funkygunther
Banned
It's better to be an absolutist if you're just going to make stuff up based on your feelings. What % of dissent is quashed exactly?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
- Status
It's better to be an absolutist if you're just going to make stuff up based on your feelings. What % of dissent is quashed exactly?
ManaByte
Member
Have you been living in a cave for the last two years?
funkygunther
Banned
don't answer my question with a question etc
Guilty_AI
Member
That 'rougher treatment' usually includes deplatforming, exclusion from social medias, pressure on employers to fire them, throw them out of college or school if they're students, etc. And even if you argue only "certain behaviours" are the target of this, that justification has been abused and mislabelled plenty already, to the point where just doing stuff like posting data suggesting certain BLM narratives are misguided can get you fired. All the while hateful rhetorics that happen to support the current status quo are overlooked or straight up enabled.
Its just a step away from aggressive opression, and why half of the west is worried - if not outright scared - of the current situation. After all thats how, historically, a lot of violent movements begun.
Last edited:
ForAcademicPurposes
Gold Member
So is he gonna let all those foreign (and domestic) agencies back on that are running psy-ops? Because technically GRU doing election interference isn't breaking any laws.
V1LÆM
Gold Member
i'd actually be up for a "Tesla Phone".
i think the smartphone market needs some more competition. i know many have tried and failed (microsoft/blackberry) to make alternatives and that the smartphone market has matured but it still sucks that you can only decide between Apple or Google. i have an iphone and i'm quite happy with it but i'm under no illusion that their marketing is to paint themselves as the good guys who want to protect your privacy. with their recent pushes into advertising and tracking it has me worried about the road Apple are going down. maybe it's time someone else tried jumping into the market again.
i think the smartphone market needs some more competition. i know many have tried and failed (microsoft/blackberry) to make alternatives and that the smartphone market has matured but it still sucks that you can only decide between Apple or Google. i have an iphone and i'm quite happy with it but i'm under no illusion that their marketing is to paint themselves as the good guys who want to protect your privacy. with their recent pushes into advertising and tracking it has me worried about the road Apple are going down. maybe it's time someone else tried jumping into the market again.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
So is he gonna let all those foreign (and domestic) agencies back on that are running psy-ops? Because technically GRU doing election interference isn't breaking any laws.
That’s a big yikes and a woof from me dawg
funkygunther
Banned
So is he gonna let all those foreign (and domestic) agencies back on that are running psy-ops? Because technically GRU doing election interference isn't breaking any laws.
Tams
Member
It's absolutely viable, especially if you have the funds and access to more that Musk as. The problem has mainly been that it's a long game, not profitable in the short-term, and in the long-term may only be mildly profitable. You'd be better off investing your money elsewhere. It's not like there's a massive need as 'back-up' to iOS and Android either, as a team could whip up a mobile OS from existing opensource projects in a day if really needed.
Other OSes can quite easily run APKs, so it's not like the apps (apart from some that demand security like banking ones) would be an issue. And with enough money you could get the major app developers to make native ones for your OS (and given the current app store fees, there's plenty of room to entice them with lower fees). The only real issue other than the cost, would be getting Qualcomm to stop being a cunt about using their SoCs. They lock that shit down so hard with their proprietary blobs, it's not funny.
All that said; I'd trust an OS made by a Musk enterprise no more than Apple for Google. And I bet it would be full on 'go fast and break things', so horrible to use.
If you really care about this, then there are multiple opensource projects (that aren't just Android ROMs) that you can try. And if you want something polished, then there's Sailfish OS - you can even get it on a phone as recent as Sony's last gen or on the Planet Computers Gemini.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Microsoft famously tried that real hard, it just doesn't work without a dedicated team and most importantly demand.
So is he gonna let all those foreign (and domestic) agencies back on that are running psy-ops? Because technically GRU doing election interference isn't breaking any laws.
I feel for her. And, as I've often noted, Musk is a habitual liar. One really cannot and should not trust any thing he says, any statistic or figure he presents, that cannot be verified.
