The problem is I understand why facebook blocked the post. If you change the race and gender, and it becomes 'offensive', then you probably can't create a policy that is enforceable.
If you are assuming that the person is from Canada, this will probably work... for a majority of the other countries out here they will need to deal with:
Latency - Trying to communicate over long distances; especially from far away countries (India, China, Australia, etc) is killer
Timezones -- Hope you don't mind them also having to get up at 2AM when they have a 2PM class
Bandwidth -- Some places like island nations are bandwidth capped due to Satellite being their only options
Firewalls -- Russia and China block access to lots of services -- same with India. Good luck watching that You Tube when Russia arbitrarily bans it...
Content Restrictions -- I can't imagine taking an LGBTQ Studies class in Russia or China...
So, that is my short list off the top of my head why this plan isn't tenable in a lot of cases...
ICE just opened the floodgates to selectively enforce whatever they want. I'll bet students who were sent to technical universities will be the first to get the boot. Their parents aren't as wealthy as their Ivy League counterparts and the schools aren't near as well prepared to cater to the in-person class rules.
Arbitrarily changing the laws just to spit in the face of a vulnerable group is insane. ICE didn't make the rules to get these students over here for cross-cultural exchange, learning, American indoctrination, etc. They just saw an opening to exploit to help their numbers.
I'm sure Stephen Miller's boner can be seen from space as he revels in the number of non-white non-americans he's fucking over just because he can.
if you read the article, the animosity is towards their hypocrisy and them trying to lie about their moderation standards... they said if it is legal under the first amendment, then it is fair game... except if you make fun of us, or make other speech we don't like... you know... the exact same thing they are bitching about Twitter for doing...
from the look at how slapdash it is... I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't hand-moderated. Not like they have any 'policies and procedures' in place that they can code for some of the snarkiness that gets people banned -- way too nuanced for a machine to pick up this quickly.
For reasons I cannot comprehend, they seem to think that the only motivation for doing anything is if the law requires you to do it.
The reason is simple: they use the tool they know. Not every job requires a hammer, but if you only have a hammer... it's the next best thing.
Lawyers know law. They aren't social scientists or marketers or tech professionals. They use their limited toolbox to solve the problem that they see the only way they know how. And their way also helps them stay in business!
This is why you need a licensing system that works
Unfortunately, it will be way too easy for these guys to tout all their years of experience and get hired on another department. If cops had to be licensed like doctors or lawyers, then these types of 'bad apples' wouldn't keep finding their way back into positions where they can harm the public.
Sometimes I think these politicians just fake this outrage to promote their donors' businesses. It is a pretty good plan. After 30 congress critters start using its twitter handle and sparking 'outrage', I can guarantee that more people went to the site just to check it out.
Wow, TechDirt being mentioned as a 'tech' company right up there with Google, Facebook, and Twitter. I, for one, am impressed this troll has elevated TD to that high of a position. Congrats guys you've made it! I love Tech Dirt, but its million unique visitors a month doesn't hold a candle to Google, Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter.
Google, Facebook, and Twitter (these guys' targets) don't kiss the ring, nor pay enough to campaigns...
A conspiracy theorist may hypothesize that they are doing this to get more campaign donations and once they have their pound of flesh will back off this rhetoric...
So, some places like TechDirt have a chat engine and moderation done 'in-house'. But other places outsource to platforms like Disqus. How would that work? Would the site using Disqus have to pay for the call center?
There are complex business models and these guys think writing 200 words on a piece of paper and calling it law 'magically' fixes everything. No research. No business impact analysis. This is lawmakers sitting in a room and making shit up at random expecting everyone else to just accept their simplistic view of the world as rational.
They get upset when we criticize them, but they don't take the time to actually research the problem, talk to stakeholders, or even understand the basics of the business. Damn the consequences, THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
So... data in motion... they also want to break HTTPS? But... how tho... That is a standard that has so many moving pieces that prevent a man-in-the-middle attack... and they want to redesign it to allow a blue-man-in-the-middle-attack?
Like... my brain is melting trying to figure out how you do it without completely rewriting every security protocol we've developed over the last 40 years...
