|
Lampsacus posted:Do you just want robots to have rights because it'd be cool? Because I feel that's the drive behind all of this. it's very important to eripsa that he be hailed as a groundbreaking philosopher and towering intellect but all the questions that matter are already swarmed and picked over by more capable intellectuals so he has to set out for the frontier so to speak and seek his fortune in rocky conceptual ground like "is my dishwasher a slave?"
|
#
¿
May 17, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
Monglo posted:Has anyone effectively debunked guys like Stephan Molyneux or Jordan Peterson? They seem like the biggest YouTube intellectual authorities right after Gavin Mcinnes amongst the alt-right and anti-SJWs. from what i remember about molyneux he's a lost cause white supremacist who said africans were better off under colonialism/slavery and that mental illness isn't real
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
Forgall posted:https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/theresa-may-internet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html he's such a staunch leftist
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Midig posted:Dat feel when leftists lose all sense of perspective* he never was a leftist, it was just something he said to manipulate people into lending him false credbility it's the same thing people say when they're all "well i WAS a leftist, but i voted trump because of all you idiots on the internet who blah blah blah" it's just a weak attempt to guilt trip people into agreeing with you
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
Mewnie posted:Excuse me, it's oh yeah haha. like it's better to describe yourself as a political antique. i wonder if that's just the part of carl which desires intellectual authority without going through all the work of education and building a pundit's career so you just dress yourself up in half understood fancy language like you're some kind of stolen valor weirdo for academia
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Acknowledging gay people is extremely political. The forums were hilarious. Just because she tongue kissed her room mate doesn't mean they're gay! (Tracer still might date me) As a 100 hour tracer playtime player I am extremely upset to have the rug pulled under my feet! the fun thing is blizzard is highly responsive to the fan community in terms of adding cutesy poo poo so you know some poor blizzard employee is paid to wade through all of that negative feedback about a cartoon's sexuality https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRJNsN_vmZ0 not to gunk up this thread but as a soldier main i love that his dance reinforces what a lame dad he is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Asl3ciOGFPc boner confessor fucked around with this message at 16:35 on May 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 24, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The people who are the most vocal about how they have a thick skin and don't get offended (and criticize others for being babies who take offense too easily) seem to almost always have even thinner skin than the people they criticize. yeah, a nonfunctional theory of mind which leads to large amounts of projection + also the internet screamer effect where more often than not people who get wrapped up in internet arguments (especially with strangers over social media) are doing so out of a need to unload negative emotions
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
bessantj posted:One thing I've noticed about quite a few of these 'intellectuals' they tend to take 30 minutes where 5-10 would have been more than enough. Is there a reason for this other than they're gibbering wrecks? for the same reason they don't write articles instead of making long rear end videos - they love to hear themselves speak and are convinced of their superior intellects. the audience for people who want lovely vlogs instead of vlogs tends to prefer people speaking instead of reading and understanding the written word, i'll leave the implication hanging
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
the FC games are repetitive and largely avoid narrative creativity but any mass media is going to have to choose to be innovative and meaninful, or have the broad popular appeal necessary to turn a profit. this is how every AAA game is, it shouldn't be a suprise to anyone the fact that FC5 uses rural white americans to fill the "religious/political fanatic bad guys" slot is pretty low hanging fruit
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Archer666 posted:I don't really see anything wrong with calling yourself whatever you want, gamer or movie buff or bookworm or whatever. identifying yourself by what kind of media you like to consume is limiting yourself as a person. it's like prefacing your statements with "as someone who doesn't get out of the house much, i..." and this is especially true for less respectable or intellectual media like television or video games
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Haven't comics been on decline since the 90s? nah, the market is growing but repetitive superhero books pushed by the traditional big publishers like Marvel or DC are losing share to indie comics or more midrange publishers that focus more on different types of stories. the walking dead is and was a huge seller, and nowadays you see more innovation and creative exploration from writers and artists
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:So not a Youtube Intellectual, but some Scottish Youtuber gets his with consequences for his actions "ugh this orwellian communist nazi society with literal gulags" *faces a maximum one year sentence for teaching a dog to respond to hate speech* also lol that the guy with stretched ears, a filthy beard, and multiple facial piercings is worried about the effect a hate crime charge would have on his employment potential
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
Fados posted:I for once think it should, and that one doesn't have to like it, or support it, even though it opens a space for terrible dumb guys like this scottish fellow or lunatics like David Irving. i think that if you're going to do something so stupid as to repeat hate speech to a dog enough times to condition the dog to respond to the hate speech, you should at least be smart enough to not film, edit, and upload a video of you repeating hate speech to a dog. like the idiot who was terrorizing his children for views, youtube and social media subtly encourage a lot of horrible behavior and it can be jarring to be removed from your happy little bubble of enablers into the sudden realization there are real world consequences for your actions if he had never tried to monetize his stupidity he would be fine. plenty of people say much uglier things about jews every day, they just have the tact to do it off camera lol at this quote though quote:“I don’t actually hate Jewish people and the video was just an insight into the darker side of my humor, a prank to annoy my girlfriend and that I did not intend for people, other than people who knew my comedy, to see the video,” Meechan said. i did not intend for people to see the video when i uploaded it to youtube he really lost my sympathy there when he refused to take responsibility for his poor decisions boner confessor fucked around with this message at 16:25 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:why not get angry over that instead? we can do both? it's not like there's a shortage of punishment available for people who film themselves saying hate speech also i dunno how many people are offended but i'm definitely entertained and feeling schadenfraude at the hack comedian QQing that he might face punishment for his idiocy
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
"why am i being punished? i only comitted light hate speech. diet hate speech, if you will. i didn't really mean it when i spent hours teaching a dog obscene gestures linked to an ideology of mass murder and oppression, it was just a funny joke. there are bigger problems in the world, starving kids in ethiopia and all that. why is my transgression of the law being prosecuted? aren't there bigger problems to deal with in our society than me, and people more deserving of punishment than myself? why do i have to face consequences for my actions?"
