adroit balloon

enjoying my time here, floating around

  • 5 Posts
  • 170 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: 14 July 2023

help-circle





  • Ok so isn’t the issue at hand whether the sites are to blame?

    let’s break this down so I can answer you in what I think is an honest way:

    1. Are the sites legally responsible for the content they host, generally speaking and/or in this context of radicalization and such subsequent results as these?

    and

    1. Do these sites bear any social/moral responsibility to moderate their more extreme content in good faith to try to prevent this sort of result?

    and

    1. Is there an overlap of 1 and 2?

    1 - this is for a court to decide. I’m not familiar enough with the very specifics of case law or with the suits being brought to know exactly what is being alleged, etc. I can’t opine on this other that to say that, from what I do know, it’s unlikely that a court would hold these sites legally responsible.

    2 - I fully believe that, yes, sites like these, massive, general-use public sites have a social and moral responsibility to keep their platforms safe. How and what that means is a matter for much debate, and I’m sure people here will do just that.

    3 - is there overlap? again, legally, I’m not sure, but there might be, and in the near future, there might be much more. also, should there be more? another subject for debate.










  • didn’t Parler have something like this, then their entire DB got hacked handed over to the FBI just after jan 6th, complete with hundreds of videos of the traitors committing crimes that they upload themselves? since Parler didn’t strip any metadata from uploaded media, the feds were able to use it all as evidence and use everyone’s IDs to tie it all to them.

    I bet they arrested hundreds of people this way and used tons more of it at the various trials




  • adroit balloontoWorld NewsHow native Hawaiians feel about the occupation regime
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Yes, you’re really smart and you’re crashing this online argument. Your logic is impeccable and your arguments are flawless. I give up, you win!

    it’s sad this is the only way you can see the world. it explains your trolling.

    Changing the subject now

    why would I engage in a discussion with a troll, knowing full well you have no problem lying, twisting my words, and using very logical fallacy in the book?


  • adroit balloontoWorld NewsHow native Hawaiians feel about the occupation regime
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m pretty sure you understand what we’re talking about here:

    I’m pretty sure I see through your logical fallacies and am not buying your mental gymnastics to cover for them.

    this isn’t about “winning” just because that’s how you see the world, although I would categorically say that you’ve lost. lost time, lost face, and certainly lost your mind if you think you’ve won anything here.

    Or you’re not actually interested in the topic and are here only to do some light trolling?

    says the troll, lmao


  • adroit balloontoWorld NewsHow native Hawaiians feel about the occupation regime
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    note the dates. it was forcibly annexed by a coup government

    the facts don’t support your assertions. even if they did, it’s irrelevant because….

    the later vote to join as a state took place well afterwards

    just as I said and the facts I gave support. since 94% of people voted to become a state, no rational person would call it an “occupation”.