Peter Thiel Calls Google 'Treasonous' and Says CIA Should Investigate
gizmodo.com
gizmodo.com
The disagreement here seems to concern appearances atop that.
Or merely competitive rivalry, in the dystopia engineering business.
Too bad, he could have spelled out in what way Google are helping the Chinese military.
Google denied these reports.
The same concerns he has about Google, anyone else can have about Planatir.
Pot-kettle-black. I wonder if some spook ripped off his software or said mean things about his mom or something.
There's a lot in this speech.
These days it is impossible to find straight news without a sanctioned political and social narrative.
No country for old men.
EDIT: The word "regime" has negative connotation meant to convey oppression and tyranny. To call the present Amercian administration a "regime" is a slap in the face to hundreds of millions of human beings who have suffered under a true regime.
Go to your local retirement home and speak to someone who has lived through those times. Words like that should not be casually thrown about.
In what way, in actual policy not twitter ranting.
What actual new policy or law...
Unfortunately, we are in a race to the bottom with what people say in this new social media/Twitter world.
I always love when the Authoritarian Left attempts to use the dictionary to defend themselves, it clearly proves you have lost the narrative
I think all individuals should be treated exactly the same by governments. That is a Libertarian position
Authoritarians want the government to treat people differently to achieve some perceived and subjective equal outcome at the other end. Taxing some people more than others, giving some people rights and privileges that others can not have, etc. That is not equality that is equity
Personally, I'd like all reference to religion removed from politics and government. I know a lot of people would be up in arms, but religion has no place in government. Practice whatever you want but don't push your beliefs on me or others.
Authoritarians do not believe in Individual rights, they believe in collective rights, they believe the "good of the community" or "society" should be more important than anyone individual. They believe governments have the ethical and moral right to impose rules and regulations upon society to achieve a subjective "good" like Universal Healthcare, Jobs for everyone, or some other utopian vision of the world. Never mind that history tells us when people set out to create a utopia is normally ends in suffering and death
Most Republicans are Libertarian to Authoritarian Right, Most Democrats before 2006 where also Libertarian to Authoritarian Right, Post 2016 they have shifted radically to the Authoritarian Left aka Communism, Socialism, etc
- “the Trump regime”. We use “regime” for the countries led by dictators who are not friends of USA, right? Since when Trump is a dictator?
- Mentioning Thiel’s comments about fat people, etc. How does it contribute to the main problem? It looks like another cheap manipulation - like “boo, see, Thiel is crazy!”
Also, it's not the general rule, most articles I see use 'administration'.
And I don't think it's the media who has a leftward bias, rather the Republican Party has moved way way out on the fringe. If you look globally, the average Democratic office holder would be a right wing politician in most other countries.
Leftward bias has been repeatedly demonstrated in the literature.
Your belief that there is no media bias may in fact be evidence of your own biases. This too is supported in the literature. I.e., there is evidence that media which confirms our beliefs is viewed as higher quality than that which disconfirms.
There has been a definite shift to the fringe. Both in the plutocratic direction, with the one-dollar-one-vote philosophy, and also in just a general nutcase direction (see the NRA).
[0] https://qz.com/1580091/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-how-far-left...
Fair point.
>Your opinion of a "sensible position" on "gun control" is almost certainly different from mine.
A sensible position can be anywhere on a broad spectrum. It does not include arming teachers and does not include selling guns to diagnosed mentally unstable people.
>I would take the perspective that people openly supporting socialism is a much further-leftward lurch than any thing on the right. [0]
I would have to disagree. I think for-profit prisons, money-is-speech, on-your-own healthcare are three examples of extreme individualism and anti-social-ism that it seems the Republicans are proud of.
>You also brand the NRA as "fringe" and as "general nutcases", which is again unfair. Your political opinion is not the single source of truth or the center of the political spectrum.
The NRA is fringe, it has recently been shown how it has been hijacked over the course of a decade or more by the Russians to sow discord and destabilize your country. That's why I chose to use such inflammatory words.
