ZahzenEclipse

I guess your world is only black and white ay?

This meme is a bit dishonest because its about Chinese government harvesting this data not about companies harvesting it. Both are bad but ones substantially worse.

I trust them more than “alt” historians who use flimsy evidence.

I’m not sure I’d trust non historians about history.

Well you took the cowards way out. I was hoping you’d actually try to contend with any of the many points they made as it would be an interesting conversation but you had to lean on ad homs in the end.

Okay so what I’m hearing is you want companies to make investments in artists directly - so a form of profit sharing essentially. Why would a company invest in artists if artists get all of the profits when its successful and the company loses all of the capital if it fails? Why would any business want to partake in a system like that?

Okay, but what does a system look like that moves past both? How do you ensure people get resources if you don’t want capitalism or a planned economy?

I agree broadly with much of your assessment of history and many of the problems that bely current western society. The rich might be exploiting capitalism to their benefit but a capitalist system with proper regulation will always be better (in terms of Quality of life and freedom) for larger groups of people Than a planned economy.

People need to expect to pay for art and entertainment. People should. It’s immoral and unethical to not pay for art and expect art to be there.

Lol. The people selling it to their local communities are just as bad as the people at the top. The people at the top are many times from the local communities you guys are defending.

I think this has more to do with it than the FBI personally.

I dislike how this narrative completely bypasses the power hungry, money hungey gangsters who were perfectly fine making money off the backs of their communities.

Suffering isn’t pointless. It makes me and many others feel good if horrible people like Brevik suffer, its justice for the people who suffer everyday due to Breviks crimes. Governments through history have been responsible for a ton of suffering - this is one of those rare instances where it’s fully justified.

But I’ll admit, wanting revenge isn’t great and you’re right, we shouldn’t setup systems to enact revenge. That being said, some people are so terrible they need to be locked up and separated from society permanently. Since enacting a death penalty is both expensive and takes a very long time if you want to have the proper checks and balances to ensure innocent people aren’t being executed, that tells me life imprisonment is the only option for people that would or should be otherwise executed.

Maybe he changes his tune in 10 years and becomes a voice against the terrorism he tried to inspire. That could end up with an at least beneficial outcome for society.

I personally beleive the death penalty shouldn’t exist for people like Brevik. The best case scenario is he suffers for the rest of his days. He can’t be rehabilitated and he shouldn’t be.

His acts were so evil he deserves to suffer. Laws should change to ensure people like him can suffer.

Anything that broke the “echochamber” is what got downvoted but this was never strictly about downvoting it was about moderation so im not sure why you shifted the focus to downvotes. We know you’re trying to essentially say the people who got downvoted or moderated deserved it because they said things so “bad” they deserved to be moderated. I’m not sure that’s always true or even mostly true.

You’re right that free speech typically means the ability to speak freely without government intervention but I think you’re being obtuse if you don’t see how those implications could be limited by corporations online and if you’re comfortable with censorship online not being democratically decided upon that’s cool but I don’t trust the corporations as much as you do i guess.

You need free speech to ensure teachers don’t get fired for teaching science. I’d be care about removing that ability from other roles and people just because you disagree with the premise.

In that sense, at least they are transparent a put being authoritarian. There are too many “populist left” spaces where those things aren’t spelled out and you’ll be banned for a vague rule that could be anything and everything. I despise when they don’t give transparency to their rules and how they enforce them. It’s generally bad too imo. That being said, mods have a hard fucking job admittedly and they aren’t paid.

Are you in favor of firing teachers who day things that go against common popular teachings in an area?

Your mocking of this situation makes me feel you’d be in favor of laws that fire teachers for teaching evolution for example.

Thats not a very good argument at all. You’re literally stating “well since majority agrees with it, it must mean somethings wrong with you.” How could possibly think this is healthy or good way to engage with ideas different than the “mainstream”?

Is this the first time the “mainstram” is right?

I wasn’t trolling at all. I’m not sure how that could be your take away with the information I gave. I guess you’re in favor of moderation that limits discussion and opposing viewpoints. Most authoritarian are though so I can’t be suprised.

Arguing with a mod isn’t trolling. Disagreeing with a mods decisions isn’t spam or harassment. I guess you’ve found a great way to control speech you don’t like though. Anytime someone says something you dislike call it trolling, spam and harrassment and oila, you can effectively control every message board in existence.