[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

 No.2[Reply]

File: 1559435267262.png (905.05 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Mayor,_Let's_get_galloping….png) ImgOps Google

Welcome to /townhall/! This is an anonymous-only board for debates, dialectics, and discussions of a serious nature.

As the topics discussed on this board may deal with sensitive or controversial subject matter, we expect a higher standard of conduct than elsewhere on the site, and will enforce the board's rules with a greater degree of strictness. Inability or unwillingness to follow the rules will result in a /townhall/-only ban.

 No.3

1) All posts in a given thread must contribute constructively to the conversation, whether agreeing or disagreeing. Off-topic, contentless, inflammatory, or hostile posts will be deleted and result in a ban.

1a) Derails that occur as a natural result of discussion progressing from the original subject will generally not be interfered with; however, if these hinder discussion of the original topic, making a new thread is preferred.

1b) Part of contributing constructively is understanding and addressing the reasoning behind an opposing view. While this can be a tedious task and will generally not be officially enforced, please make an effort to at the very least avoid "talking past" someone when presented with a counterargument. Simply doubling down on your initial point does not advance a discussion.

1c) Be as willing to "lose" as you are to "win", and above all else, be willing to learn and understand. You will not get the most out of this board if your only goal is to persuade, and you will not even be effective at that unless you understand what you are arguing against.


2) Ad hominems and other uncivil behavior will not be tolerated. You may have a significant personal stake in some subjects discussed here, and it is normal to be frustrated when someone cannot relate; however, lashing out is not an effective way to engender sympathy for your position, and will not advance the conversation in a constructive way. Even if you find someone's argument morally abhorrent, there are constructive ways to express this.

2a) Attempting to deliberately provoke an uncivil reaction is prohibited, even if it is done within the letter of the law.

2b) Snark and other forms of mockery are strongly discouraged and may result in warnings or bans.

2c) "Strawmanning" an "opponent" deliberately will be regarded as uncivil conduct and will be dealt with accordingly. This will not apply to genuine misunderstandings.


3) While we do not claim to be arbiters of absolute moral or empirical truth and aim to moderate this board in a fair and even-handed, politically agnostic manner, the following extreme positions are considered "off-limits" regardless of how they are put forward, including attempts to "hint" or dogwhistle:

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

 No.13363[Reply]

File: 1715197697756.png (237.87 KB, 779x720, 779:720, betta-2753067_960_720.png) ImgOps Google

https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/1038198/minors-suspected-of-gang-rape-of-14-year-old-girl-youngest-perpetrator-aged-11

So, a 14 year old girl is taken by her "boyfriend" to a secluded place and is repeatedly gangraped by a group of his friends, where ages go from 11 to 16.
The culprits recorded the rape and were bold enough to share videos over social media.

I have to wonder, what drives people to do this?
Why is it that young people are so eager to share or even rent out their girlfriend to their mates?
Or be so unabashed to share offensive material over social media?

I don't get young people anymore.

> image unrelated, because I don't want to put a silly image on this

 No.13364

That isn't anything new. People have been violent since the dawn of mankind

 No.13365

>>13363
>I don't get young people anymore.
I'm guessing the perps are Muslim immigrants from low-human-capital countries.  So I'd say it's not *young people* that you don't get, but rather young people *from a foreign culture* that is worse than European culture on the whole.

 No.12483[Reply]

File: 1693696732533.png (942.63 KB, 1280x853, 1280:853, large.png) ImgOps Google

Racial equality is assertion that racial differences are cosmetic and not substantive in terms one's abilities, character, or rights.  Is this general idea good, bad, or offensive in your opinion?  Is there any reason to try to be racially egalitarian (or I suppose to try to be less if your opinion is that racial equality is unwise)?
16 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.12520

>>12505
>If I'm a police officer in an urban location, finding out that local criminal groups, especially dangerous gangs, are arming themselves with this will mean that I'm at a far greater danger than otherwise.
Not really.  With a good IWB holster and baggy clothing, it's easy to conceal normal compact pistols and sometimes even full-size pistols.  Gang members arming themselves with only an Ideal Conceal pistol would probably put cops at *less* risk, due to the very low ammo capacity.

 No.12523

>>12520
>>12519
It really has to be asked whether the concealability of such a gun is that much better than your typical derringer.
They aren't especially large, and ultimately, that seems to be all these are.