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:is it common for those other people to get thrown in jail for hate speech in Britain? serious question I don't follow British politics. i dont know. probably? they seem pretty robust about prosecuting these things but this case is a bit exceptional and is going to generate press where more mundane cases might get a mention in the local paper and that's it little munchkin posted:So John Cleese, David Cross, the guy from the producers, and anyone else who's pretended to be a nazi for a laugh should all be arrested? -few of those people are subject to british law -especially british law from the 1990's-2000's -if you're part of a large production and have established yourself as a comedian who is acting out a written script you have a more credible claim that you're "just joking" versus some schmo in his living room. at the least you'd have the legal protection of your employer, and likely their legal guidance on what you can get away with. how many people are pretending to be nazis on british tv nowadays? -those people are actually funny, and getting a laugh out of someone lends further credibility to the claim of "just joking" versus someone repeating 'gas the jews' at a dog like it's a broken FYAD meme
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
mojo1701a posted:I love the complaints about now not being able to be hired as a result of a hate speech arrest. Isn't the whole point of "free speech" is that it allows others to call you a prick if you are in fact acting like a prick? free speech means that i can say whatever i want and you're not allowed to say anything bad or critical about it or make me face consequences for my actions in any way
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
i've seen a few conservatives say the guys in portland who got stabbed standing up to the ranting racist should have minded their own business. it's telling that they regard the men who died or were wounded as the wrong parties in this scenario who should have kept their mouths shut, and not the insanely angry armed man who was screaming racial epithets at teenage girls. this really tells you all you need to know about how people on the right regard free speech and who is allowed to have it
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:fair enough, those were awful examples i dont know who that is but i'm going to say yes because anyone responsible for a live action show on adult swim would probably be better off in prison
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:watch his stand-up no thanks little munchkin posted:for an explanation on why I think a guy yelling "kill the jews" at his dog is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things it's not a dichotomy. we can punish them both, we don't have to choose boner confessor fucked around with this message at 18:04 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
they're both awfully stupid opinions to have. again, we dont have to choose
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Midig posted:Companies don't genuinely care about that stuff. They care about their reputation. Which means that if you try to play off a joke as a real opinion you are making sure that someone is fired for no good reason. if someone's joke is difficult to distinguish from a real opinion then that's kind of a problem for them. as it turns out, actions have consequences and realizing/accepting this is an essential part of growing up
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Midig posted:Basically, a person is only allowed to make offensive jokes if: offensive humor is difficult, so it helps to be a good comedian when trying this kind of humor instead of just filming yourself conditioning an animal to respond to hate speech, which isn't actually funny Midig posted:Struggling/semi-successful comedians are not allowed to because 40+ people like you might not understand it. i understand it, it's just not funny. where is the punchline? where is the comedy? what broader statement is being made here except that people do stupid things? this is about as funny as someone making GBS threads themselves on purpose, or your posts it's super easy to dip into awful, shocking behavior because that's not as difficult as being creative and building an audience. i'll refer you to the earlier videos of the man who "pranked" his children until they had mental breakdowns. was he a struggling comedian deserving our respect as well? if you're asking me to draw a line between lenny bruce and nazi pug man, i'll ask you to draw the same line between nazi pug man and man who screams at his children as a joke
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
also again i think it's extremely funny that a man with facial piercings and earplugs trying and failing to become a youtube comedy star is suddenly worried about his employment potential
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
Midig posted:He makes his silly dog learn to react to offensive material that is widely considered to not be "too soon" material. That is the joke. I smirked a bit at that. It is not genius comedy, but you have to be a special breed of moron to go around thinking "he is spreading antisemitism with his silly dog". Even worse to think that it warrants one year in jail. i'm sorry that you think the scottish legal code is a special breed of moron but that sounds like exactly your problem and nobody else's. maybe if the guy wasn't so desperate to not work for a living that he would do something so stupid as to film himself teaching hate speech to a dog he wouldn't be in this mess but the world never ceases to amaze regarding the basic idiocy of everyday people
