News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by tarboreus on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @11:32AM (#26239241)
Is anyone finding this terrifying? When did democrafts, the party I vote for, become the people calling for tight censorship in every sector? Weren't the last people to make this move (more more ineffectively, thankfully) the Christian right? Is there something we can do to stand up for speech?
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by rayiner on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @11:36AM (#26239300)
Democrats were proponents of free speech when Republicans controlled the media, culture, and institutions. Increasingly, the media, culture, and institutions are controlled by progressive Democrats (and I think there is a growing schism between liberals and progressives on this front), and traditional liberal ideas of the free exchange of information have no more value.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by blacktriangle on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @11:48AM (#26239479)
Which is exactly why no matter where you land politically, you should be 100% in favor of fighting for free speech for yourself and the other side.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by PTOB on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:46PM (#26241948)
This human has read his history.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by Spivak on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @05:07PM (#26243561)
I think there’s a disconnect here. Does free speech have to include someone knowingly purposely spreading misinformation with the intent to deceive people? Or someone speaking with the explicit intent to harm another person?

Because I think nobody should be able to silence your thoughts, ideas or opinions but those things don’t encompass all speech.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by blacktriangle on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @01:21PM (#26253514)
A few decades ago homosexuality was a mental illness, global cooling was going to kill us all soon, and a healthy diet was a pyramid based on eating a ton of grains. Do you want to live in a world where people arguing against those points of view were prosecuted for "knowing purposely spreading misinformation?" Because that's the world you are advocating.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by Spivak on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @03:19PM (#26255216)
I feel like we're arguing past one another. This is not about dissenting opinions or someone holding unorthodox views. This is about someone knowingly purposefully making stuff up, presenting it as fact, and spreading it around with the intent to deceive people.

I'm not saying this should a tool to enable internet censors. This should be used to go after the networks of people people producing this garbage. Unless you operate a website or blog where you are literally making stuff up and spreading it around as fact then this doesn't affect you in the slightest.

A lot of good examples of this surfaced when people were talking about what bathrooms trans people should use. It was an entirely manufactured controversy where no-name fly-by-night "news" sites would publish completely fictional stories about sexual assault cases to try and sway public opinion. I, and you, should be equally as mad at someone making up news stories trying to sway public opinion the other way.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by blacktriangle on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @03:25PM (#26255298)
You're right, it's not about opinions and who can say what. The issue we're arguing past one another, and the real important one, is who do you trust do decide that. The other guy seems to believe it's possible to have some government that is a benevolent determiner of truth vs propaganda, where I believe the other guy is painfully naive.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by tarboreus on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @09:30AM (#26250146)
Yes, it does, because who decides what is harmful or what is wrong? There is no freedom in speech if there is an authority deciding whether it is harmful. That is restructured speech, not free speech.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by offby37years on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:37PM (#26241810)
If you're convinced fascism has arrived in America, you'll excuse any means necessary to topple the dictator and to prevent a reoccurrence. The issue is in doing so, they've become the tyrannical force they propose to oppose.

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear." — Harry S. Truman

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by nyczomg on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @08:06PM (#26245328)
Not only that, but the people gladly handing over more and more power to the government now that Trump is out will be in for a terrible surprise when they learn that someday someone like Trump might win another election and will assume those additional powers.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by TrispusAttucks on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @08:47PM (#26245614)
I like your quote. It inspired me to share another.

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you."

~ Friedrich Nietzsche

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by maerF0x0 on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:35PM (#26241793)
> When did democrafts, the party I vote for

Probably around the same time as it became socially unacceptable not to vote for them? Note how you had to qualify yourself as a democrat voter as some kind of proof point of the validity of your claims?

