SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[BloodOmen]

 

[Embattle]

Seems like Viktor Orban and Putin have gained another European friend:

Giorgia Meloni: Italy's far-right wins election and vows to govern for all

Giorgia Meloni is set to lead a right-wing coalition as Italy's first female PM.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Raven]

Prawn cocktail flavour quavers are a thing again. My life is complete.

 

[Scouse]

Labour being labour - from the politics thread:

Rapid action needed on online hate, say Angela Rayner and Sadiq Khan

Labour deputy and London mayor call for ministers to push ahead with online harms bill

www.theguardian.com

Rayner told the audience that such was the abuse she faced that she almost never read online comments or tweets, generally only doing so if her staff found one that was potentially criminal and she needed to read it to give police a victim impact statement

If her victim statement reads anything other than "I didn't read it as I have staff to read stuff for me - so I wasn't harmed" then surely that's fraud?

 

[dysfunction]

Labour being labour - from the politics thread:

Rapid action needed on online hate, say Angela Rayner and Sadiq Khan

Labour deputy and London mayor call for ministers to push ahead with online harms bill

www.theguardian.com

If her victim statement reads anything other than "I didn't read it as I have staff to read stuff for me - so I wasn't harmed" then surely that's fraud?

if money is being stolen from your bank and you don't notice doesnt mean it's ok

 

[Scouse]

if money is being stolen from your bank and you don't notice doesnt mean it's ok

False equivalence. You're harmed whether you know about your money being stolen or not.

But if someone calls you a cunt and you don't know anything about - how does that hurt your feelings?

You're not a fucking victim if nothing has happened to you. This is exactly about bashing people who say things Labour doesn't like - "we don't like what you say, so we're going to ensure we have a legal mechanism to ensure you get punished if you ever say it, even if nobody got hurt".


Edit: But I'm glad cold hard cash and reams of police time is being taken up pursuing this kind of crime, rather than crime where there are actual victims.

 

[dysfunction]

False equivalence. You're harmed whether you know about your money being stolen or not.

But if someone calls you a cunt and you don't know anything about - how does that hurt your feelings?

You're not a fucking victim if nothing has happened to you. This is exactly about bashing people who say things Labour doesn't like - "we don't like what you say, so we're going to ensure we have a legal mechanism to ensure you get punished if you ever say it, even if nobody got hurt".


Edit: But I'm glad cold hard cash and reams of police time is being taken up pursuing this kind of crime, rather than crime where there are actual victims.

So you think online hate speech should be ignored?
As you dont have to read it....

Of course nevermind the people who have committed suicide due to online bullying

 

[Raven]

Does a tree make a sound when it falls, if there is nobody around to hear it?

 

[Scouse]

So you think online hate speech should be ignored?

Why not answer some of the questions I've posed, rather than just asking some more?

Where's the victim of a crime, if there's no victim?

To go further than you though - it's a question of priorities and cash. In a finite cash world, police don't turn up if your house has been burgled. If someone comes into your house, steals your shit, makes you feel unsafe in your own home. There's a real victim of a real crime with long-lasting consequences right there.

But the police don't turn up. Some of their resources are being pivotted to chasing down people shit-talking on social media accounts that are monitored by staff, and they have to process "victim statements" from victims that never even read the comments in the first place.

In a finite-resource world - where should we be placing our efforts @dysfunction?


This is why people hate Labour. It's full of wankers who don't have their heads on right. It's like the Kyle's mom thing - "horrific violence is OK, as long as we prosecute people with potty mouths".

 

[Gwadien]

Why not answer some of the questions I've posed, rather than just asking some more?

Where's the victim of a crime, if there's no victim?

To go further than you though - it's a question of priorities and cash. In a finite cash world, police don't turn up if your house has been burgled. If someone comes into your house, steals your shit, makes you feel unsafe in your own home. There's a real victim of a real crime with long-lasting consequences right there.

But the police don't turn up. Some of their resources are being pivotted to chasing down people shit-talking on social media accounts that are monitored by staff, and they have to process "victim statements" from victims that never even read the comments in the first place.

In a finite-resource world - where should we be placing our efforts @dysfunction?


This is why people hate Labour. It's full of wankers who don't have their heads on right. It's like the Kyle's mom thing - "horrific violence is OK, as long as we prosecute people with potty mouths".

Police resources are stretched because of dealing with 'internet hate?'

lol, come on, that's bullshit and you know it, the Police are stretched because of underfunding and excesses of paperwork, think about it logically; there's barely any admin involved in something that's online because it's already logged.

