Jiro
1mo ago
Is it classified as 'substantial' when the amount of people clicking the holocaust denial link drive it to the top of Google search results?
Just because they click it doesn't mean they want it. It's like clicking on a scam, except that unlike a scam, which is false and trying to take your money, this one's just false. People don't want false pages.
Jiro
2mo ago
He used a similar tactic at Reddit
Not according to that link. That link is a user speculation (labelled with a sarcastic JUST KIDDING, which doesn't mean that he's kidding, but does mean that it's something he thinks happened, not something he has evidence for.)
Jiro
2mo ago
I couldn't watch Gunslinger Girl. The whole setup with older men mentoring young girls to do weird things, even if in this context it was assassination, seemed too close to grooming for me.
Jiro
3mo ago
The Arabs hate the US because the slogan "they hate our freedom", while laughed at by a lot of the left, is pretty much true. The Arabs don't like to have multi-ethnic, religiously tolerant states where the inhabitants get the freedoms that the West approves of. Even freedom of the press and separation of church and state would be alien to Arab countries, never mind something like gay rights.
Jiro
6mo ago
The left may not be consistently anti-Israel, but even when not actually anti-Israel, it's anti-a lot of things Israel does, including border walls. So the answer is "pretty much nobody who opposes limits on immigration in the US supports it for Israel".
Jiro
7mo ago
If "ecosystem" refers to people in charge, there is no contradiction between them cheering for Hamas and everyday leftists not doing so.
Jiro
7mo ago
Everyone dies sometimes. And many different types of deaths cause trauma. So this seems fundamentally unfair, since the drunk drivers don't get to negative-visit traumatic deaths that don't happen because someone died from a drunk driver instead of dying from cancer or something else traumatic later on.
Jiro
8mo ago
Right after you win the World Cup, a famous and powerful gay guy whom you're kind of acquainted with...
It's impossible to have a gay guy who would be attractive to the vast majority of males the way that a guy could be attractive to the vast majority of females.
Jiro
8mo ago
The sentiment is hostile. You don't need to believe Hell exists in order to understand that someone louldy proclaiming that you're going to go there probably doesn't like you very much.
What about employers who tell people to sell their vote to their employer or they are fired? Middle class employees won't stand for this, but people with few skills who are qualified for few jobs, .ay have a problem.
And for those people who will likely never be interested in politics for one reason or another, they still have the ability to directly benefit from their voting privileges as a citizen.
What do you about the fact that you being able to buy unused votes dilutes third parties' votes? Aside from forcing the third party to bid against you for the votes just so that he's no worse off than he is today.
Jiro
10mo ago
Also giving executives who fail miserably huge severance packages instead of doing what they should, telling them to get on the dole like a normal person.
They get severance that you don't for the same reason that they get paid more than you. So I'd say that yes, they should get huge severance packages.
Jiro
11mo ago
I don't think your conflation of death with life imprisonment as things the state should never do on the off chance it does it to an innocent makes much sense.
It does if you don't fall in the lizardman constant. I guarantee you that outside weird rationalist forums, you'll find essentially nobody at all, and certainly no death penalty opponents, who say that there is an acceptable level of innocents killed by the state. Yes, if you do say that, my argument isn't relevant.
Jiro
1mo ago
I don't know, does he think that Israel is a death cult against Hamas's existence?
Jiro
1mo ago
The implication of "towering over the rest of the world is great" is that it's based on a principle. Any such principle that doesn't outright say "and no Jews" or equivalent would approve of Jews doing the same.
Jiro
1mo ago
Wingnuttery is not 99% recognized as false, Holocaust denial is, unless you're in Iran.
'Conservatives' want to see those viewpoints. They are a minority.
There's a minority, being less than 50%, and there's a minority, being less than 1%. Conservatives are the first kind; Holocaust deniers the second, outside of countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, which I have no qualms about saying Google should ignore.
Again, what is your problem here, exactly? You are OK with banning things you don't like.
Google is not banning Holocaust denial. Not showing it unless people ask for it isn't banning.
The extent of the worldview is 'my reasons are good, other peoples reasons are bad'.
What's the alternative to using reasons, even if you think your own are good and someone else's are bad--just don't use reasons?
And why was it on top of Google?
As the unintentional effect of stupid algorithms. Again, by your reasoning since a lot of people click on spam, they want to read spam.
You keep oscillating between 'true/false' and 'minority'
It's both.
What I am suggesting is that you can't even have a discussion on whether or not something is true or not if you ban it.
It's not banned. It's just not shown to people who want something else. People who actually want will still get it if they search for it. You're acting as if Google won't return Holocaust denial no matter what you do. They're not doing that. They're not even making it difficult to find.
Besides, there is no "discussion" except among a tiny minority.
Jiro
1mo ago
The people looking up the holocaust and related stuff obviously clicked on it.
Because it was on top of Google. You are trying to justify putting it on top of Google by saying that people clicked on it, but people only clicked on it because it was on top of Google. That's circular reasoning.
It's not false. It's true.
Oh come on now. Holocaust deniers really are a tiny, tiny, minority. Conservatives aren't.
You decide truth for the holocaust and ban it.
No, the world does. Holocaust deniers are a tiny minority, and they state false things.
Progressives decide truth for 'conservatives' and ban it.
Are you seriously suggesting that we should pay no attention to truth because someone might think false things are true?
We could say things like, the outcome of your legal case doesn't really depend all that strongly on what your lawyer or the prosecutor thinks of you.
Just like parents don't affect their children's outcomes much, unless they're abusive, lawyers may not affect the outcome fo the trial much, unless they're abusive. The civilian who knows nothing about lawyers and certainly nothing about you personally, has no idea if you'll deliberately lose the case because you think he's unsympathetic, or even just give in to the prosecutor because you don't care about the case. So he lies to appear more sympathetic.
Jiro
2mo ago
That's just a semantics question over what "bad" means. You can say "hurting someone in self-defense is always bad, but sometimes it is the best option" or you can say "hurting someone in self-defense is not bad" and you're really saying the same thing.
Jiro
2mo ago
...with the exceptions, as you note, of CRT, BLM, Gays and Abortion
And trans.
That already describes my priors and sampling method.
More options
Context Copy link