman is breastfeeding in public. As long as the person feeding on them is young enough to make it okay.
That brings up an interesting question, at what age is breastfeeding in public no longer considered acceptable? I'd be excited to see the news about some 30 year old dude getting arrested because he was sucking a woman's tits in public fighting a legal case because technically he was breastfeeding, which is legal. :p
 

·
Not a new member
Joined
·
237 Posts
I hate how free speech is being eroded. If you don't say that muslims are all our good buddies, they want to lock you up or shame you all over the media. It's sickening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,834 Posts
I hate how free speech is being eroded. If you don't say that muslims are all our good buddies, they want to lock you up or shame you all over the media. It's sickening.
People criticizing you is "free speech".

Free: Person 1 speaks negatively of person 2. Others speak negatively of person 1.
Not free: Person 1 speaks negatively of person 2. No one is allowed to speak negatively of Person 1.

Being able to criticize Muslims, while asking NOT to be criticized for our opinions of Muslims, is the opposite of free speech. If we share a negative opinion, we also leave ourselves open to negative opinions from others. It's a two-way street, and that's how it's meant to work.

I also doubt the claim that no one can speak negatively of muslims. Supporting a Muslim ban is good for your political career.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,834 Posts
Looks like Mueller has delivered his report.
There's some confusion about what happens now or what it means, which we'll mainly have to wait to find out. What I seem to understand at the moment (which is likely not fully accurate):
- They won't indict more people. The confusion seems to arise from people believing it was Mueller's job to indict people, which isn't actually the case. It leads to people thinking "no more indictment = mission accomplished", which is inaccurate.
- Their job was to investigate and then share the information they've found with other forces, who would then take over and potentially indict/prosecute people based on what was found. To be clearer: Mueller's job was to find the dirt and report what he found to the right people.
- So far, information has been shared with attorney generals and federal prosecutors across multiple states: NY, Virgnia, DC, Manhattan, and I assume more.
- It has also been shared with investigations inside the FBI, the CIA and Congress.
- People who hoped this would put a final end to every investigation will be disappointed. This was one investigation tasked with feeding information to everyone else. This wasn't one investigation to rule them all and in the darkness bind them.

tl;dr: Supposedly, nothing actually changes at the moment. Their job was to feed info to People, they're done feeding info, but People aren't done working.
tl;dr2: People won't be reasonable or patient. This will turn into a giant mess. Better disconnect while this settles down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Not that I really care because it's not my country, but I can't help things are getting a little odd across the pond. Like weather or not I agree with it, I can understand why you would want to ban guns, but I think this might be a tad absurd.

9lkqbtxitpn21.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Absolute free speech can't exist. True freedom of speech would require a lack of a consequences, which of course can't exist, but I really hate how the internet responds to someone using their free speech. I don't mind people responding negatively to whatever opinion people have, but it bugs the shit out of me how often the first thing people do is go after people's jobs.

"REEEEEE that guy said something bad about muslims/women/my dog.... everyone group together and contact this guys employer so he gets fired and can't support himself. I'm sure that'll fix his wrongthink".

It's a modern, legal version of murder. You can't murder someone, but the next best thing is taking away their ability to support themselves and their family. I wish nothing but the worst for people who do this. The next mass shooters should point their guns towards them. Good thing I'm self employed or I'm sure saying that would have a few people calling my employer....
 
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Top