Last edited:
Tams
Member
That didn't work out not because it's not possible, but because it was half-hearted, subject to internal company politics, and ultimately the money was better spent on things like cloud services (Azure) or pushing Surfaces as they were/are profitable and maintain the presence of Windows as the operating system.
If Microsoft had actually tried, perhaps twisting a few arms here and there, they absolutely could have. If Jolla with 58 employees can still keep going at it as their sole business, then Microsoft could absolutely could have. Even on the hardware side, HMD Global with only 600 employees keep going and Microsoft make (design) the Surface Duos (that can even run Windows - experimentally).
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Microsoft not only solicited private companies, but in 2011-2013-ish they even started a program open to the public that offered money to individuals for ports.
I'm not saying no one could ever accomplish it, but if one of the richest, mature tech companies with deep expertise and reach couldn't do it, I can't see any company driven by someone as lacking as Musk pulling it off.
Last edited:
Vestal
Junior Member
So is he gonna let all those foreign (and domestic) agencies back on that are running psy-ops? Because technically GRU doing election interference isn't breaking any laws.
Tams
Member
Just ignore half my post why don't you. And Microsoft clearly went around with too many carrots and not enough sticks. Windows Mobile was doing okay before they axed it.
Anyway, my point is someone with the resources of Musk absolutely could pull it off. But this is Musk we're talking about. I would let him look after my pet gerbil... and I don't even have a pet gerbil.
gothmog
Gold Member
This guy is a champion of free "as in free to lie" speech. Kinda funny how those people work.
akimbo009
Gold Member
So is he gonna let all those foreign (and domestic) agencies back on that are running psy-ops? Because technically GRU doing election interference isn't breaking any laws.
Wooooof. Add it to the pile with this guy though.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Sam Harris nuked his account 
LegendOfKage
Member
Sam Harris has been getting non-stop criticism for having no integrity ever since an interview he did a week or two ago where he admitted something unrelated to Elon Musk or Twitter that destroyed his credibility in the eyes of many and caused a massive backlash. I'm not about to go into details, because it's highly political (meaning against forum rules), but anyone wondering why should probably look into it.Sam Harris nuked his account
I'm just pointing out it likely has nothing to do with Musk, or how he's running Twitter.
[edit] Based on what EviLore posted below, it seems I'm mistaken, but I still think the backlash to the interview I'm talking about was probably a contributing factor.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
If I had to guess it follows the line of all his controversies where he says something we all know is true but aren’t willing to say aloud, and people are either too dumb to get the point or disingenuously misinterpret it.
But that’s my guess. I googled and didn’t find much to go off of.
FunkMiller
Member
Sam Harris nuked his account
I never followed the dude, but I guess he was dead set against Musk buying Twatter?
This article explains recent events. He left in response to Elon reinstating Trump.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Seems more pissed off at reinstatement of certain types per the article Lore posted. It's a shame, he's the most rational and clear headed voice out there IMO.
LegendOfKage
Member
Jimmy Dore has made a couple videos about it. Even if you don't like the guy or what he has to say, he plays the clip from the podcast interview that caused the backlash. The one from four days ago shows more of the interview than the recent one, so I'd watch that if you're interested.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
I have to confess, I don't tend to follow many Americans. The hyper-partisanship that seems to infect almost all of your public discourse puts me right off. I know a little of Harris from his relationships with people like Ricky Gervais and Richard Dawkins, but that's about it.
Unknown Soldier
Member
The mentally insane voluntarily banning themselves from Twitter is a good thing for the platform. I know who this guy is, hopefully he stays gone. There's at least a 50% chance he comes crawling back when he misses the attention.Sam Harris nuked his account
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
I wouldn't describe him as hyper partisan, he's got critical takes for both sides, but he is known for being anti-religion. Naturally that makes him a target for one side, but he's also got all sorts of disdain for extremists on the other side. I don't think getting flak from both sides means you're necessarily correct, but in his case, I think he's usually spot on.