 No.13362

File: 1715148529930.jpg (83.65 KB, 564x511, 564:511, Neco arc goku die.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Who the hell here is racist? I'm about to have to call up my homies to come down there and beat that ass and I'm gonna have to suck on that dick until you isn't racist. And don't call me gay. I ain't ever been gay.

 No.13304[Reply]

File: 1714563627650.png (281.5 KB, 1079x1152, 1079:1152, Screenshot_20240501-073240.png) ImgOps Google

What will come of the pro-Hamas agitators who are unlawfully harassing and intimidating Jewish students?
https://twitter.com/wanyeburkett/status/1785470499734319129
36 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13358

>>13357
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes#2023_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war

Every single entry here is "a gray zone"?

 No.13360

>>13358
Okay, looking at that, I see some allegations (not previously mentioned in this thread) that, if true, would be Israeli war crimes.

 No.13361

>>13360
Alrighty, that's fair enough then. Acknowledging that side of the conflict at least is all I'd wanted at least.

 No.11640[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

File: 1669604376674.jpeg (184.53 KB, 1080x1052, 270:263, FiZuEeBWYAE9CJe.jpeg) ImgOps Google

Is it true that woke propaganda is being pushed in public education? And if so, what should be done about it?  I would say that the morals taught in public school should be those that are widely supported by ordinary Americans.  Public schools shouldn't really endorse one side of a politically contentious issue.

I remember a decade or two ago, it was far-right Christian fundamentalists who were trying to prevent the teaching of science of human evolution in public schools.  Nowadays, i guess it's the woke far left.
118 posts and 35 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13353

File: 1715023023180.jpg (239.83 KB, 950x1404, 475:702, Harle and Starky.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>13352
I've never heard of someone being discriminated against due to apathy. That sounds counter productive for a lack of a better word. Greed can lead to discrimination of different classes; as can poverty.

>Like, opposition to disability accommodations can be rooted in devaluing disabled people as being a 'drain' on society (itself rooted in a narrow-minded evaluation of a person's value).
Are you suggesting that if someone owns an establishment and doesn't have disability accommodations that they have a discrimination against disabled people? I tend to disagree.

That said, as someone who is incredibly empathetic and compassionate; my heart does go out to the disabled and I think more places should be accommodating.

 No.13354

File: 1715027142179.jpg (332.27 KB, 1352x1235, 104:95, Screenshot_20210301-190906….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>13353

My point is that the view that disabled people are a drain and thus shouldn't be accommodated for is not rooted in hatred as much as it is greed because accommodations cost money. Granted, it's not a very intelligent position but it appeals to the instinct towards loss prevention and a short-sightedness towards what income they can make long-term by accommodating the disabled.

>>13353
>>>13352 (You)
>I've never heard of someone being discriminated against due to apathy. That sounds counter productive for a lack of a better word.


You're right, it is counterproductive, it's a narrow minded view.

Discrimination doesn't have to be tied to any specific emotions, it can be rooted in prejudice alone, in the sense of the etymology of the word, pre-judgement, judging without sufficient information, it doesn't have to involve any emotion what so ever, or even be concious.

Like if someone building a multi-level mall and not installing elevators alongside escalators because escalators alone is cheaper than elevators with escalators or even elevators alone. Effectively, that space discriminates against people who cannot physically use the escalators to access the shops on the second floor, probably one rooted in simple lack of consideration rather than flat out hatred of the disabled. This not only limits access to shopping, but potential employment too.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

 No.13359

File: 1715106073339.jpg (708.63 KB, 1075x1518, 1075:1518, Gurugarere.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>13354
Actually, I think I know exactly what is going on and why your message is muddled and confusing.

Here are two separate definition from Oxford:

[Discrimination: the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability.
"victims of racial discrimination"
Similar: prejudice, bias, bigotry, intolerance, narrow-mindedness
unfairness, inequity, favoritism, one-sidedness, chauvinism, partisanship, sexism, racism, racialism, anti-Semitism, heterosexism, ageism, classism, ableism, apartheid
Opposite: impartiality
2.
recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.
"discrimination between right and wrong"]

You are combining the two completely separate definitions into one. You are correct. You don't have to have emotional attachments to discriminate, however when we're talking about groups of people it is almost impossible not to attach some sort of feeling towards it. The first definition is tied to avoidance, aggression, or revulsion/disgust. The only time I can really think of where you wouldn't is if you are simply stating facts. (This weapon type is superior because it's stats are superior.)
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

 No.13130[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

File: 1713307188519.jpg (117.69 KB, 720x950, 72:95, Olivia.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

So when is it gonna end?
72 posts and 19 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13291

so, "woke" culture can mean different things 2 different ppl.

for some, liberalism. for others, necessary change. still others, a tiring, flawed, overly-promoted philosophy.