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by tarboreus on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @09:32AM (#26250168)
Honestly, that's fair.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by ntsplnkv2 on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:44PM (#26241920)
~75 million people voted for Donald Trump - it is hardly socially unacceptable to vote for a republican and you have a secret vote anyway.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by jimbokun on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @05:22PM (#26243743)
For the most part, it is socially unacceptable to vote Republican if you live in a large US city, and it is socially unacceptable to vote Democrat if you live in a rural area.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by rayiner on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @10:47PM (#26246359)
I live in a Trump precinct in Maryland and if I said I supported Biden nobody would blink. If I went down to DC and said I voted for Trump people would look at me like I grew a second head.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by jancsika on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @06:55PM (#26244698)
I've never seen any evidence that it's "socially unacceptable" in any meaningful sense of the term to vote Democrat in a rural area. Where are you getting this?
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by throwaway0a5e on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @07:23PM (#26244928)
It's just an extension of how rural vs urban societies handle people doing weird stuff they don't like.

If someone's doing something dumb and weird in a well off rural area nobody cares as long as they aren't actively negatively affecting people. Like maybe people will talk behind your back and think you're an idiot but that's about it.

If someone's doing something dumb and weird somewhere densely populated and wealthy people pour over the bylaws, call whoever they can to harass you and generally try to force you to stop by making your life miserable.

If someone's doing something dumb and weird somewhere poor, regardless of urban vs rural, nobody gives a crap because people have bigger problems.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by jimbokun on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @09:49AM (#26250389)
Anecdote:

My son's soccer team from the city decided they wanted to make a statement against racism and kneel for the national anthem before games. At one of the suburban/rural schools, they were vehemently booed and yelled at by the parents and supporters of the other team.

(And the decision to kneel was made after a game the previous season against a different rural high school where my son's team mates were racially abused during the game.)

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by xyzzyz on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @11:35AM (#26251889)
That’s not booing for voting, that’s about making a divisive political statement on a freaking kid soccer game. When you bring your activism into non-political contexts, don’t get surprised when people don’t like it.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by jimbokun on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @02:45PM (#26254666)
So you’re saying it’s socially unacceptable?
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by xyzzyz on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @05:54PM (#26257286)
In some contexts, yes. A kid's soccer game is a place to hang out together and have fun, not to relitigate the major point of social disagreement of the day. If some kids from some other school behaved in an improper manner, deal with this problem directly, instead of taking your grievance out on unrelated community whose only crime is also being rural, so surely must be bunch of evil racists.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by jimbokun on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @08:56PM (#26258821)
They kneeled before every game. They weren’t singling out any specific community.

And the school pushed as hard as it could to have the original incidents addressed (the same school has been reported for other similar incidents previously) and the league did not impose any consequences.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by skynet-9000 on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:11PM (#26242275)
> it is hardly socially unacceptable to vote for a republican and you have a secret vote anyway.

Those two things are not in conflict with each other: a sizable percentage of Trump voters may have been counting on the fact that they could secretly vote in order to protect themselves and even their jobs.

It seems that, today, some vocal people arguing for censorship immediately assume that anyone on the side of free speech and liberal thought is secretly a Trump apologist.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by ntsplnkv2 on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:57PM (#26242786)
> Those two things are not in conflict with each other: a sizable percentage of Trump voters may have been counting on the fact that they could secretly vote in order to protect themselves and even their jobs.

Black people have lost their jobs for years for being black (See, Kaepernick.) many mad about this post didn't care then. It's all fake, using free speech to coverup blatantly partisan items.

They can't actually be on the side of free speech and be a Trump apologist. He was extremely anti-media, one of the most anti-press presidents we have had.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by quercetumMons on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @04:16PM (#26242989)
Kaepernick did not lose his job for being black.

You can be pro free-speech and anti-media for the same reason you can be capitalist and anti-corporation.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by BitwiseFool on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @11:57AM (#26239618)
I've noticed that there is a common belief amongst Democrats and Progressives that people are duped into holding conservative viewpoints because of Fox News. Whenever I have asked people on the left why they think Republicans and Conservatives believe what they believe, the conversation always includes references to Fox News and the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. So in that sense I can understand why so many Democrats want Fox News dismantled.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by rayiner on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @12:08PM (#26239761)
I agree that many people think that, but it gets the chronology precisely backwards. CNN has been on the air since 1980. Fox News didn't even exist until 1996, and didn't become popular until 2000. Fox News is a response to media bias,[1] not the other way around.

