trs8080

> I am very aware of the poverty here. I have met people on the roads and in the woods with some incredible stories & lifestyles.

You sound like someone who is very privileged, who has not had to deal with the same circumstances that people who live on the Res have had to deal with. What's worked for you, an individual, in your own life in your own circumstances obviously doesn't work for these folks and just because you think you may know better than them doesn't mean you do.

"The US government has assisted native americans and improved their lives so much that they've become lazy and complacent" is probably the hottest, most uninformed take I've ever seen on HN. Kudos.

Packing the court with partisans does, in fact, count as court packing. Here's a helpful article: https://www.rutgers.edu/news/what-court-packing

From the article:

"People often use "court packing" to describe changes to the size of the Supreme Court, but it's better understood as any effort to manipulate the Court's membership for partisan ends. A political party that's engaged in court packing will usually violate norms that govern who is appointed (e.g., only appoint jurists who respect precedent) and how the appointment process works (e.g., no appointments during a presidential election).

"Seen from this perspective, the Barrett appointment is classic court packing. The president nominated a hardline conservative who appears to question major parts of U.S. constitutional law. And the Senate majority changed its procedural rules – invented to deny Merrick Garland a hearing – to ram through the nomination as people were voting."

You siding with the partisan politics of members of a supposedly-neutral court who were put there to make the court partisan, doesn't make it normal.

I'm siding with not banning journalists on an absolute free speech platform.

> Orwellian

Ok bud.

Ah yes, another attempt to pretend that the single Supreme Court justice nominated by the former (D) president was blocked for anything other than partisan political reasons and that Trump didn't add the most number of SC justices since Reagan, all of whom were put forward by the totally-not-partisan Federalist Society and one of whom actually cried about how much he loves beer while testifying during a job interview, which is definitely normal and the type of behavior we expect from a judge in the highest court.

Totally not court packing. Just business as usual.

Just because you can't be bothered to do even the most basic Google search doesn't make you right.

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

Except you're attempting to legitimize the decision by calling journalists "clowns," as if you're the gatekeeper of "real" journalism.

People making these sorts of excuses are usually the ones who are most vocal about the importance of free speech. Ironic, isn't it?

"It doesn't matter that Elon Musk is silencing his critics on his absolute-free-speech platform, these aren't /real/ journalists."

Please. I didn't realize all of Musk's fans had gone to j-school and are the arbiters of "journalism's higher standard."

You realize that those of us who aren't Musk fans also dislike other billionaires, right? This is a class issue, not a personal one.

Yes, because pocketing money directly from fundraising activities for a 501c3 is illegal, regardless of if you pay capital gains on it.

Turns out the FAA has been stalking people for decades. Can we also add "getting arrested is kidnapping actually" to this list of arbitrary interpretations?

> They are the ones that don't want free speech

Content moderation and free speech are not mutually exclusive. Absolute free speech is not the only kind of free speech, nor is the definition of "free speech" the same globally.

> So here is a policy that everyone agrees with and increases safety on the platform. And they are not happy. It's such a funny situation.

Not upset, just confused that a free speech absolutist is banning people for exercising the version of free speech that he claims to be protecting.

If "we" is you, go ahead! You're free to judge whomever you want.

This is a fairly simple issue - a community of people who are pro-privacy and anti-surveillance have concerns about a former surveillance officer working for an organization which creates small, portable, popular computing devices.

If you haven't heard about law enforcement abuses of surveillance, here are some helpful links:

https://theintercept.com/2019/10/10/fbi-nsa-mass-surveillanc...

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/07/police-are-still-abusi...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-12-27/when-poli...

Some people do not support law enforcement and a large number of people using Mastodon are pro-privacy and anti-surveillance. RPI's cavalier response to their concerns about a former surveillance officer being hired by a company that creates computers is a cause for concern.

Being concerned about a pattern of behavior is paranoia now?

"Body positivity" is not about labeling everything as beautiful but rather not labeling people who may not match traditional standards of beauty as "ugly."

I'm aware that we don't have all the evidence yet - this is why there's a federal probe. So far, the quotes we see from employees (those competent scientists that you said you trust) suggest extreme malfeasance.

Regardless of your opinion of the current state of journalism or the "Eye of Sauron" or Trump or whatever else you're trying to drag into this conversation, Elon Musk's company is being investigated by the federal government after his employees have alleged widespread ethical abuses in his company.

As a counterpoint to your lament of geniuses being persecuted, I don't think Musk is particularly "excellent" in any way except being rich, which affords him opportunities and platforms far beyond the reach of the average person, including being able to hire the smartest people in the world who do the actual work in his companies.

Maybe you don't think it's a serious problem, but enough employees do and so does the federal government. It's not "tragic" in any way that Musk's companies are regulated the same way other companies in those domains are regulated. I find that Elon Musk doing something unethical/illegal is far more plausible than what you suggest - a conspiracy by journalists and the employees of Neuralink (again, the competent scientists which you claim to trust) to defame him.