...but i don't think it means very much.

wat is there, afterall, but such?

consider the triangle, a gift from the Gods.

Let us learn, then. and together, we shall oak.

 No.13340

File: 1714947613916.jpeg (428.06 KB, 800x1067, 800:1067, Yuno gasai phone smile.jpeg) ImgOps Google

I think it's time people stopped talking about when it should end; and more so about how to stop it.

 No.13348

>>13340
If you want a serious answer, see:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/kristi-noem-suggests-bidens-dog-commander-killed-hers-rcna150789

 No.12719[Reply]

File: 1698829158349.jpg (20.37 KB, 305x165, 61:33, Spongebob.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

A lot of the debates on the Israeli-x-Palestine conflict that has recently flared up in a violent way has brought back old academic and popular culture debates on settlers, on colonialism, on the formation of nation-states, and on the idea of legitimacy in the creation of countries as legal entities.

A major issue is that of what makes a territory a "homeland". What makes an area an inherent place designed to be occupied by a certain race, certain religion, and certain ethnicity to the exclusion at worst or detriment at best of other categories of people. It's a sticky issue.

For example, "Palestine" as a territory is popularly thought of as a homeland for Muslim Arab peoples based on Islamic rule through Arabic culture that would either not have Christians, Jews, atheists, et al or would subject them to second-class citizen status in those lands.

In the U.S., the argument is made that this a white European based Christian nation made as a homeland for those peoples to which other groups (such as Muslims, or Black people, or transgender individuals who aren't Christian) are mere guests or such.

>What are your thoughts?

In my opinion, the concept of a "homeland" is not an ethically or legally viable one. Anybody living in a territory ought to have clear-cut civil rights such as the right to bear arms and freedom of speech regardless of their social group status w.r.t. their religion or whatever else. Nonetheless, I would call a "homeland" a practically and rationally viable concept. Historically, it can make sense to view a patch of land as having significant meaning to certain groups with that being given social respect that doesn't involve coercing anybody to do anything. For instance, the national parks associated with English colonial shipping in America ought to preserve educational information, such as protecting buildings for tourists, without this meaning that "being English" as an ethnicity is somehow targeted for political meaning.

P.S. I don't want to use a sad photo of Israelis or Palestinians being hurt or anything related as the OP, so have SpongeBob, I guess.
15 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.12774

I also think it's fucking stupid that other countries have to get involved.

Let nature take its course.

>>12773
It's from my immortal

 No.12788

>>12774
Yes, but I still like the other idea about Hagrid.

 No.13317

fyi i bombed farah last week
sucks to suck

 No.13270[Reply]

File: 1713791325228.png (510.77 KB, 1137x1919, 1137:1919, Grand_Duchy_of_Finland_Arm….png) ImgOps Google

Instead of annexing Finland into the Russian Empire, Alexander I of Russia organized Finland as an autonomous grand duchy and acted as its head of state.  This autonomy allowed Finnish culture and national identity to flourish despite being part of a larger empire.  Are there any lessons to be learned from this that are applicable to the modern world?
6 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13303

>>13301
I'm one of those weird people who actively enjoy talking about historical facts that happened before my parents were born. So, well, I don't care too much about hidden motivations.

W.r.t. Russia versus its neighbors, its interesting to note that Czar Alexander III deliberately avoided any major wars to the point that he's been known ever since as "The Peacemaker" (Russian: Миротворец, tr. Mirotvorets) and has the international title among historians as the "Tsar’-Mirotvorets".

For all the notions that warfare results in fame, that Czar's efforts at friendship with the French specifically resulted in the creation of the Pont Alexandre III, an ornate arch bridge spanning the Seine in Paris, which still stands today. This goes to show that intelligent moderation can also cause fame. At least, in some circumstances.

 No.13325

The Finns were handed over as spoils of war. Russia didn't care as much about the Finns ad people, and cared more about having a buffer zone between Sweden and important Russian cities. Russia had just surrendered to Napoleon and was brought under his influence, where Sweden was still an active belligerent against Napoleon.