And that isn't the reason why people don't vote for Labour, it's because people think they're left wing loonies that only care about transgenderisms.

 

[Scouse]

And that isn't the reason why people don't vote for Labour, it's because people think they're left wing loonies that only care about transgenderisms.

Police resources are stretched, period. And some of that is because we're focussing on this sort of wank. "Internet hate". Get off fucking twitter then you cunt - there's people getting assaulted, people getting raped, people being burgled - victims of real life crime, in the non-virtual world.

Yet yes, loonie labour lefties do care about transgenderisms, about online hate, about what people say even when they've not read those words themselves. Their fucking righteous anger is diverting resources away from more pressing needs.

So yes. In the absence of proper funding - either sack or repurpose the police dealing with "online hate" - and get them solving burglary, get them solving violent attacks, get them to help solve drug problems, racism and intimidation in the real world.


I'm dreading Labour coming in - not because they'll get the economy wrong (they (largely) won't). But because they come with a load of idiotic moralising bullshit that paints everyone as a victim and takes agency from the individual with incredibly well-meaning but utterly fucking retarded legislation which has consequences that are obvious to anyone with a couple of brain cells to rub together. I really really hate them for that.

But they'll probably make it illegal to be ideologically opposed to them at some point (even if you agree with their basic thrust).

I've said it before. If Labour focussed on the important things - and left the social realm alone - they'd have no problem staying in power.

 

[dysfunction]

Why not answer some of the questions I've posed, rather than just asking some more?

Where's the victim of a crime, if there's no victim?

To go further than you though - it's a question of priorities and cash. In a finite cash world, police don't turn up if your house has been burgled. If someone comes into your house, steals your shit, makes you feel unsafe in your own home. There's a real victim of a real crime with long-lasting consequences right there.

But the police don't turn up. Some of their resources are being pivotted to chasing down people shit-talking on social media accounts that are monitored by staff, and they have to process "victim statements" from victims that never even read the comments in the first place.

In a finite-resource world - where should we be placing our efforts @dysfunction?


This is why people hate Labour. It's full of wankers who don't have their heads on right. It's like the Kyle's mom thing - "horrific violence is OK, as long as we prosecute people with potty mouths".

Well if the Police (and other public services) were better funded they probably could tackle more than 1 thing at a time.
But yes there should be a priority of resources and probably is which is why people being burgled are not getting a response as the police are dealing with murders and other more serious crimes instead.

Online abuse shouldnt be tolerated either. And it's not victimless.

Khan said his office had reported 100 of the most offensive tweets about him to Twitter, with only four taken down.

That's not acceptable. Imagine if that was in person getting hundreds of abusive speech hurled at you. It will have a mental effect on you

And Rayner only reported things that were potentially criminal. So you know...do you not think people should be reporting things that could be a crime in progress?

I think you've taken this and made a mountain out of a molehill

 

[Scouse]

Well if the Police (and other public services) were better funded they probably could tackle more than 1 thing at a time.

But they're not, they never have been under any government, and it's not ever going to be.

But yes there should be a priority of resources and probably is which is why people being burgled are not getting a response as the police are dealing with murders and other more serious crimes instead.

This whole conversation is about the fact that a Labour politician, who doesn't reads tweet, engages police time when her staff points stuff out to her - so she fills out "victim statements".

It's the very definition of a) a victimless crime and b) burning up resources that could be used to deal with murders and other more serious crimes.

That's the reality Dys.

Online abuse shouldnt be tolerated either. And it's not victimless.

Clearly in this case it is. And it's easily dealt with - turn your fucking twitter account off. If it's a choice between policing that (impossible) or policing actual physical crime in the actual real world then choose the fucking real crime.

Imagine if that was in person getting hundreds of abusive speech hurled at you. It will have a mental effect on you

And if that mental effect isn't to turn fucking twitter off, and campaign for the police to capture rapists and violent offenders then you're a twat.

And Rayner only reported things that were potentially criminal. So you know...do you not think people should be reporting things that could be a crime in progress?

Finite resources? Can you not keep a concept in your head?

It's EITHER <fix wankers on the internet> OR <more resources for violent offenders>.

Which is it?

I think you've taken this and made a mountain out of a molehill

I think I've pointed out a process that burns up public money and police time by a professionally offended Labour politician - she's literally got staff to monitor when people say naughty things and then cries to the po-po. She's making herself a "victim" because she doesn't like people saying naughty things on the internet.

The focus on this sort of shit, at the expense of important stuff, is part of the reason why Tories get in all the fucking time.