You have things like sRTP, RDP, database protocols.... there's so many things that 'go over the internet' that you can't readily hand over to the man in blue... hell, even if you did, it wouldn't mean that they would understand it or even use it. More than likely be chucked into the bit bucket and never looked at... but at least they now can tell which SQL query that terrorist ran!
Something I heard on the radio; Basically, like a lawyer or a pilot, you train and license police officers. Once you are licensed, you can be a police officer. However... you can have that license revoked. If you lose your license by screwing up (falsifying information, killing a civilian, use of force, etc) you are no longer eligible to regain that license. Assuming an independent agency was monitoring this, you'd have them make the call to take the politics and unions out of it. If the board says you aren't fit, you'd be blacklisted from the industry for life.
NOTE: This is NOT enough to solve the entire problem, but that would solve the problem of officers just going to another department when they screw up at one and are fired. Seems like a common sense approach.
I think we are saying the same thing, but differently.
I'm in favor of right-sizing the police force -- equipment included. Why should a police department require an MRAP that they can conjure up a use case once a decade? The maintenance costs alone makes no sense.
Regardless of restructuring, violent crime doesn't just magically go away. There will be times it is needed, and you need officers trained and ready. But in this post-right sizing, most of the jobs will be completely removed from police jurisdiction. I'd assume the unarmed staff would already be in other departments -- mental health, animal control, basic security, community liaison, etc. etc. etc.
I'd imagine that police (armed) escorts would be required in some cases where they are there as a 'backup' for the other civil servant (mental health crisis involving a gun, etc).
But again... all these details can be worked out; We aren't going to solve this on a message board. But I think de-escalating the divisive rhetoric around this concept would give it a better chance of getting some traction.
I won't lie, the first time I heard the phrase I thought "defunding police" was a 'bridge too far' until I actually educated myself on it and learned what the proposals were. I personally don't like the name, I think it is needlessly divisive title, but honestly, the policies behind the name do make sense:
Quit sending a police officer to a person who is suicidal... send a counselor.
Don't send a police officer to take care of a stray dog... send Animal Control.
Dedicate a division to traffic enforcement that is not apart of the police department (remember, not just pulling people over, but wrecks, traffic light outages, blocked intersections, etc)
The list can go on and on and on and on. This would be better for literally everyone... except the police unions which will spin this any which way they can as an 'attack on the police', even if the police would benefit from being pulled in 30 different directions, being overworked, and understaffed.
The police have become polite society's handy man... they do everything and don't do all of it well. Defund the police for their sake as well as ours.
This 'Back in My Day' idea of people doing things differently now automatically means it is bad needs summarized into a succinct and memorable name; much like the Streisand Effect or santorum.
I'm not good at naming things but I'll throw a couple out to get this started:
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Talking About Racism On Social Media (2019)
"[race] [sex] are so fragile"
The problem is I understand why facebook blocked the post. If you change the race and gender, and it becomes 'offensive', then you probably can't create a policy that is enforceable.
On the post: As Expected, US Surveillance Of Social Media Leads To EU Court Of Justice Rejecting EU/US Privacy Shield
Splinternet, here we come!
On the post: Why Does Richard Blumenthal Always Feel The Need To Lie About Section 230?
Re:
Because there is child porn on the dark web, we should be allowed to sue Facebook over a copyrighted cat picture! It ONLY MAKES SENSE!
On the post: In The Middle Of A Pandemic, ICE Says Foreign Students Must Attend Physical Classes If They Don't Want To Be Kicked Out Of The Country
Re: Re: student visa's
If you are assuming that the person is from Canada, this will probably work... for a majority of the other countries out here they will need to deal with:
Latency - Trying to communicate over long distances; especially from far away countries (India, China, Australia, etc) is killer
Timezones -- Hope you don't mind them also having to get up at 2AM when they have a 2PM class
Bandwidth -- Some places like island nations are bandwidth capped due to Satellite being their only options
Firewalls -- Russia and China block access to lots of services -- same with India. Good luck watching that You Tube when Russia arbitrarily bans it...
Content Restrictions -- I can't imagine taking an LGBTQ Studies class in Russia or China...
So, that is my short list off the top of my head why this plan isn't tenable in a lot of cases...
On the post: In The Middle Of A Pandemic, ICE Says Foreign Students Must Attend Physical Classes If They Don't Want To Be Kicked Out Of The Country
Re: I thought Trump was such a good business man?