Finland also absolutely was annexed. Being an autonomous ducky didn't mean fuck all when your Duke was the Emperor. The reason Finnish culture was allowed to exist is because the Tsars didn't care about them enough to try and Russify the area.

 No.13332

A reminder:

>

 No.13097[Reply]

File: 1712385402273.jpeg (213.47 KB, 1290x1218, 215:203, tr6ft0jfoosc1.jpeg) ImgOps Google

Do you ever think we're going to see a time where birth control will be banned?

I have to wonder how many people are currently in favor of it, together with porn lately there seems to be a vocal push to get rid of both.

(also divorce)

(twitter source for OP https://twitter.com/LizzieMarbach/status/1775882953790230666)
4 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13106

>>13104
The point, though, is not just whether it's popular with the masses, but whether action would be taken in spite of the "will" of the masses.

 No.13110

>>13104
>>13106
I'm not sure, despite my clear pessimism and previous comments, whether or not the current move to far right social and culture beliefs is sustainable or not.

This all could burst dramatically in a balloon type fashion. Like the end of the housing bubble. Or the end of the Cold War shaping the U.S. with the Soviets suddenly disappearing.

The more people are bluntly subject to simple questions about whether or not the government should literally throw women into prison if they're suspected of having abortions... I think the more people understand the consequences of Big Brother government the less they like it.

 No.13261

File: 1713766162793.jpg (80.8 KB, 602x715, 602:715, Yuno gasai licking knife.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Banning birth control is just another means for desperate women to attempt to trap a man. What they don't realize is that all this is going to do is leave a lot more single mothers across the population.

Thank God I don't ever give away my real information when I get laid by females.

 No.11384[Reply]

File: 1657410219582.jpg (89.7 KB, 845x466, 845:466, Homura-Akemi-Mahou-Shoujo-….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

What is your opinion on suicide?

Personally i think the only time it is condoneable is if you are suffering from a terminal illness that will cause you extreme pain before death over a long period or cause you to enter a vegetable state.

Outside of that there really is no excuse to be honest.  There is always solutions to any problem, be it financial, emotional or first world millenial, and honestly if your solution is just to throw away the one life you were gifted with, then you did'nt deserve to be born in the first place.

Which i suppose would have the same outcome for you but suicide generally causes harm or trouble for other people too, making it also selfish and also hypocritical if your reason was no one cared about you, because you obviously didnt care about the feelings of whoever has to clear up your mess after either.
10 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.11415

At least in the case of America, I feel like every suicide case is essentially a murder.

If we didn't have widespread pain, hatred, and misery in this country due to the average person abandoning basic human niceness and most people treating each other in public like insufferable douche-bags, then depressed individuals wouldn't live like statues being eaten away into lumps by acid rain, the gradual pain of living itself due to the abuse and harassment of others being so tough.

I've little clue how to actually make things better, though, other than countless individual small efforts to raise the sanity waterline.

I would argue that a lot of it does come from the top, though, and a country that moves from having icons such as Donald Trump to icons such as Fred Rogers is getting better.

 No.13129

File: 1713306889158.jpg (114.29 KB, 626x626, 1:1, gypsy.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Honestly, let it happen. Talk to someone if you care, but don't pull that guilt-trip BS. That's just selfish. Forcing someone to live in a world that they can't stand is one of the most cruel things you can do to someone.

I've had a friend who killed theirs self. I'm not mad at them. I'm sad, but I'm also glad they aren't suffering anymore.

 No.13255

File: 1713745535316.png (15.03 KB, 187x342, 187:342, akA0TRM.png) ImgOps Google

It's really terrible.

But everyone should be able to do what they want with their own body, even killing themselves.

 No.13108[Reply]

File: 1712875697593.jpg (148.41 KB, 1080x1286, 540:643, Screenshot_20240411_174648….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Is this the fundamental turning point? "One man, one vote, once"?
6 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13126

>>13125
I feel like that applies to this whole discussion, honestly.
I'm left scratching my head. Especially why I should care about a poll of twitter randos, at that.

 No.13127

I have to wonder what would happen if a bunch of states coming November just announce to not open any voting booths and just declare their pick (Trump or Biden) as the absolute winner?

Will the people take to the street to protest this?
Or will the average person just be very thankful they get to stay in bed and not care about the elections?

 No.13128

>>13127
Even if the state legislature uses some method other than popular vote to select its presidential electors, a popular vote would still be required to select representatives for the House of Representatives.  "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature."

