Whoop tee doo. I've seen dozens of livestreamed murders on Instagram Live and Facebook Live. Reddit has /r/chiraqology where there are hundreds of videos of gang bangers and drill rappers beefing with each other and shooting at each other, and commenters celebrate the lifestyle and keep detailed ontologies of it all.
Nobody is talking about nuking any of these platforms from existence just because of some isolated illegal incidents.
Reddit nukes hate subs weekly. They're slow to get to it, but they do it. As far as Facebook live and Instagram live, those platforms weren't made with the sole purpose of harassing and doxxing people. Neither is reddit. When they find communities that promote those things they do take them down. Their moderation is slow and overwhelmed, but don't pretend Facebook encourages murders on live streams. KiwiFarms does encourage everything that happens on it.
If you're going to take a strawman this far, blame the cellphone and camera manufacturers involved in those live streams. As well as the landlord who owned the building it happened in. And any restaurants that serve them, can't murder if you don't eat.
Wrong, Reddit explicitly allows hate speech against white people because it follows the nouveau definition of "racism" not including whites. There's a Reddit admin response to repeated requests to ban /r/FragileWhiteRedditor somewhere that outlines this.
> KiwiFarms does encourage everything that happens on it
Wrong. The admin, Null, has explicitly said they don't allow doxxing or swatting and complies with law enforcement
> If you're going to take a strawman this far, blame the cellphone and camera manufacturers involved in those live streams. As well as the landlord who owned the building it happened in. And any restaurants that serve them, can't murder if you don't eat.
That's cute but what you're describing as absurd is basically what Keffals et al are doing with this website by hounding every service they tangentially use to get them banned. If they could make the site operator unbankable or unable to receive postal mail it's pretty obvious they gladly would
They nuke hate subs selectively. There are plenty of hate subs they leave online routinely and don't nuke.
Heck, there are plenty of anecdotes showing they bias towards keeping hate subs targeted at "majorities" alive, and have actively changed their ToS multiple times to discriminate between who they consider vulnerable.
Pussypassdenied is basically misogyny, fatlogic is fat hate, religiousfruitcake is full of Islamophobia and antisemitism, combatfootage is just videos of foreigners dying with vile bigotry filled comments(wouldn't be surprised if many of them were innocent). Reddit hardly does anything about the hate they host, honestly.
People talk about threatening reddit and pulling out advertising all the time. It's also why on a random basis that reddit goes around and wipes some communities off the map. Especially when they start showing up in other media.
The Chiraqology stuff is wild. People threaten each other on YouTube and then follow through with murder! The only reason it’s not banned is because nobody with power cares what happens to impoverished black kids in Chicago unless they can make money from it.
I doubt that banning the subreddit would stop the violence, all that would do is sweep the problem under the rug where it's easier for people in power to ignore.
The solutions put forth by the elected officials of Chicago and Illinois seem to fall into two general strategies; providing funding for anti-violence programs in Chicago, and lobbying for DOA legislation in Washington. Those outreach programs, such as Chicago CRED, READI Chicago and Metropolitan Peace Initiatives, have social science studies backing up their efficacy, but say they need more money to have a greater impact (Chicago's 2021 budget was $12.8 billion, with $16.5 million allocated to violence prevention.) They're very clear about needing more money to hire more social workers, but I can't find any statements from these organizations about the need for moderating reddit and youtube.
If Reddit were materialists to that degree then they wouldn't have banned popular gore subs.
It's more likely the sub taps into a vein of black culture that happens to be interwoven with some violence, and Reddit tolerates it because they don't want to be seen as trampling out anything to do with black culture.
Now if there were a sub dedicated to a popular genre of exclusively white musicians who occasionally livestream themselves murdering their white "opps," Reddit would ban it in a heartbeat under their "glorifying violence" ToS policy
There are still plenty of subs for hating fat people, Muslims, Indians, etc. Reddit just doesn't care about most of its issues, unless a journalist writes about them and puts on the heat.
>Now if there were a sub dedicated to a popular genre of exclusively white musicians who occasionally livestream themselves murdering their white "opps," Reddit would ban it in a heartbeat under their "glorifying violence" ToS policy
Not the same, but combat footage is a popular sub that's basically just watching brown people get bombed.
> combat footage is a popular sub that's basically just watching brown people get bombed
That's a reeeeach. I've been subbed there since 2013 and there were also many contemporary posts of white Americans (because that's disproportionately who serves and dies in combat) and European service members being shot and blown up by IEDs and so forth in GWOT (although the votes and comments were more controversial).
The war in Donbas also yielded plenty of footage of white casualties. And now the latest Ukrainian conflict.
The most controversial time on the sub was when ISIS was at their peak and people were straight posting their propaganda (executions and so forth). That was all disallowed unless it was only traditional combat footage, preferably with nasheeds stripped out. If the sub was about enjoying brown death that carnage would've been allowed.