 

[dysfunction]

But they're not, they never have been under any government, and it's not ever going to be.



This whole conversation is about the fact that a Labour politician, who doesn't reads tweet, engages police time when her staff points stuff out to her - so she fills out "victim statements".

It's the very definition of a) a victimless crime and b) burning up resources that could be used to deal with murders and other more serious crimes.

That's the reality Dys.


Clearly in this case it is. And it's easily dealt with - turn your fucking twitter account off. If it's a choice between policing that (impossible) or policing actual physical crime in the actual real world then choose the fucking real crime.


And if that mental effect isn't to turn fucking twitter off, and campaign for the police to capture rapists and violent offenders then you're a twat.



Finite resources? Can you not keep a concept in your head?

It's EITHER <fix wankers on the internet> OR <more resources for violent offenders>.

Which is it?


I think I've pointed out a process that burns up public money and police time by a professionally offended Labour politician - she's literally got staff to monitor when people say naughty things and then cries to the po-po. She's making herself a "victim" because she doesn't like people saying naughty things on the internet.

The focus on this sort of shit, at the expense of important stuff, is part of the reason why Tories get in all the fucking time.

Molly Russell: Instagram posts seen by teen were safe, Meta says

The 14-year-old girl viewed material about self-harm and suicide before she took her own life.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Scouse]

Other stuff that's off-topic (but if you *really* want to talk about it we can)

Not talking about that Dys. We're talking about Labour politicians who've not seen any bad tweets reporting (as you said) 100 tweets to the police - that need following up on. These politicians are just pushing shit at the po-po and it's costing money, time and effort in a finite resource world. You can't escape that fact.


But, if I must: As for Ms Russell - she was suicidal. Do you think if instagram took all the bad shit in the world down, she wouldn't have found something else to latch on to before offing herself? Did suicide not happen before social media?

Suicide rates from 1970 (their high) to present have remained relatively stable per 100,000 population. The advent of the internet hasn't seen some massive spike. (Men, of course, are massively more represented than women in suicide figures - women more represented in self-harm).

It's a complex thing, but "moral panic" over shit-talking on the internet, without actually looking at the evidence, is right up the Labour book of wanky shit that stops them getting elected.

There are much more important things to be focussing on. But unfortunately, Labour won't do that. It'll tie itself up in largley irrelevant wank rather than getting on with the job that they should be doing - running the economy, bringing real crime down, NOT mandating social ettiquette.

 

[Wij]

Thread:


View: https://twitter.com/BriannaWu/status/1574338690410844161

 

[Scouse]

Thread:


View: https://twitter.com/BriannaWu/status/1574338690410844161

Maybe a fair bit of this sort of stuff @Wij - and social media is really just a communication platform:

Fascism is a Reaction to Capitalist Crisis in the Stage of Imperialism: - Historical Materialism

A Response to Ugo Palheta By Ken Kawashima I want to thank Historical Materialism for allowing me to respond to Ugo Palheta’s article, ‘Fascism, Fascisation, Anti-Fascism’.1 In what follows, I would like to very schematically develop the meaning and implications of these three terms. On...

www.historicalmaterialism.org

Although, I'd argue "what has changed to make democracy weaker in the last 20 years": Thatcher & Regan and Laissez-faire trickle-down economics resulting in rampant never-before-seen inequality - and the assumption by the people that democracy isn't dealing with it (it isn't - but not because: democracy - but because there's not enough democracy).

 

[Wij]

Misinformation, paid for, is the biggest cause. Divisions are deliberately stoked. Inequality is not the main cause. Fascists love inequality. People vote for more inequality to make liberals cry.

 

[Scouse]

Misinformation, paid for, is the biggest cause.

Disagree. Don't get me wrong - absolutely it's a powerful mechanism - but all it does is supercharge shit that's happening anyway.

The rise of facism due to this stage of capitalism, and the mechanisms with which it works and manifests itself were predicted long before computing, never mind social media, was a thing.

Social media just greases the wheels. But they were turning anyway.

 

[Wij]

Disagree. Don't get me wrong - absolutely it's a powerful mechanism - but all it does is supercharge shit that's happening anyway.

The rise of facism due to this stage of capitalism, and the mechanisms with which it works and manifests itself were predicted long before computing, never mind social media, was a thing.

Social media just greases the wheels. But they were turning anyway.

Bollocks. People have always been able to be persuaded towards a them and us mentality and the need for strong leadership to kick the 'others' out. Even back in ancient times. It's not a capitalist thing. It's a human society thing.