The Constitution does not require a popular vote for presidential electors: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors...".  In the early days of the republic, some state legislatures did in fact directly select the state's presidential electors.

 No.13101[Reply]

File: 1712459756309.gif (175.06 KB, 200x151, 200:151, 200w.gif) ImgOps Google

This can be evaluated scientifically.

https://www.cspicenter.com/p/are-we-getting-dumber

The short answer is "no". That's because of the vague nature of the "we" being asked about. The situation very, very drastically varies based on country.

Thoughts?
9 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13117

File: 1712908079902.jpg (208.16 KB, 1021x1667, 1021:1667, bb8d124756bc414548ebe1abd8….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I kinda don't feel like reading a paper on intelligence from the guy writing "papers" on the IQ of Rick Sanchez or the scientific justification for incels. Certainly not on a eugenicist's personal slush fund posing as a "think tank".

Someone wanna give me the bullet points?

 No.13119

>>13115
>Most phenotypic traits can't be traced to just one gene
Yes, but how does that relate to my post?

 No.13121

File: 1712929179602.jpg (395.3 KB, 1080x1863, 40:69, Screenshot_20240412_083441….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>13117
I don't get what you're saying. Literally all you have to do is scroll down to the "in conclusion" tab and read four sentences. And that's it. That's really it.

I'm not being sarcastic. That's all.

As far as the political organization supporting the author does, I would care if the article had some obvious agenda in its findings like "clearly socialists and the general left have destroyed IQ progress". However, the study has the exact, black-and-white opposite result. As in, "nah, we're fine".

 No.13002[Reply]

File: 1709948228521.png (427.95 KB, 1080x880, 27:22, Screenshot_20240308-131354.png) ImgOps Google

Currently, about 2% of babies in the US are conceived via IVF.  IVF offers some advantages over traditional fertilization, including polygenic embryo selection (PES).  In the near future, gene editing tech might be used to correct multiple undesirable mutations, such as mutations that increase risk of cancer, heart disease, and diabetes.

Do you expect the percent of babies conceived via IVF to rise significantly this century to take advantage of this beneficial technology?  I predict that it will be used for a majority of babies within 100 years, assuming we don't get paperclipped by AI or suffer civilizational collapse.
6 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13096

But, seriously.

Is this one of the "smarter" reasons why people are getting on board the ban IVF train so much lately?

 No.13100

File: 1712429649740.jpg (291.42 KB, 2560x1595, 512:319, BRCA1_and_BRCA2_mutations_….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>13094
>That is to say that a "deliterious" gene can be adaptive in the right ecosystem or even be both adaptive and deleterious.
In some cases that's true, but other mutations are simply bad.  E.g., having two copies (homozygous) of the allele responsible for Tay-Sachs is definitely bad; it almost certainly results in a painful death during childhood.  But having exactly one copy of the allele (heterozygous) isn't harmful and some speculate that it is actually helpful and might be partially responsible for the higher average IQ of the Ashkenazim.  So polygenic embryo selection against homozygous Tay-Sachs alleles is definitely desirable.

As another example, BRCA mutations are very bad in expectation and are autosomal dominant.  Having one mutated allele greatly increase risk of certain cancers, and having two mutated alleles leads to death of the embryo in a majority of cases.   Polygenic embryo selection to avoid BRCA mutations are most likely a good thing.

>>13095
That paper is from before Roe v. Wade was overturned.  I suspect the dysgenic effects of banning abortion might invalidate the paper's conclusions.

 No.13111

A fundamental issue here too is that biological traits related to genetics vary dramatically from clearly positive things to clearly negative things to things with ludicrously ambiguous and complex things.

For example, being bisexual is regarded in modern Western countries for the most part as a bad thing even though in objective scientific terms there's absolutely no negative aspect of it whatsoever. A bi man or woman can have children and live life without any problems should culture and society allow them. There are also other aspects of personal identity such as hair color, skin color, breast size, eye color, and so on that for the most part appear to mean nothing in the sense of scientific value, even if men and women spend literal millions to enlarge chests as much as possible year by year and very obviously would shell out the same to kill off 'the A-Cup genes' if they ever get found.

It's such a metaphorical can of worms.

 No.13061[Reply]

File: 1710899238224.jpg (6.41 KB, 275x183, 275:183, Giant_reddit_icon_in_backg….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

The tech companies Reddit and YouTube must face a lawsuit filed by the survivors of a mass shooting in Buffalo inside of New York State given that the online organizations hosted media that the murder engaged with in order to pick out both the best firearms for the attack and also the best body armor to wear during it.