ICE just opened the floodgates to selectively enforce whatever they want. I'll bet students who were sent to technical universities will be the first to get the boot. Their parents aren't as wealthy as their Ivy League counterparts and the schools aren't near as well prepared to cater to the in-person class rules.
On the post: In The Middle Of A Pandemic, ICE Says Foreign Students Must Attend Physical Classes If They Don't Want To Be Kicked Out Of The Country
Re: Bait and Switch much?
Arbitrarily changing the laws just to spit in the face of a vulnerable group is insane. ICE didn't make the rules to get these students over here for cross-cultural exchange, learning, American indoctrination, etc. They just saw an opening to exploit to help their numbers.
I'm sure Stephen Miller's boner can be seen from space as he revels in the number of non-white non-americans he's fucking over just because he can.
On the post: Parler Speedruns The Content Moderation Learning Curve; Goes From 'We Allow Everything' To 'We're The Good Censors' In Days
Re:
if you read the article, the animosity is towards their hypocrisy and them trying to lie about their moderation standards... they said if it is legal under the first amendment, then it is fair game... except if you make fun of us, or make other speech we don't like... you know... the exact same thing they are bitching about Twitter for doing...
On the post: Parler Speedruns The Content Moderation Learning Curve; Goes From 'We Allow Everything' To 'We're The Good Censors' In Days
Re:
from the look at how slapdash it is... I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't hand-moderated. Not like they have any 'policies and procedures' in place that they can code for some of the snarkiness that gets people banned -- way too nuanced for a machine to pick up this quickly.
On the post: 'But Without 230 Reform, Websites Have No Incentive To Change!' They Scream Into The Void As Every Large Company Pulls Ads From Facebook
The reason is simple: they use the tool they know. Not every job requires a hammer, but if you only have a hammer... it's the next best thing.
Lawyers know law. They aren't social scientists or marketers or tech professionals. They use their limited toolbox to solve the problem that they see the only way they know how. And their way also helps them stay in business!
On the post: North Carolina Cops Fired After Their In-Car Camera Catches Them Talking About Wiping Black People 'Off The (Expletive) Map'
This is why you need a licensing system that works
Unfortunately, it will be way too easy for these guys to tout all their years of experience and get hired on another department. If cops had to be licensed like doctors or lawyers, then these types of 'bad apples' wouldn't keep finding their way back into positions where they can harm the public.
On the post: GOOGLE THREATENS TO DEFUND TECHDIRT? Where Are All The Politicians Complaining?
Fake Outrage = Free Advertising
Sometimes I think these politicians just fake this outrage to promote their donors' businesses. It is a pretty good plan. After 30 congress critters start using its twitter handle and sparking 'outrage', I can guarantee that more people went to the site just to check it out.
On the post: Goldman Sachs Created A Font, But You Are Forbidden By Its License To Critique Goldman Sachs Using It
Re: Techdirt CAUGHT by Project Veritas!
Wow, TechDirt being mentioned as a 'tech' company right up there with Google, Facebook, and Twitter. I, for one, am impressed this troll has elevated TD to that high of a position. Congrats guys you've made it! I love Tech Dirt, but its million unique visitors a month doesn't hold a candle to Google, Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter.
On the post: Another Day, Another Bad Bill To Reform Section 230 That Will Do More Harm Than Good
Re: Addressing the wrong code
Google, Facebook, and Twitter (these guys' targets) don't kiss the ring, nor pay enough to campaigns...
A conspiracy theorist may hypothesize that they are doing this to get more campaign donations and once they have their pound of flesh will back off this rhetoric...
On the post: Another Day, Another Bad Bill To Reform Section 230 That Will Do More Harm Than Good
Call Center Requirement -- Infinite Complexity
So, some places like TechDirt have a chat engine and moderation done 'in-house'. But other places outsource to platforms like Disqus. How would that work? Would the site using Disqus have to pay for the call center?
There are complex business models and these guys think writing 200 words on a piece of paper and calling it law 'magically' fixes everything. No research. No business impact analysis. This is lawmakers sitting in a room and making shit up at random expecting everyone else to just accept their simplistic view of the world as rational.
