• "Dissenter" browser addon puts a bigoted, alt-right comment box on every webpage
    110 replies, posted
It's literally part of it for them. Even if it's entirely their own fault, the more despised and marginalized they are the more they can play the oppressed victim card.
It depends, what have your family done? But seriously though, policing what debate is "legitimate" is difficult. At what point do you draw the line? It's easy to say "bigotry" or "racism" but it's much harder to classify debate as this in reality, but people easily paint opposing views to their own in an attempt to invalidate their opinions.
Also, who has the authority to draw that line and do you trust them and everyone who has that authority afterwards?
They're jewish so uh, they exist.
emphatically no.
For me in particular, that's not really the point. From a purely practical perspective, this can't be stopped. Trying to get rid of it would be a waste of time; if removed from the Chrome Web Store, they'll just all switch to Firefox or another browser that'll let them sideload it. What I'm worried about is how to combat the inevitable consequences, because this is potentially very powerful for them.
nah, echo chambers are the biggest threat to our society literally thousands of people are dying across the world because of echo chambers causing vaccination scares, it's just not an acceptable mindset to ignore stuff it has to be actively fought
bit of a non-sequitur to see a statement like hail satan's and say "it depends". either every opinion is worthy of respect, or not every opinion is worthy of respect. it doesn't depend on anything, what his family, in specific, has or hasn't done is irrelevant to the question and if we're getting down to definitions, what is "policing" a debate? am i doing it if i give my personal opinion on how a certain point of view is trash? in a proper debate, i'll be drawing lines, you'll be drawing lines, we'll all be drawing lines and i'll apparently turn into oprah. it isn't always conclusive, and it isn't always meant to be. the point is often to study and explore a subject more than it is to make be-all-end-all classifications
Yeah, thinking about it... does this app really enable them to do anything they wouldn't be able to do anyway using another service?
It literally just embeds the comments section from another website inside the page. Imagine if Facebook or Twitter offered an identical service: would it be a problem?
While it's unfortunate and in many ways unstoppable, extreme clusters like this accelerate quickly to even more insane lines of thought.
You misunderstand what I was (in jest) responding to, I was saying a one line description of an argument doesn't necessarily paint the full picture. He was arguing "obviously bad" arguments shouldn't be platformed. In this case, whether or not the argument his family should be killed should be platformed, the answer is obviously no right? but in reality debate is never this simple. Hence, "it depends" Policing a debate in the context I used is deciding what should and shouldn't be platformed as "legitimate" debate. I'm of the opinion bad arguments invalidate themselves.
While Gab is trash, This is, excuse the language, completely fucking idiotic. They're not shoving it in your face or contacting anyone who doesn't use this service. Can it be used for nasty purposes? Absolutely. (Think commenting on someone's social media profile to organise incidental drive-by-harassment or whatever.) That said, this has terrible discoverability by nature and is going to be less effective than any plain old bulletin board forum for such a purpose. It's nothing to worry about in particular. About the only concern might be the "coolness factor" a "secret chat room" might have, and that they'd be discoverable in the browser extension stores. It's probably going to get taken down once there's enough unmoderated trash on there to report it/raise a publicity issue for Google and/or Mozilla. If not, that means there's not enough publicity surrounding it, which would mean it's essentially harmless.
is every opinion worthy of respect or not? i understand debate is complicated, that shouldn't mean this question can't be answered. why are you equating it with deplatforming? i don't respect 'dissenter' in the slightest, but i am not taking any measures to deplatform them
I actually already know how to do this for Discord. Create a browser extension that interfaces with a Discord client. Set up a Discord server with a custom bot in it that allows users to create a room based on the hash of a URL. The browser extension would automatically create a room for any URL it visits, by providing the hash to the server. It would then join the room. This creates relative privacy of URLs (assuming you use a proper hashing algorithm), and is impossible to shut down. Guess we should ban Discord now huh
I mean I think we can try and find a middle ground between allow everything and ban everything
Trying to ban this sort of thing will inevitably lead to you having to ban encryption. It's just not going to happen. It can't happen. There are serious moral, legal, and technical reasons you can't really prevent people from talking to one another if they want to, especially without due process.
This was the not the question that was being asked and certainly not the one I answered.
it most certainly was
Because the article reminded people here that the type of people using it exist, and they'd rather they didn't. While seemingly ignoring the bizarre rabbithole it creates to stomp out discussion you don't agree with when it's within legal boundaries. Moreover, if it wasn't attached to such a politically awful situation, I love the idea of being able to directly ignore a website which would otherwise disable or remove comments. The issue is it's such a niche that you're going to get a very narrow band of people commenting and the whole thing is probably scraping your data at every opportunity anyways.
I interpreted "respect" in his context to mean "given a platform", you seem to interpret it as, liked? admired? shown consideration for? What is respecting an opinion? You seem very insistent that I answer the question literally for your interpretation, and so I will try. On a base level, I believe everyone's opinion should be respected (shown consideration), however that doesn't mean it can't be questioned or debated. Let's say, in the example used earlier than someone's opinion was that a jewish family be killed. From the outset that seems very extreme, do you think the best way to deal with that opinion is to remove it from discussion, or do you think deconstruct the argument and understand why the person feels this way and perhaps argue the alternative after first showing consideration for their view?
what if their beliefs don't come from a rational place
nobody should have a place where they can just be racist and bigoted away from public eyes
And how are you going to realize this utopia where no private conversations exist
id like to work on fixing whatever is making these people so miserable and misanthropic, rather than just letting them be hateful in private probably capitalism or something hey? but i'm not gonna be happy with a solution that's just out of sight out of mind. if i know that people are just going to be racist where i can't see it, that's not a solution either.
That's not what you said. You didn't say you wished people didn't feel the need to be bigoted. You said you don't think anyone should have a place where they can be bigoted without the public knowing. The only way for that to happen is to prevent any private conversations between individuals
There's a difference between avenues that already exist for private conversations, which nobody can stop, and a platform set up specifically for hate speech that most websites will not allow. Let me clarify I guess, this isn't private, I said nothing about private conversations, this is more or less a public app/forum, designed to only be seen by hateful eyes. It's not one on one convos, it's a way for people to air their hate speech on the things they're not allowed to comment their awful shit on, together. It's like getting invisible marker and writing on someone elses walls, and only the racists have the glasses to be able to see it (because nobody else would install this app).
But nothing is stopping you from doing the same. You can download the extension and post the things you want said. Just because you're unwilling to engage in the conversation doesn't mean they're preventing you from joining it.
An add-on made by weak cowardly men for weak cowardly men.
Wow, you had a decent argument until you basically went “liking this media means you’re secretly in support of all of these things”. welp I guess everyone who likes South Park is secretely an altrigher praying for the end of the world for the “lulz”. Flat out generalities like this do nothing.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.