[1] And by "bias" I don't necessarily mean open bias. CNN wasn't partisan in the 1990s like it is today. But it still provided news filtered through a liberal ideology. For example, 71% of republicans say religion "does more good than harm in American society" versus 44% of democrats: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/11/15/republicans.... If you limit the analysis to white Democrats (the people who run newsrooms) the disparity is even starker: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/23/religiously... ("Religiously, nonwhite Democrats are more similar to Republicans than to white Democrats").

Do you think that someone who believes religion is an negative force in society, maybe jokes about religious people to friends after work will report on COVID-related church closings the same way as someone who believes religious practice is important to societal health? Even if they are acting utterly in good faith, their ideology can't help but influence their choice of stories, the gloss they put on developments, etc.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by zug_zug on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @01:45PM (#26241088)
The truth is, we don't know the causality. Nobody has a good explanation of what makes an otherwise normal, intelligent person believe Q-anon, for example. We have some ham-fisted theories about how Hitler riled his country to exterminate Jews, but it's not really a nuanced enough explanation to say when/if something like it could happen again [nor assure us it won't].

I'd like to pretend that we're all rational agents, but I know that there are certain "emotional backdoors" that people like Hitler have exploited in the past to get people to do horrible things against everybody's interest.

For those of us who live in a country controlled by the will of the majority, obviously the education of the average person is a priority.

If the shoe was on other foot, and I had a mainstream news channel that had 40% of the population angry and believing demonstrably false things (e.g. Aliens were running the country and I could point out the aliens for you), and I was hinting/insinuating a revolution was necessary, how hard would you defend my cable TV show?

[Edit - Lol, I know I've got a pretty solid argument when nobody can answer the question but only give a pouty downvote]

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by arminiusreturns on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:28PM (#26242469)
>Nobody has a good explanation of what makes an otherwise normal, intelligent person believe Q-anon, for example.

It's easily explainable, on the contrary, it was an intelligence psyop using half-truths that was setup to perform the two fold-function of honeypotting and distracting the "conspiracy theorists" who might look into the Trump admin and understand it's real dark underbelly, which is completely different from the one the MSM pushed for four years, and then to be used as most limited hangout psyops are; as a tool to discredit genuine conspiracies as crazy by association.

So now people like you who are probably fairly intelligent, but probably not keeping up with the underlying truths in the "half-truths" side of the phenomenon that was Q, can easily just discredit those who believe it as uneducated (usually the nicest term used), without understanding how they got there, and that you also lack education, at least in that department.

So thats the sort of high level overview, but I can give you a few examples about how psyops manipulate otherwise intelligent people to buy into that sort of thing.

1. Hope and belief: After the war, I ended up becoming an atheist and started to notice in my studies on that topic, more specifically in conversations with old christian friends, that much of their belief system stemmed not from the truth of the matter, but from the hope it gave them. Further, from the need for hope, and need for belief it provided. Q-Anon exposes to some limited degree that the elites are up to some very shady shit, and then said: "Don't worry, it's being taken care of! Trump is a good guy, antiestablishment revolutionary who is going to take them down from the inside, and drain the swamp!" And for a certain amount of intelligent people who know the elite are indeed up to nefarious things, that's so tempting to want to believe! Having been on the Q-board from more or less day one, I do want to make a point that the first few months were full of very original and deep "bread" (research postings), by the more intelligent from the conspiracy and chan community. After a few months when the game became increasingly obvious to those people, but as it gained more noteriety and more normies showed up, the demographics shifted noticeably, primarily towards the religious right... a group who have already demonstrated their ability to suspend critical thinking when it comes to belief. The vast majority if not all of the people (besides the q psyop group themselves) that did the best work left knowning what the intent was (this was max a few months into the forced switchover to 8chan)

