mcantelon

>This pales in comparison to the actual problem, climate change

Seems a bit ideological to label climate change as "the actual problem" when 24 arsonists were caught, over the season, deliberately starting forest fires. Forest fires aren't a new thing but people deliberately starting them seems to be.

Relying on any one source of info is probably a bad idea. Getting news from multiple outlets with multiple slants is a more robust approach.

Celebrities actually do have influence, horrifying as that is.

The mainstream media can push conspiracy theories, such as Russiagate, until the cows come home but people are generally fine with that. During Russiagate numerous establishment outlets pushed blatantly false stories, such as Buzzfeed's story, refuted pretty much immediately by Mueller, about Trump supposedly directing Michael Cohen to lie to Congress and the Guardian's story about Manafort allegedly meeting with Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy (a meeting that likely never actually happened given there were no records of it at the embassy). Neither of these two example stories were retracted IIRC.

24 people being charged with arson, deliberately setting forest fires, during this season seems like a lot.

Insane people/outrage feeders will only be tolerated if they serve an establishment agenda.

When clicking on this I assumed it would be about pervasive surveillance, but seems like it's yet another article about how it's a bummer that social media provides an alternative to establishment media.

An ethos that can be used to justify anything, given sufficiently crafted and amplified rhetoric.

Ideologues often don't that care much about being professional or reasonable.

People should definitely take a stand against something that they were previously okay with when another administration was in power.

I've got a old-ish smart Samsung and I've never configured the Internet, but can still plug USB keys to it and play movies, etc. Newer TVs might insist on an Internet connection, though, to use any "smart" features.

Gut bacteria IIRC effect personality/mood as well as other things.

The word "meaningless" is defined as "lacking any significance". The claim that data lacks any significance until someone extracts meaning from it seems most useful, apart from philosophical discussions, as a rhetorical attempt to make data secondary to interpretation and ergo something that can be waved away by belief systems.

Seems like it's Forbes that's doing that, not IA.

Good rhetoric to have on speed dial when encountering data that contradicts one's beliefs.

You can both insulate shipping containers and cut windows into them.

>But also, yes, I think it's not unreasonable to expect that people might show more outrage for murders than for property damage, even if they disagree with both.

I never mentioned property damage. Antifa's violence isn't "property damage". This is the kind of thing I'm talking about: bad faith straw manning to justify ignoring violence by leftists.

If so, why are many people hesitant to condemn the left wing extremism that does exist? Does right wing extremism somehow justify left wing extremism?

> The first was at most in anti-govt groups, which were clearly not left.

You don't need to be associated with a group to be an individual extremist deciding to advance a movement. The shooter's photographed doing a black power salute. The black power movement isn't right wing.

https://heavy.com/news/2016/07/micah-xavier-x-johnson-dallas...

While there may certainly be more extremists on the right the idea that someone on the left can't be an extremist, or that there are no leftist extremists, doesn't make much sense.

Why do many people use "whataboutism" to wave away double standards?

>When reporters discover the people behind pseudonymous lobbying fronts, they don't report only the pseudonyms to protect the real identities involved

Apples and oranges are different, yes. A private individual communicating independently is a much different thing than a lobbying front.

>Isn't this just Reddit's weird norms leaking into the real world?

It could be that online culture might know a thing or two about the downsides of exposing people's identities, especially when done by journalists with large audiences.

>Or is it just the case that, as one friend said on Slack, "doxxing is when someone you don't like posts information about someone you do like"?

Do some people have double standards about doxing? Sure. Double standards are pretty common in general.

They can report on people using pseudonyms by referring to the pseudonym. This is done all the time when referring to tweets, etc. And, yes, people certainly exist who get offended and decide to harass/threaten others as a result. There's no real downside to making it harder for people to do so.

I'd say it's pretty reasonable to condemn two ways of exposing people to possible harassment and violence.

You're asking what one form of doxing has to do with another? Well... they're both forms of doxing. You seem to arbitrarily consider one form a problem, but not the other.

Does the data show that left wing extremism should be ignored because there's not as much or it's lower intensity? Why do many people seem to have a hard time condemning political violence in all forms and by all parties?

Islamism seems to still be the number one source of terrorism fatalities:

https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/wha...

So you think it's okay to connect a pseudonym to a real identity, but not a real identity to a physical address?

True, but seems doxing fits better conceptually into "harassment" than "violence".

Exposing the real names of anonymous/pseudoanonymous people, regardless of whether it's hard to find out (given that many people suck at opsec), is probably the most common scenario people refer to when using the word "doxing".

"researching and broadcasting private or identifying information (especially personally identifying information) about an individual or organization"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing

And a left wing extremist problem, given the recent Antifa beating of journalist Andy Ngo and, fortunately unsuccessful, attempt by Antifa to ignite a large propane tank next to a migrant center.