This time round it's not the economic model that is driving it for most people. Incels are frustrated that they can't get laid and blame it all on feminists. Q supporters vote for Trump because they believe he is fighting paedophile lizards.

 

[Wij]

Subreddit Discriminates Against Anyone Who Doesn’t Call Texas Governor Greg Abbott ‘A Little Piss Baby’ To Highlight Absurdity Of Content Moderation Law

Last year, I tried to create a “test suite” of websites that any new internet regulation ought to be “tested” against. The idea was that regulators were so obsessively focus…

www.techdirt.com

 

[Scouse]

Bollocks.

250 million twitter users globally.

8 billion people - yet democracy in retreat across the globe, and right wing facism on the rise everywhere.

It ain't social media on it's own m8. There needs to be a disatisfaction to build on - and that's rising economic inequality.

 

[old.Osy]

Bollocks. People have always been able to be persuaded towards a them and us mentality and the need for strong leadership to kick the 'others' out. Even back in ancient times. It's not a capitalist thing. It's a human society thing.

This time round it's not the economic model that is driving it for most people. Incels are frustrated that they can't get laid and blame it all on feminists. Q supporters vote for Trump because they believe he is fighting paedophile lizards.

It'll be ok though. It'll all be ok... in the end.

 

[Wij]

250 million twitter users globally.

8 billion people - yet democracy in retreat across the globe, and right wing facism on the rise everywhere.

It ain't social media on it's own m8. There needs to be a disatisfaction to build on - and that's rising economic inequality.

The internet. Not just social media. Mass communication. Globally. Content produced anywhere and consumed anywhere. And gamed by people with an agenda to change the political mood. That is making a difference.

Rising income inequality isn’t what persuades wealthy business owners in their late 50s in Texas that Hillary Clinton eats babies.

 

[Scouse]

We've been over it before @Wij. The communication thing just lets people know that Hillary eats babies (she does, you know). We didn't know that before so we had shared delusions, driven by a smaller media footprint that was just as rabid.

Yes, there's absolutely that stuff at work - but it doesn't gain traction if people are settled, happy and comfortably off. The foundation is that people are having a shit time all over the place.

 

[BloodOmen]

So this happened awhile back, the Alec Baldwin thing where he shot someone on set due to a malfunctioning movie prop

Is it just me that thinks he shouldn't face any charges? movie studios employ gunsmiths to be on set for this exact reason, if a prop weapon malfunctions, thats down to the gunsmiths, not the actors. You could argue he shouldn't have pointed it at someone... but they were making a movie, whether it was the poor woman that died or someone while they were shooting a scene, that weapon was going to be pointed at someone and it was seemingly inevitable that someone was going to get hurt. I also see people arguing that he should have checked the gun first, he couldn't have though... for insurance purposes he was likely not allowed because he wasn't a qualified gunsmith... hence having the actual gunsmiths on hand.

Just seems to be me that people want their pound of Baldwin flesh because of him taking the piss out of Donald Trump on SNL

 

[Scouse]

400 people in UK diagnosed with preventable cancer every day, data shows

Experts say healthy lifestyle changes such as quitting smoking and eating more vegetables can lower risk

www.theguardian.com

40% of cancer avoidable, through:

• Eating healthy food (more veg)
• Cutting out ultra-processed food
• Drinking less
• Losing weight - maintaining a healthy weight (no such thing as healthy overweight)
• Doing more exercise
• Stay safe in the sun
• Breastfeed your kids

I wouldn't have bothered posting it - but 40% is a fuckload of avoidable cancer.

 

[Gwadien]

400 people in UK diagnosed with preventable cancer every day, data shows

Experts say healthy lifestyle changes such as quitting smoking and eating more vegetables can lower risk

www.theguardian.com

40% of cancer avoidable, through:

• Eating healthy food (more veg)
• Cutting out ultra-processed food
• Drinking less
• Losing weight - maintaining a healthy weight (no such thing as healthy overweight)
• Doing more exercise
• Stay safe in the sun
• Breastfeed your kids

I wouldn't have bothered posting it - but 40% is a fuckload of avoidable cancer.

I'm fairly sure pretty much everyone here is aware of this.

But yeah, preacher gonna preach.

 

[Scouse]

I'm fairly sure pretty much everyone here is aware of this.

But yeah, preacher gonna preach.

It was the 40% reduction I was struck by (and unaware of myself). 40%

That was newsworthy enough for the papers? Don't see your problem, unless touchy whiner gonna whine?

 

[Raven]

Any bike cunts have bike insurance? As of next week I will be commuting by bike, found a few for about £80 a year but anything I should look out for?