2. Real truths: I'll just come out and say what most of it really is: the multi-national, multi-intelligence agency compromise operations are completely out of control, and target most if not all high level politicians and businessmen. There is a myriad of evidence, buth deductive and inductive, to support this claim. Epstein was just a disposable middle manager in a blackmail network, for example. When analyzing this issue it quickly gets to the darker stuff people don't want to think about or talk about. My usual summary of how it works is that the order of operations for compromise/control go like this; idealogical - at a lower level , say a freshman state congressperson, having idealogical alignment is enough to get them to do what is wanted, no real overt control need be exerted, but lets go to the next level; bribery. This is standard congressional fare. Lunches, parties, pac donations, kickbacks of various kinds to both the campaign and to causes the campaign wants pushed, cushy jobs and kickbacks for relatives and friends of the congressperson, etc. All mostly legal, with a few outliers like Jack Abramoff pushing the edges of that level. What happens when you get a congress person who doesn't play ball though? This is where you start to run into the higher levels, such as pure blackmail. Cameras are setup, and it starts with the after-after-party, usually just drugs at first. Then it's hookers. Then it's underage hookers... and it gets worse. Human trafficking, and worse. If for some reason the rare person with integrety survives all this, that is when the threats begin (and they are not empty!). This is all true stuff. But no one is actually doing anything about it, because most of the people in a position to do so are already compromised are at the very least afraid.

What Q did was exploit that these things really happen, by creating a false narrative that tended to only focus on the democrats participation in this system (both parties are completely compromised in this way, anybody remember Dennis Hastert?), and then pretended to offer a (false) hope by saying Trump was an anti-establishment savior, despite his many connections to this very system! For example, his mentor Roy Cohn was a CIA and Lansky-gang (who blackmailed Hoover) connected pedo-blackmailer very much in the vein of Epstein! Then creating other false narratives to distance the more obvious connections between him and that world (for example, pushing the narrative that he didn't like Epstein because of his pedo-tendencies, but in reality their spat was over a real-estate deal that went sour, and had nothing to do with Trump having a higher moral compass (laugh) than Epstein). Then taking all these things and promising there was always some action going to be taken around the corner, next week, next month, next year, stay tuned, etc... and none of it ever materialized.

So for a people who find so much value in the need for hope and belief, mixing real truths with half-lies and then pretending something would be done was a recipe made in heaven for the people behind Qanon. The media, who didn't want to address any of this just lied through their teeth about the Russian narrative, created a reinforcement mechanism that they weren't to be trusted, which pushed even more "normies" over into Q-territory.

Now, as you see the push for censorship and castigation of all things Q-anon, remember all nuggets of truth inside the half-truths are going to be thrown out baby and bathwater style... and I argue that this was the main intention all along (along with the cries of "domestic terrorism" being used to push all kinds of horrible things). Cass Sunsteins cognitive infiltration system is at play and is the modern evolution of COINTELPRO.

PS. For just one example in a myriad, look up the Dutroux Affair, aka Belgiums X-Files sometime, if you think that darker stuff isn't true/doesn't happen. (warning, not for the faint of heart)

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by metiscus on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @06:33PM (#26244524)
I appreciate the detail of your response. It provides food for thought that I had not considered.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by maxerickson on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @01:50PM (#26241164)
You've misquoted the survey, inverting the result. Republicans think religion does more good than harm at that rate, and the other way around for the other guys.

That it was a typo is clear enough from the rest of your comment.

CNN isn't partisan though, they are just sensationalists.

Like I think you could treat Ron Johnson like a jackass and not be partisan, and they don't even do that, they act like he is a straight shooter and play out the kayfabe.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by rayiner on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:06PM (#26241430)
Thanks corrected.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by lftl on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @01:57PM (#26241287)
I believe you've transposed "harm" and "good" in your quote. The linked Pew article lists the question as "Do more good than harm."
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by TrispusAttucks on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @08:42PM (#26245588)
Long-time democrat here. I am terrified of what my party is becoming!