Good thing you trust the competent scientists he's hired, because they're the ones blowing the whistle on Musk's operating practices. The lede: "Elon Musk’s Neuralink, a medical device company, is under federal investigation for potential animal-welfare violations amid INTERNAL STAFF complaints that its animal testing is being rushed, causing needless suffering and deaths." (emphasis mine)

"Millions of white working-class and middle-class Americans vote against their own economic interest by defending policies that hurt them while profiting the rich, including the 1% wealthiest Americans. Several factors help explain this peculiar dimension of U.S. politics: myopia fostered by anti-intellectualism; the relationship between religious fundamentalism and free-market fundamentalism; blind faith in the American Dream; and how racism hinders economic solidarity."

- https://academic.oup.com/california-scholarship-online/book/...

Another: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0023656920089018...

Unfortunately don't have free links but if you're able to read these, they'll answer your questions.

"seeing the initial shots were fired by a group of armed black men, killing several white men at the police station"

This is a loose interpretation of the article which loses important context. The initial shot was fired when a white man attempted to wrestle a gun away from a black man. The gun accidentally discharged and both sides started firing. Your interpretation would lead a reader to believe that a group of armed black men began the entire event by murdering white men.

Agree, but this announcement kinda makes me think they're working on either money-making enterprise tools a la Teams/Slack/etc OR maybe even exploring ML recommendation engines as an entrypoint to creating their own search engine. Definitely not their core competency but they've been having to get creative with their offerings/business because honestly making incremental improvements to a browser with 3% market share isn't going to get them the userbase they need to fund their efforts.

It was free, so they never sold it and nobody ever bought it. Companies often times need to pivot or introduce pricing to their products to survive. Would rather pay a modest fee to ensure that Brave continues as an alternative to the major browsers vs them running out of money and shutting down.

Most people are probably just amused. I'm more on the unhappy side because a vehicle can actually kill people when it crashes and Musk seems like more of a "move fast and break things" personality, which is not a great combination for safety.

> No you did not, you responded with an unrelated fact that "right news" (which is widely over categorized in these research papers BTW) is the most shared link

Yes, on Twitter, which according to you was "Extreme left authoritarian" until recently. Odd that leftist authoritarians allow right wing content to dominate their platform.

> twitter employee based censorship was largely in one direction

Any evidence for this claim?

> the fact that twitter policies were written and enforced in one ideological direction

Evidence? Twitter's own data says that this is not the case in the links I provided.

> No your link proves and supports nothing

My links (there were two) prove and support my point - you haven't read them though.

> doesn't that just mean someone who doxes people they don't agree with

... no?

> Try to actually talk about what I am complaining about

> > I hate when people attribute opening the Overton window to more than just Extreme left authoritarian political opinions, which is what Political Twitter was isolated to before elon

I literally quoted what you talked about and responded to your claim - please try to improve your reading comprehension skills.

Answered above, reproducing for you here:

"As the Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin noted on Twitter, the suspended users include Chad Loder, an antifascist researcher whose open-source investigation of the U.S. Capitol riot led to the identification and arrest of a masked Proud Boy who attacked police officers. The account of video journalist Vishal Pratap Singh, who reports on far-right protests in Southern California, has also been suspended."

"All four accounts had been singled out for criticism by Andy Ngo, a far-right writer whose conspiratorial, error-riddled reporting on left-wing protests and social movements fuels the mass delusion that a handful of small antifascist groups are part of an imaginary shadow army called “antifa.” In a public exchange on Twitter on Friday, Musk invited Ngo to report “Antifa accounts” that should be suspended directly to him."

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...

"As the Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin noted on Twitter, the suspended users include Chad Loder, an antifascist researcher whose open-source investigation of the U.S. Capitol riot led to the identification and arrest of a masked Proud Boy who attacked police officers. The account of video journalist Vishal Pratap Singh, who reports on far-right protests in Southern California, has also been suspended."

"All four accounts had been singled out for criticism by Andy Ngo, a far-right writer whose conspiratorial, error-riddled reporting on left-wing protests and social movements fuels the mass delusion that a handful of small antifascist groups are part of an imaginary shadow army called “antifa.” In a public exchange on Twitter on Friday, Musk invited Ngo to report “Antifa accounts” that should be suspended directly to him."

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...

> I hate when people attribute opening the Overton window to more than just Extreme left authoritarian political opinions, which is what Political Twitter was isolated to before elon

This is incorrect.

"Based on a massive-scale experiment involving millions of Twitter users, a fine-grained analysis of political parties in seven countries, and 6.2 million news articles shared in the United States, this study carries out the most comprehensive audit of an algorithmic recommender system and its effects on political content. Results unveil that the political right enjoys higher amplification compared to the political left."

- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8740571/

"Twitter reportedly won't use an algorithm to crack down on white supremacists because some GOP politicians could end up getting barred too"

- https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-algorithm-crackdown-...

Sounds like this space is ripe for disruption. You could do a whole white supremacist App Store with Klanstagram, Fourteen Little Words (a "pure" dating app), and Save Our Marriage (an anti-LGBT mobile game).