Facebook is just trying to stop people abusing their service,

No, the article I linked to specifically refutes that talking point.

Removing crap in any language should not be seen as virtuous, with the exception of illegal crap. It is not the place of Facebook to decide The Truth because history shows again and again when you give that power to a small group of individuals they will abuse that power.

Serbian people especially should know of the danger of corporate mouthpieces for the government. It devolves from good-intentions into one-sided propaganda alarmingly quickly with devastating results. That is a shameful part of their history that should serve as a warning. Russia, China, more of the same, this is not a standard for the media to be encouraged.

"But They Are A Private Company They Can Do What They Want". They can. They simply shouldn't. "They Are Allowed Their Opinions But They Are Not Entitled To A Platform". Agreed. However the platform is being allowed or denied based on what is being said, not how it is being said, and there is mounting evidence the government is coercing the private companies to de-platform their political rivals.

I am not making any statement about what is True or Not-True. My opinion lies firmly in the "dumbass people say dumbass shit". Anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, 9/11 truthers, they are all stupid, and yes, their words can have measurable harm on society. But it is far better to let them speak and be stupid than to cede control of our public discourse to a bunch of billionaires in Silicon Valley who are very clearly acting on behalf of specific political parties.

Private companies are brazenly being coerced by the government to act on the governments behalf. The legality of the situation is not as simple as you seem to think it is. For example

https://greenwald.substack.com...

We have a name for when corporations act on behalf of the government to infringe the rights of citizens. This is not something the progressive left should be supporting. But it seems nobody learns from history.

Normally taking a knee is seen as highly respectful.

It is historically seen as an act of submission to a superior force. Indirectly this is used in worship to religious icons. Kneeling exists in all major religions and their related organisations, e.g. kneeling before the King who receives divine right to rule by God.

This is not the same as respect. Kneeling may be because of fear, because of failure, or to acknowledge power, but not to show respect. You respect the guy who works 2 jobs to feed his family but you don't kneel to him. Religious people don't kneel out of respect for God, but to worship God.

Kneeling in modern usage is plain weird. Who are they worshipping? Who are the submitting to? Who is the superior they are acknowledging? Or is it a sarcastic way of calling attention to historical submission aka slavery?

Perhaps kneeling is changing its meaning just like handshakes used to show good-will but now are apparently sexist. But when two groups have wildly different understandings of the symbolism behind kneeling there is going to be confusion and anger.

Regardless of the good intention it's weird and divisive symbolism. We saw this in F1 where many European drivers refuse to kneel because in their culture you only kneel to God. This caused massive friction with F1's resident activist who wanted everybody to kneel.

A raised fist is a far better symbol of rejecting oppressive power. Kneeling was a bad choice of symbol and is now cemented in culture mostly because Trump spoke out against it. If he had not opened his fat stupid mouth it most likely would have fizzled out by now.

A lot of the hatred is being fuelled by news media which profits from controversy. Fake news is not restricted to the right-wing although there was a time not that long ago I would have though it was exclusively a Fox News problem. Now I recognise the vast majority of news media is constantly lying about nearly every major event. Reading articles by independent journalists like Green Greenwald has opened my eyes and I'm sick to my stomach realising how bad it has become. Partly this is due to profit motive but my cynical opinion is that news media is now mostly a propaganda arm for political hacks.

The solution is to take away the shield that corrupt journalists hide behind. Make them accountable for telling lies. Put the purveyors of falsified incendiary news in prison where they belong. This includes punishing inflammatory speech that incites mobs. That applies to *all* mobs including ones trying to overturn the process of law and conduct trials by public opinion (or more accurately trials by public manipulation).

I didn't accuse him of being racist. I said his post was so low information content it came across as racist or nonsense.

Your comment comes across as asshole-ish. Note that I'm not accusing you of being a asshole. Just saying that your post is so far up its own rectum that it comes across as asshole-ish nonsense

To those who didn't read the article, it talked about the effects of standard-test-less admissions, enacted because COVID-19 shutdowns made it hard or impossible for some students to take tests.

Equally likely the universities are seeing a drop in income due to COVID and are relaxing their requirements to increase revenue. Universities don't care if the low-income families fail and drop-out next year, permanently mired in debt, so long as the profit margins are kept high this year.

Whenever you see a policy that is reputedly for good reasons, it's often a cover story for the more disreputable reason of making money. A common example is greenwashing by corporations trying to extract more money from well-meaning but poorly-informed consumers.

It was a purposefully and explicitly uncharitable interpretation.

Yeah well don't do that. Slashdot has mostly managed to avoid that kind of antisocial behaviour. Go to Facebook or Twitter if you want to randomly accuse strangers of being "racist" or "sexist" or "whatever-ist" to advance your point.

What the right-wing news media has done is over-focus on the outlier opinions.

What ALL news media does is over focus on the outlier opinions. Russia Gate? Four goddamn years of that nonsense and it was utter fabricated lies. I can't stand the orange buffoon but to think the left-wing news media wasn't just as guilty of this bullshit when they saw political points to be scored... well its bullshit.

Glenn Greenwald has a greatly detailed writeup on how utterly awful the media has become - both left and right - particularly in regards to the past five years of insane over-the-top fact-free partisan reporting. Love him or loathe him - I personally think Greenwald is an insightful and thoughtful reporter and what he says is 100% worth listening to - you can't deny that news media in general is utter garbage at this point. When I read an article my 1st thought is not if they're lying but HOW are they lying. I just assume at this stage they are lying to me either through omission or in some cases just outright fabrication.

It's not a left vs right partisan issue. Take your cheer-leading "my team is awesome your team is evil" nonsense out of here.

Ryzen 9 5950X handily beats the 11900K in multicore workloads

Best of luck finding one. Those things are rarer than comments in enterprise code. Good thing about Intel is at least you will be able to buy them - owning their own fabs has at least one benefit Intel still maintains over the competition.

Winning on paper then failing to produce (and sell) enough silicon is no way to build marketshare.

Another worthless article from the raging dumpster fire that is Ars Technica. Don't waste your time, go straight to someone who knows a thing or two, Dr. Ian Cutress from Anandtech.

https://www.anandtech.com/show...

You don't need evidence for that. It's the simplest theory that fits all known facts.

Occam's Razor has to be one of the most misunderstood principles of all time. It does NOT mean the "simplest" theory is the correct one. The original wording is non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate, or in English "don't add extra variables".

An example of two theories where Occam's Razor applies would be (A) Professor Plum with the candlestick in the library vs (B) Professor Plum with the candlestick in the library and it was raining. The extra variable that it was raining - if not relevant to the actions of Professor Plum - should be removed, making the first the best of those two theories.

An example where Occam's Razor does NOT apply is (A) the cow got sick because of an invisible pathogen that replicates by hijacking cells and overwhelming the immune system vs (B) the cow got sick because of a witch. You CAN NOT use Occam's Razor to separate those two theories, despite the witch explanation being a lot simpler, and despite the witch theory being the most popular for thousands of years.

It is always the more complex version that requires the proof.

They BOTH require proof. I swear, the lack of logic on display here sometimes is astounding.

This witch hunt has now turned cruel and inhumane. One of the hallmarks of liberalism is that punishment should be proportionate to the crime aka retributive justice, and that rehabilitation is more important than revenge. That's not what's happening here - this is petty spiteful destruction, an attempt to humiliate and erase a man, being led by billion dollar corporations against a person with obvious emotional disabilities.

Destroying one man's career, his livelihood, his entire life's work, ostracizing and "othering" the man rather than engaging him, are symptoms of ideological purity and mass hysteria. It is this generation's Red Scare and it is out of control.