I'm more critical of my own party because I hold them to a higher standard. I'm getting very disillusioned with them at this point. All the behaviors I decried of the right so many years ago are now in full swing on the left side. The difference now is the consolidatation of control and power makes it an even greater threat. I fear a point of no return.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by rayiner on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @11:34PM (#26246604)
Same boat. People tell me, “but Trump is worse.” I didn’t realize that was the bar.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by sneak on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:35PM (#26241787)
The dirty secret of American hyperpartisan battle is that the two parties in the US are fundamentally identical where it counts: pro-surveillance, authoritarian war machines.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by Clubber on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:01PM (#26242141)
And don't forget pro-corporate, which has been historically the norm, to the point of overthrowing other governments to protect crop yields / revenue.

There was a study that came out a few years ago, and I can't find it, but the point was that any laws passed that the general citizenry want were purely incidental. All the laws passed over the last 20 years or so directly benefited corporate and special interest groups.

Another person described the spectrum of the various forms of democracy as a highway. The went on to describe the two US political parties as the two parallel lines dividing the highway.

/rant

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by jackson1442 on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @07:39PM (#26245074)
Agreed. Fortunately this appears to be only two house members sending this. If McNerney or Eshoo are your representatives, it might be a good idea to reach out and make your case.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by macspoofing on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @01:14PM (#26240612)
>When did democrafts, the party I vote for, become the people calling for tight censorship in every sector?

When Trump got elected and it broke people's brains. At that point, everything became permissible in order to fight Trump. Now that Trump is gone, you can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Since Trump, the Democratic establishment has effectively captured Mainstream Media, Big Tech and Social Media (with Academia being already firmly in the Democratic tent). Mainstream media and Big Tech isn't even pretending to be objective anymore. There is now an incestuous pipeline between executive leadership in those institutions and the Democratic establishment. And I say 'establishment' because it isn't just the Conservatives, Republicans and Libertarians that are getting censored. I don't like the anti-war, anti-American, class-focused Left, but those groups also get targeted, as are Progressives that focus on class (as opposed to cultural) issues.

>Weren't the last people to make this move (more more ineffectively, thankfully) the Christian right?

Apt analogy. This is the 'Christian Evangelical Right' from the 90s, with similar level of puritanism ... and with the backing of media companies and big tech. So much much worse.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by BitwiseFool on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:33PM (#26241757)
I can't help but think 'puritanism' is a personality trait and there has always been a sizable portion of the American public dedicated to policing the thoughts and behavior of others. The underlying ideology may have changed, but the archetype sure hasn't. Maybe the so-called SJWs of today would have been Temperance activists 100 years ago.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by hntrader on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:22PM (#26242393)
It's an authoritarian personality type which exists on both the left and the right. It's remarkable that when we look at the many personality subtraits of authoritarian types on the left and the right, they align extremely closely with one another.
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by reducesuffering on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @09:31PM (#26245928)
Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by rayiner on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @07:51AM (#26249308)
Someone sent me this article which is quite interesting: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/revenge-of-...

> Shedding its specifically Northern mainline Protestant cultural attributes, a version of Social Gospel Protestantism has mutated into the secular religion of wokeness, the orthodoxy of the universities and the increasingly important nonprofit sector. Its converts include many of the affluent white secular children and grandchildren of members of mainline Protestant denominations like the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Methodists, which are hemorrhaging membership to the category of religious “nones.”

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by mnouquet on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @02:40PM (#26241858)
> When Trump got elected

Gamergate pre-dates Trump, and was the exact same mentality, which you can probably trace back to the 1970's if not before.

Re:Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] by citilife on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:15PM (#26242323)
To be frank, the democrats have been directly calling for increasing amounts of censorship for years... In 2016-2018 it was slow at first: de-platforming people, refusing to let conservatives on media, etc.

Since, 2018-2020 has been almost a militant level of censorship being pushed.

There's a boatload of examples, but generally I recommend trying to join / visit different communities. While the right has been targeted to an extreme you can still see their points of view on gab.com or patriots.win pretty much uncensored.