>Your implication here is that the right has become fringe, but the graph linked above shows otherwise.
This may be true, I honestly did not have time to read the whole article. I don't disagree that the left has a bunch of issues and idiotic positions, hyper-sensitivity and a general vicious lack of tolerance for momentary lapses in judgement being the main ones in my opinion.
I'm guessing your frame of reference is left-of-center; mine is somewhat right. There is no "one true anchor" for who is where, so the best thing I can think to do is use the general center of American politics when we discuss America. I'd take many positions you'd generally disagree with, but others would call them sensible. Other opinions of mine are not generally regarded as sensible by most, and that's fine too.
> The NRA is fringe... it has been hijacked... by the Russians
The NRA operates with the approval of many Americans. I wouldn't call it's positions fringe, though the organization certainly has its failings. At some point, the Russians supported the election of a president; it's hard to call a figure such as that fringe. I'm not sure an endorsement by the Russians should damn and organization or person; the same thing is now happening to Tulsi Gabbard (non-interventionist policy is amenable to the Russians).
> This may be true, I honestly did not have time to read the whole article. I don't disagree that the left has a bunch of issues and idiotic positions, hyper-sensitivity and a general vicious lack of tolerance for momentary lapses in judgement being the main ones in my opinion.
Fair enough. The important part is the box-plot graph mid-way through the article, which shows a huge leftward lurch in the past few years. I would have linked directly, but the page overlays text on an image so it can't be linked.
No, it hasn't, and if it had, the Right wouldn't keep spinning findings of a predominance of Democratic Party membership among media employees as if it were the same thing as a finding of leftward bias.
This was a 2 minute search of Google Scholar:
^1 "...the mainstream press in America operate within a narrow range of liberal beliefs... only a narrow band of liberal thought is supported by the press"
^2 "Our results show a strong liberal bias"
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jim_Kuypers/publication...
[2] https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/120/4/1191/192...
Unfortunately, there is no more compromise in today's world. People just want to win because even giving up even a small amount of ground to an opponent is considered a complete failure.
This, of course, begs the question: how do you fix it? I don't know.
That's seems to be a sign of either extremely limited reading (biased to left-wing sources out of the mainstream) or extremely selective memory (rejecting or inventing facts to fit a right-wing narrative).
While both “Obama regime” and “Trump regime” seem to be used mostly originally by outside-the-mainstream media (the right and left fringes, respectively), the uses of the latter don’t even seem to get quoted much in mainstream sources, while the former (though not particularly frequently) do, at least from reviewing and, in the case of mainstream results, reading through results from the obvious phrase searches on Google News.
Gizmodo is a left-wing outlet so this kind of snark is to be expected.
If someone were to call the current American government a regime then they're likely dog whistling[0] and it reflects the editorial slant of the writer and/or the publication. But it's worth keeping in mind that Gizmodo is just another tech blog and, having worked for one before, I can say that the focus is on churning out more clickbait crap rather than producing anything with substance. The person who wrote it probably has no real understanding of journalism and doesn't understand the implications of the words chosen - they got the job just because they have some half-decent level of grammar. And the editor who approved it probably focused more on the title than the content. So don't think too much about it.
I guess only when it's to their own advantage.
No offense, but has Thiel completely lost it? He's starting to sound deranged. Is he seriously suggesting civilian Google employees should be interrogated by three letter agencies to institute some sort of state capitalism in the US? For all the scaremongering about China he doesn't seem to have a lot of problems with applying their methods
in the future I could see some tech companies being considered CNI requiring security vetting - for senior / sensitive jobs.
Which of course would suck for those who came in via h1b and of course Mr Thiel who is a first gen immigrant would have a hard time passing DV / TS clearance.
95 - 99 % of the time when people refer to political correctness its because they are objecting to the changes in modern society they object to or that it challenges the prejudices they grew up with.