Twitter literally banned the sitting President of the United States, a Republican. Other Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene have had their accounts banned, while this has never happened to a Democrat. People were banned for questioning COVID (e.g. the lab leak hypothesis), banned for questioning the 2020 Presidential election's integrity (yet nobody was banned for speculating on Russian interference and calling Trump illegitimate in 2016), banned for misgendering or deadnaming transgenders. Conveniently all the wrongthink that fall squarely in opposition to progressive ideology.
I don't think anyone believes there's a secret conspiracy, it's more that the type of people who work in programming, and particularly for a Bay Area company like Twitter, tend to be very progressive. It's the same miasma that clouds the mainstream media, academia, and now most corporate PR.
So you give the example of Britain plundering India. Explain to me why Indians in America are the most successful ethnic group in the country then, at almost twice the median income of white people?
What is there to explain? I am not challenging the intelligence of one ethnicity over another, that seems to be your argument here.
My argument is that we tell countries in the Global South to use strategy B (free competition) to try to become ‘successful’ like us, when actually we ourselves used strategy A (infant industry protection and export subsidies) [1].
In other words, we give them advice we ourselves didn’t follow, and then blame them for not having ‘caught up’ and become ‘developed’.
The delivery mechanisms for rich cultural inheritances, and use of the best time-saving strategies, are increasingly made artificially scarce through a combination of (1) the money system, and (2) through the IP system (the Aaron Swartz Doc. is great on this). Silicon Valley is Silicon Valley because of the US Intellectual Property regime.
To understand this deeper, I'd implore you to check out the work of Guy Standing [2]:
"…today, a tiny minority of people and corporate interests across the world are accumulating vast wealth and power from rental income, not only from housing and land but from a range of other assets, natural and created. ‘Rentiers’ of all kinds are in unparalleled ascendancy and the neo-liberal state is only too keen to oblige their greed.
Rentiers derive income from ownership, possession or control of assets that are scarce or artificially made scarce. Most familiar is rental income from land, property, mineral exploitation or financial investments, but other sources have grown too. They include the income lenders gain from debt interest; income from ownership of ‘intellectual property’ (such as patents, copyright, brands and trademarks); capital gains on investments; ‘above normal’ company profits (when a firm has a dominant market position that allows it to charge high prices or dictate terms); income from government subsidies; and income of financial and other intermediaries derived from third-party transactions."
The reviewer of Chang’s book then goes on to write:
"Rather than a “free market,” the neoliberal global economy praised as “free trade” by policy wonks is actually “a global framework of institutions and regulations that enable elites to maximise their rental income.”
Standing says 31% of Western corporate profits today, as opposed to 17% in 1999, are in industries where profits are rents on artificial scarcities like patents, copyrights and trademarks enforced under the neoliberal treaty regime established in the ’90s. To take one example, Apple — thanks to patents, copyrights and trademarks — runs a 40% gross profit on the iPhone. Two-thirds of drug research is funded by taxpayers, while patents add $140 billion to the annual price of drugs in the United States.
And Standing makes short work of the propaganda myth in favor of so-called “intellectual property”; rather than being a reward for innovation, the main actual purpose of patents is to prevent others from innovating. This is especially egregious, considering that most of the new technologies and products under patent were developed with heavy taxpayer R&D subsidies, and then enclosed for private profit.
Alongside rents on the artificial scarcity of ideas, the state provides enormous rents to the propertied classes through the enclosure of land and natural resource commons, dating back to the enclosure of peasant land in early modern Europe, the engrossment of land (both vacant and native-occupied) in settler societies like America and Australia, the hacienda system in Latin America, the nullification of peasant land rights by colonial powers in Asia and Africa, and the looting of oil and mineral resources. Property claims to all these forms of looted land and resources have persisted in the hands of Western capital under neocolonialism, and one of the main functions of the state is to enforce such titles — in the name of “defending private property rights” — against attempts at reclamation by their rightful owners.”
[1] Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective by Ha-Joon Chang (2002)
If I were to use a VPN I'd stick with providers with proven track records of responding to court orders with empty logs, not the company with a CEO who capriciously kicks sites off their platform in response to online mobs.
I'd also feel very uneasy with continuing to feed the consolidation of the internet's traffic. Giving full control of your phone's routing to Cloudflare is sold as improving performance, but what it also does is give Cloudflare a lot of flexibility to pay less in transit costs and have a stronger position for peering agreements. Today that might be good in preventing ISP shakedowns, but very bad tomorrow if ISPs have to pay Cloudflare for the privilege of accessing the majority of the internet.
This is funny to me because CF's previous reputation was that they'd do business with anyone no matter how scummy. They're notorious for selling to both sides when criminal gangs were DDoS'ing each other. But they terminate service for a grand total of two sites and suddenly they're "capricious".
As far as I know, CloudFlare are still willing to provide service to all of the DDoS services that let anyone with a few dollars knock any company which doesn't buy from CloudFlare off the internet. They just don't have the excuse that they're doing it out of some kind of belief in free speech anymore.
Sorry but when it comes to VPN providers you have to have a pristine track record, not a couple whoopsies here and there. And I doubt that grand total is going to stay stuck at two when they're hiring Antifa supporters/members.
Nobody is talking about nuking any of these platforms from existence just because of some isolated illegal incidents.