In general terms, I'm basically a free speech absolutist. However, explicitly giving somebody who says that he or she is going to commit real acts of violence your own best advice to help them do just that, particularly when it comes to something like buying the right pieces of body armor, appears to me personally to be so immoral that it ought to be clearly illegal. Similarly, I would think that somebody giving out tips about filming child pornography and how best to host it online has crossed an ethical line and should also get in trouble.

There's more at: https://www.npr.org/2024/03/19/1239478067/buffalo-shooting-reddit-youtube-lawsuit

Am I making a mistake? Could increased legal scrutiny of those two platforms have negative side-effects? It's almost goes without saying that increased online censorship causes unintended consequences.
8 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13085

>>13082
>The online platforms deliberately chose to organize themselves so that their framework hosts content that actively incites violence,
Did they, though?
Or did they just make a platform built to allow people, generally, to organize themselves, host content for whomever wishes to use it?

You're prescribing a motive that I do not believe exists. Especially considering this is Google of all things.
Nothing I've seen suggests that this system is inherently only good for one purpose, violence, as you seem to suggest with the pen analogy.

Google is not handing out grenades, here.
Platforms for content and means to organize are not grenades.
In fact, it falls under an umbrella the government can't regulate, as I understand it, thanks to freedom of association.

 No.13090

File: 1711338778086.jpeg (108.4 KB, 1080x1080, 1:1, FdInY1JWAAEo5gY.jpeg) ImgOps Google

>>13082
>content that actively incites violence
Do you have an example of that?  The incitement exception of the First Amendment is pretty narrow.  In particular, it only applies to incitement of imminent lawless action.  See Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio :
"""
Clarence Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan (KKK) leader in rural Ohio, contacted a reporter at a Cincinnati television station and invited him to cover a KKK rally that would take place in Hamilton County in the summer of 1964.[9] Portions of the rally were filmed, showing several men in robes and hoods, some carrying firearms, first burning a cross and then making speeches. One of the speeches made reference to the possibility of "revengeance" against "Niggers", "Jews", and those who supported them and also claimed that "our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court, continues to suppress the white, Caucasian race", and announced plans for a march on Congress to take place on the Fourth of July.[10] Another speech advocated for the forced expulsion of African Americans to Africa and Jewish Americans to Israel.[11]
...
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed Brandenburg's conviction, holding that government cannot constitutionally punish abstract advocacy of force or law violation.
"""

>recommending what body armor to wear when undertaking a mass shooting
That sounds more like crime-facilitating speech than incitement.

>>13082
Huh?  Lots of inherently dangerous products are legal to sell (and should be, IMHO).  Firearms, ammo, circular saws, angle grinders, etc.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

 No.13092

>>13061

Interesting. It looks like the lawsuit is saying that the algorithms and such have become so advanced that they ought to be treated as a defective product. Unfortunately, while I am quite free speech, such companies may need to be held liable somehow, due to the amount of psychological manipulation involved in marketing nowadays. When you co-opt the English language, which is common heritage, for marketing purposes, isn't it sort-of a crime against humanity at that point? We already know YouTube is an echo-chamber and finding new, original, interesting content is near-impossible anymore.

I think the world would be better off if the lawsuit led to the result of something like such algorithms being banned and opt-in only with full disclosure of the risks and limitations of the product.

 No.13069[Reply]

File: 1711169877618.jpg (60.62 KB, 754x721, 754:721, question w8x3mtfl92621.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Why did Muslim terrorists attack *Russia* of all places?
12 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.13086

>>13081
Then die.

This defeatist notion that humanity is irredeemable is part of the problem.

 No.13087

>>13084
>the temptation to dehumanize
That's absolutely a fair point. Feelings are an extremely powerful motivation. And while they can blind, at the same time they can bring about the sensations of being able to "revel in" something happy. As you put it.

I suppose I'm still idealistic and optimistic about humanity even though I don't really know how the human condition as such can be changed as much as it needs to be.

I suppose it can be compared how to, say, smoking cigarettes and drinking dangerous mixed alcohols are hard to argue against from a broad social viewpoint. As an individual, you want to just feel happy. It's difficult to condemn positive feelings.

 No.13091

>>13071
>>13078
>>13079
Arigato, it seems I was rather ignorant of tensions between Muslims and Russia.

[]
Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]