dbasedweeb

Conflating legality with morality is silly.

Are you aware/against those forms of slavery/torture?

Yes, because there are some moral absolutes, which is why you retreated from a moral argument into a legal one.

No offense, but this feels like a “99%” and “most” that is something less than rigorous. I don’t think sound arguments for or against GDPR can come from the “Ah Reckon” space. Throwing out made-up numbers that just represent personal assumptions and anecdote is an impediment to real discussion of these issues.

I’d add that GDPR explicitly forbids just the kind of “press yes to forfeit all of your rights” crap we’ve seen before. I realize that some sites are still trying to get away with it, it it’s non-compliant.

If easy competition is being paid for through shady practices, then it should never have been that easy. It’s a no-brainer that a large, established business has certain advantages over up-and-comers; GDPR didn’t make that the case either. It’s easier for a large, rich company to do almost anything, including respecting our privacy as enforced by regulation or law.

Why ruin a good post with that last, grossly inappropriate line?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2018/05/29/rosean...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/arts/television/twitter-p...

Just a list of mad shit from her: https://www.buzzfeed.com/marcusjones/roseanne-barr-tweets-th...

Voat has fulminating hate boners and tumbleweeds, and literally nothing else.

https://voat.co/v/gardening

Jesus that’s dead. Meanwhile if you want to hear some skinhead rant, that’s plenty active. Accept what you want, but I’m not interested in the internet equivalent of a Klan rally or a skinhead bar. I’ll go to the reputable establishment down the street that 86’s violent drunks, because loud, violent assholes make for a lousy social experience. You can enjoy a post every month or so in Gardening on Voat, because “freedom”.

Is this not the greatest keyboard ever?! I only wish I could magically hook it up to my tablets as well, but even tethered to my workstation it’s the best thing since sliced bread.

For now all of the benefits are hypothetical, and some people think they’re feeling the pain, so we’re at the peak of a whining asymptote. This is buoyed by the fact that some people resent regulations on ideological grounds, and others resent anything that in any way restrains their freedom to “hustle” by screwing over people for money.

So again, we can talk about what we think people want, their declared preferences and ideologies, or we can just look at what they do. The revealed preferences of a significant majority is to be free of trolls and shit stirrers, unless they’re trying to troll or stir shit themselves, then suddenly they’re 1st amendment activists.

I didn’t make a claim, you did, then flipped it around and made one for me. ;)

Seriously, if you don’t know what something means, don’t use the the damned phrase.

“For insulting” “For wearing” are not thought crimes. A handy rule to detect a thought crime is this: unless someone was jailed just for thinking it wasn’t a thought crime.

Please, actually read 1984.

Thought crime = the thought itself is a crime, i.e. simply having the thought. Expression is a totally separate thing, and using “thought crime” this way is just announcing that you didn’t actually read 1984.

Governments aren't crawling into people's heads just yet, but they are certainly willing to criminalize the communication of thought.

No shit. Communication has been subject to government intervention and overreach since th dawn of recorded history. The 1st Ammendment in the US was created for a reason.

Nobody cares.

That’s a hell of a claim, I’d love to see some serious citations on it.

There’s an ocean of content, but most of what’s actually born online is an aggressive waste time, designed to maximize engagement and nothing else. There are 10 minute+ YouTube videos on topics that could be better encapsulated in a paragraph of the written word, but of course it’s easier to monetize the video. The pervasive online business model is industrial scale invasion of privacy, news media is teetering, blogging is suffering, forums are mostly dead.

A majority of the population visits a handful of sites like Facebook and Google, the latter of which wants to subvert email. Brandolini’s law rules, and has been turbocharged with the power of a thousand retweets and a million echo chambers. White supremacists and all other manner of kooky fucks finally have the global audience they’ve always dreamed of. Twitter and other platforms have fueled an outrage culture with the soul of a jackal and the attention span of a gnat.

I do like streaming content, but it seems like a bad trade off.

Oh yeah, and we have the security disaster that is the IoT and resulting bothers.

My personal guess is that in some fields expertise is ultimately self-justifying. What is art after all? Whatever notable artists and critics and dealers say it is. Try that same shit in software, and you’ll lose your job. At some point the artistic type can be so thoroughly cut off from challenge to their beliefs that they feel free to impose them on society without much reflection.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy#Arrest_and_first_t...