They get upset when we criticize them, but they don't take the time to actually research the problem, talk to stakeholders, or even understand the basics of the business. Damn the consequences, THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
On the post: Senators Launch Full On Nuclear War Against Encryption: Bill Will Require Broken Encryption, Putting Everyone At Risk
So... HTTPS?
So... data in motion... they also want to break HTTPS? But... how tho... That is a standard that has so many moving pieces that prevent a man-in-the-middle attack... and they want to redesign it to allow a blue-man-in-the-middle-attack?
Like... my brain is melting trying to figure out how you do it without completely rewriting every security protocol we've developed over the last 40 years...
You have things like sRTP, RDP, database protocols.... there's so many things that 'go over the internet' that you can't readily hand over to the man in blue... hell, even if you did, it wouldn't mean that they would understand it or even use it. More than likely be chucked into the bit bucket and never looked at... but at least they now can tell which SQL query that terrorist ran!
On the post: Cars, Guns, Cider, And Snapchat Don't Cause Crime
gotta get rid of speedometers in cars then... if I don't know how fast I'm going then I won't be driving recklessly /s
On the post: John Oliver Says What Needs To Be Said About Why Defunding The Police Is The Right Thing Right Now
Another Idea... Police Licensing
Something I heard on the radio; Basically, like a lawyer or a pilot, you train and license police officers. Once you are licensed, you can be a police officer. However... you can have that license revoked. If you lose your license by screwing up (falsifying information, killing a civilian, use of force, etc) you are no longer eligible to regain that license. Assuming an independent agency was monitoring this, you'd have them make the call to take the politics and unions out of it. If the board says you aren't fit, you'd be blacklisted from the industry for life.
NOTE: This is NOT enough to solve the entire problem, but that would solve the problem of officers just going to another department when they screw up at one and are fired. Seems like a common sense approach.
On the post: John Oliver Says What Needs To Be Said About Why Defunding The Police Is The Right Thing Right Now
Re: Re: I was a skeptic...
I think we are saying the same thing, but differently.
I'm in favor of right-sizing the police force -- equipment included. Why should a police department require an MRAP that they can conjure up a use case once a decade? The maintenance costs alone makes no sense.
Regardless of restructuring, violent crime doesn't just magically go away. There will be times it is needed, and you need officers trained and ready. But in this post-right sizing, most of the jobs will be completely removed from police jurisdiction. I'd assume the unarmed staff would already be in other departments -- mental health, animal control, basic security, community liaison, etc. etc. etc.
I'd imagine that police (armed) escorts would be required in some cases where they are there as a 'backup' for the other civil servant (mental health crisis involving a gun, etc).
But again... all these details can be worked out; We aren't going to solve this on a message board. But I think de-escalating the divisive rhetoric around this concept would give it a better chance of getting some traction.
On the post: John Oliver Says What Needs To Be Said About Why Defunding The Police Is The Right Thing Right Now
I was a skeptic...
I won't lie, the first time I heard the phrase I thought "defunding police" was a 'bridge too far' until I actually educated myself on it and learned what the proposals were. I personally don't like the name, I think it is needlessly divisive title, but honestly, the policies behind the name do make sense:
Quit sending a police officer to a person who is suicidal... send a counselor.
Don't send a police officer to take care of a stray dog... send Animal Control.
Dedicate a division to traffic enforcement that is not apart of the police department (remember, not just pulling people over, but wrecks, traffic light outages, blocked intersections, etc)
The list can go on and on and on and on. This would be better for literally everyone... except the police unions which will spin this any which way they can as an 'attack on the police', even if the police would benefit from being pulled in 30 different directions, being overworked, and understaffed.
The police have become polite society's handy man... they do everything and don't do all of it well. Defund the police for their sake as well as ours.
On the post: Don Henley Tells Senators: We Must Change Copyright Law... Because The People Like TikTok?
This phenomenon needs a name
This 'Back in My Day' idea of people doing things differently now automatically means it is bad needs summarized into a succinct and memorable name; much like the Streisand Effect or santorum.
I'm not good at naming things but I'll throw a couple out to get this started:
Grandpa-had-polio-but-it-just-gave-him-character Mindset
Non-existent Nostalgia Conundrum
Old-Man-Yells-At-Clouds Effect
Those suck, but you get the point... let's make it happen!
Next >>