Well, that's an opinion alright.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
I'm aware of him and I have agreed with him when I have seen him on stuff like Real Time, but I'm just not into the whole intellectuals writing books in which they philosophize broadly and make persuasive arguments beyond the scope of their expertise. The closest I've come to that is Sagan's collection of essays The Demon Haunted World - though that was more of a broad popularization of science than anything else.
I'll read their books if they stick to a single subject or theme, and it's something they specialize in. For example, I really liked Steve Jones's Darwin's Ghost, Dawkin's The Selfish Gene, and Steven Johnson's The Ghost Map. But they lose me when they veer off into all kinds of topics that they're not even educated or classically trained in. Which is the kind of stuff Harris struck me as doing.
Anyways, on topic, I am kind of surprised we've gone so long without another story in this saga.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
The ideology whose overgeneralized description Musk described as "accurate" is then strawmanned to be equivalent to/representative of a dude that wants the extinction of humans? That's a bit of a stretch. I think Musk might be seeing boogeymen where they don't exist, or at the very least overestimating their severity and influence.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Welp. It seems like ol' Sam met the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. I see his point, but that's an overreaction, IMO.
Yeah that's too bad. He's a smart dude. If Musk is seeing boogeymen, then so is Harris on the other side of the spectrum. This is one of the unspoken rules of celebrity content creators. He let it get to him. Don't obsess about your haters, lest you cede control of your mental health to them.
Toons
Member
No one needs to.
Repercussions for harmful actions arent necessarily authoritarianism.
Toons
Member
The guy who's every word on the site and elsewhere being seen, read and discussed by hundreds of thousands while he owns one of the most popular social media sites on the globe claiming that his dissent is being squashed with no sense of irony at all is pretty hilarious
FunkMiller
Member
What a moron. If you’re going to pointlessly virtue signal, best to get your facts in order.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Plenty of companies have sinister origins or blemishes in their past. What matters is now. Such companies as they currently exist are nothing like they were nearly a hundred years ago.
This shouldn't even need to be explained, but some people really don't think things through beyond "will this comfort me?" or "can I possibly make my imaginery opponent angry?". Both parties are being foolish.
Last edited:
250 year old country is racist because of its origins, but 90 year old company is good even though it originated with the holocaust.
Last edited:
TTOOLL
Member
Ignoring context is also pretty hilarious.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Who said a country was racist?
DeaDPo0L84
Member
Just say you support authoritarianism and stop pretending like you're genuinely concerned that an absolute stranger might see a shitty tweet. YOU were okay with the moderation because the people YOU don't like were being banned.
When you have bias people deciding what constitutes as hate speech and enforcing the rule along their own guidelines it's not "moderation", it's punishment for disagreeing with their world view.
When you get banned for not using preferred pronouns or for saying trans women are not women, that's not hate speech, that's reality, and people in power are constantly doing their best to drown out those who are simply stating facts.
1619 project
DeaDPo0L84
Member
Oops, already posted on this page.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
You gotta give her a long leash for her….performance…in Embrace of the Vampire
DeaDPo0L84
Member
I asked if his wife's bf would be joining them on Hive 
Guilty_AI
Member
Yes, someone needs to. For this or the previous ones.
The 'right thing' isn't an universal concept that exists besides humanity, it is not the same as 'the grass is green'. It is something we build ourselves, and will keep building.
Many things you consider obvious nowadays, and sneers your antecessors for not knowing or believing, while seated on your privileged historical seat with many decades or centuries of historical, social and philosophical development over them, they weren't always obvious.
And thinking you've reached the peak of righteousness in human history, thats normal. Our antecessors who claimed homossexuality was a disorder that needed to be treated thought the same. You think you're better than them due to a meagre few decades of extra knowledge that didn't exist on their time? Congratulations, you fell for one of the most common historical traps humans can fall into.
Labelling something as harmful because you want it removed is, on the other hand. How do you guarantee the two aren't being treated as the same?
Last edited:
nush
Member
Microsoft were late to the party and tried to push Windows on a smartphone, Blackberry failed to pivot from a mobile email/phone to a smartphone. Not sure how Nokia managed to fuck up so hard though, can't just have been N gage.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked