Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:It makes sense. (Score 1) 37

Low karma is a good thing if you're a right winger. A badge of honor. Mod system has become just "how far left are you?"

This is the dumbest of all dumb takes on Slashdot. Every time I post about the obvious and well-accepted failures of capitalism I get modded down but somehow this place is a haven for leftist thought? No, you are just a shitty person with shitty ideas.

Comment Re:Cooperation Governments needed (Score 3, Informative) 32

They are a communist totalitarian regime

wank wank flonk flonk

doing ethnic purges not only historically but also RIGHT NOW

We're funding one not only historically but RIGHT NOW

openly preparing to invade their peaceful neighbour Taiwan

Venezuela, bitch.

operating the Great Firewall

Yeah, we don't have a great firewall, we just have unconstitutional citizen spying programs with taps on all backhaul links and points of ingress/egress.

implementing some absurdly Orwellian schemes like their Social Score thing

Wait until you find out about credit scores and employment or renting a home.

not to mention stealing all western IP they can lay their hands on

Yeah, we sent it to them so they could build us stuff, and our nation was very much founded on ignoring patents.

and abusing their trade dominance (rare earths anyone) in any way they can.

You mean the rare earths we stopped producing because we got them cheaper from China, and could be producing again but we don't want to? Oh yeah and tariffs.

My point here is not that any of this shit China is doing is great. My point is that we are doing all the same shit, and if you don't think so, you're a nationalistic dipshit with his head so far up his ass he can see out of his own mouth.

Comment Re: We've done the experiment (Score 1) 152

Maybe the halfway house is that platforms keep their section 230 protections, but must identify any users that post illegal content

So now you want sites to verify ID before people can post, so that they can be ID'd if some content they posted is deemed illegal? Think about that one some more.

Comment Re: We've done the experiment (Score 1) 152

I don't think there's any lack of fundamental problems. We're still primarily using a protocol that wasn't designed to be resistant to bad behavior, with address starvation, with assignments carried out by conflicted organizations, with name services likewise, with apparent disinterest from government organizations happy to write speeding tickets in anything like enforcement of existing laws about conduct on telecommunications networks, which themselves occasionally make a lunge towards censorship and all of which are somehow complicit in unconstitutional citizen spying programs. All of these problems are also international. When you want to discuss problems with the internet, the first problem is where do you start, and the last is where do you stop?

But on the flip side, at some point even the phone company is allowed to cut you off, and not only for reasons of nonpayment. It may have to involve legal action, but if you are problematic enough, you can be denied non-emergency phone services. Or, you know, imprisoned. Then you wind up with really terrible access to telecommunications. How much are we expecting to change society in the course of this conversation?

Comment Re:So "justice" == social media platforms banning (Score 1) 152

You can see all the content of Slashdot *if* you choose to. Just filter at -1.

Slashdot, Reddit, and other atypical social media sites have their own benefits and pitfalls unique to their particular community and moderation designs. Aspects of Slashdot's specific mod system are beneficial and user-friendly, including the descriptive moderation and ability to assign scores based on it. I give bonuses for flamebait, troll, and offtopic on the assumption that much of that moderation is intentionally abusive, but I also don't want to wade in the muck of every single comment in busy discussions.

Sometimes I click around and eventually do read every comment, especially in discussions with few comments, but I'm not about to make that my default because I sure don't want to. But I still wish that metamoderation had any perceptible effects, or that you could comment in discussions where you've moderated — just not in the same thread — as the people most qualified to comment are also the people most qualified to moderate.

Comment Re: Greatest president of modern times (Score 1) 128

Oh yeah this is a completely isolated incident

Now do Israel oppressing Palestinians.

Ah yes just what I needed today: some asshat trying to explain the Jews to a Jew.

Apparently you did, because equally apparently you don't understand as much as you think you do. You also seem to think you're the only descendant of Jews around here.

Comment Re: Greatest president of modern times (Score 2) 128

Just please fuck all the way off and take your shit with you as you go.

I didn't have you being a little bitch on my bingo card for today.

Did those murderous arseholes in Australia this morning bother to check whether any individual jews they were shooting were observant or flat out atheists? No.

It's extremely antisemitic to conflate all Jews with Zionists, as Zionism is antisemitic. But...

It is absolutely 100% about race.

...most of the Zionists' ancestors weren't even semites, unlike the people they're genociding. Tell me again about how it's 100% about race. You're focused on this incident, I'm talking about the bigger picture, of which this incident is only one piece. Was it anti-semitic? Yes. Is Israel's genocide promoting anti-semitism? Also yes. Does that justify attacking all Jews? No it does not, not any more than being opposed to actions of some Muslims or middle easterners or any other group justifies attacking all of them. But since I never said so, it is you who may fuck all the way off. If I had meant that, I would have said it, because I am not a mealy-mouthed little fuck who can't say what he means. I don't have to make points through weaselly implication because I am not afraid to simply say what I mean, despite the accusations of cowardly clown fucks.

A significant number of Jews insist that their ethnicity and their faith cannot be separated, which is only true to the extent that some of their sects refuse to consider you to be a Jew unless your mother is a certified Jew — another practice which both limits the growth of their faith, and alienates them from everyone else. It's not universal, but it's universally harmful, because the people who do this insist with their fundamentalist fervor that it's the only valid way to be a Jew. So while I would say that for individuals it's entirely possible for those things to be separate, it's not reasonable to expect people to believe that it is.

Every person is an individual, whether it's the shooters in Australia, or their victims, or the Muslim who took the shotgun away from the shooter and got shot twice in the process. Everyone's potentially got their own narrative about every other person, none of which will fully capture who or what they are. All we can do is look honestly at situations, causes, actions, and results, and look for solutions. None of them come from being willfully ignorant as you are demonstrating here, nor from a jerking knee.

Do better.

Comment Re:So "justice" == social media platforms banning (Score 4, Insightful) 152

Section 230 isn't about protecting them for the sake of protecting them, it's about protecting them for the sake of our rights. You might hate feceboot with good reason, but a lot of people have a lot of serious conversations there amidst the stacks of shit.

Every platform has to decide what to show users. Even Bsky has a "Discover" feed which is algorithmically generated.

Comment Re:Repealing Section 230 ... (Score 0) 152

That still doesn't sound like a restraint on free speech.

It is.

Governments need contact info from people and organizations in order to function.

They can contact my provider and have my page taken down if the law is being broken. They do not need to contact me. They especially do not need to charge me money. The fee is a large percentage of my yearly hosting cost, so it significantly increases my costs. In protest, I am not paying it, and disabled comments instead so I am not prosecuted for the actions of trolls. This has reduced free speech on the internet. Now multiply that by the number of hobby sites affected.

Now, if the government tries to influence what content can be removed and what cannot, then I do see a problem.

Do you see the Catholic Court that's replaced the Supreme Court?

Comment Re:Repealing Section 230 ... (Score 1) 152

A requirement that someone needs to be registered on a site for communication purposes does not sound like a suppression of free speech by the government. Nor does a fee, which if I understand correctly, is not "required" by the provider to charge, and is not collected by the government.

It is the fee which amounts to suppression, and you do not understand correctly. You do not get safe harbor protections if you do not register with the feds and pay a fee. Educate yourself before you "try" again.

Slashdot Top Deals

No one gets sick on Wednesdays.

Working...