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I work with several people who have some or all of those things so that isn't a particular barrier in the UK, they just adjust the dress code to compensate. i mean i've seen people who work in head shops dressed that way as well but you're strictly limiting your employment potential when you cosmetically modify your face in what the west considers nontraditional ways such as tattoos, piercings, etc. this is part of the appeal of the thing to young people, to decorate one's body in a taboo fashion which marks you as someone who rejects mainstream society and the concept of having a straight job. suddenly this man has reversed himself and is very concerned about his future once he's started to face the repercussions of his behavior. it's weird how life sneaks up on you like that, huh?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Midig posted:Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it* so the man who screamed at his children until they had panic attacks but then excused his behavior as a prank, you're on board with that? if not, why not? Midig posted:Good. If you understand that it is a joke you move on. Congratulatulations, you are not a moron. Instead of appeasing morons by giving him a sentence, how about not putting him under arrest. turns out when you break the law you don't get a freebie if you explain to the officer arresting you that you didn't really mean it. i'm not sure if you're aware of this but the penal system doesn't work that way
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Midig posted:The dog has no idea what it is doing and it has no effect on its life. The child was bullied by his protector for views. You guys should seriously start to learn that the differences matter more than the (highly reaching) similarities you find. they're both just pranks though? funny pranks? why is one different from the other if they're both just joking pranks among pals for laughs? a few posts ago you said "Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it*" so what makes you an expert on the critera now? how do you know screaming dad didn't really mean it? all of a sudden you feel confident that you can draw a line between acceptable joking and non-acceptable joking where previously that line couldn't exist, the fact that you would contradict your own argument so quickly is a little puzzling to me. can you explain it? nazi pug man specifically tried to prank another human, his girlfriend, the dog's owner. it's not like this man is just autistically repeating hate speech to a dog for his own amusement. why is it ok to startle someone by teaching their dog to respond to anti-semitism but it's not ok to startle someone by being much larger than them and screaming at them?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Midig posted:Good thing that I have the luxury in a discussion to express that the problem is not him breaking the law, but the fact that the law is not flexible enough to detect obvious jokes. "officer, please, let me explain - i was ironically mugging this man! this is a toy gun! we have a hidden camera! i was going to give his money back! it's a social experiment! this is a violation of my free speech! officer, stop hitting me, this is censorship-" little munchkin posted:yea the boner dude is being super disingenuous with that comparison and also with his hand-wringing over how the dude had facial piercings Area Man With Facial Tattoos Complains That Drug Misdemeanor Unfairly Impacts His Employment Potential
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Midig posted:The dad's joke hurt a kid in an environment he was stuck in. You can scroll past the nazi-pug joke. Again, have to emphasise that the way you try to make it similar falls flat. you can scroll past the screaming dad too. "just don't listen to it if you don't like it" is a stupid comparison i'll ask you one more time and then i'm just going to assume you acknowledge your argument is stupid and you can't defend it - why did you say "Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it*" as a defense of one thing, but then you immediately violated your own rule when presented with a more obvious case of harm being done with the "it's just a prank" defense? why would you trap yourself in a double standard like this? don't you recognize that immediately undermining your own argument makes you look like you don't really believe in the things you say? OwlFancier posted:I think you're being really weird with this line unless you actually think that people looking odd means they shouldn't have jobs. i dont know how to use any simpler words to explain it. it's silly to me that someone who would damage their employment potential by getting unnecessary piercings and modifications to their face would be concerned about damaging their employment potential by comitting light hate speech. either be a social rebel or don't, you can't half rear end it and do both without looking like a coward. if you're going to be edgy, you have to go all the way, you can't retreat back into safe conformity the second that things get too real
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Midig posted:Wait, you are actually implying that the dog reacting to anti-Semitism hurt someone? i'd imagine that jews didn't like it, but that's just a hunch. we all know hate speech laws exist in a vacuum anyway
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Midig posted:I am talking about the actual kid. Not the viewers. thank you for admitting you have a weird double standard here that isn't logically consistent, it will help me consider whether or not to read your posts in the future. god bless
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
lot of people struggling with understanding and accepting reality itt todayMidig posted:How is it a double standard for me to think that a kid who can't escape the abuse of his dad is similar to a video that is voluntary? because you refused to acknowledge there's an acceptable threshold between comedy and damaging acts by supporting the "it's just a prank" defense for one youtube idiot but you did draw that line for a different youtube idiot, despite both youtube idiots filming themselves doing illegal things. in two similar cases you applied a shoddy defense to one of them but not the other, and you're relying on strange appeals to common sense to support your argument. you're saying people who don't think like you regarding teaching a dog to respond to hate speech are just humorless buzzkills but then you cross the line and join team this isn't funny when we go a bit further down the line into a man pranking his children with emotional abuse. this all indicates to me you haven't really thought at all about the things you're saying and you're just throwing big words out in a pile to justify your kneejerk emotional reactions, which is a boring thing to read since neither i nor anybody else cares about your opinion on things
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Lovechop posted:depends what you do for a job really dude. kind of judgemental.  take it up with society. the reason young people do it is because it's transgressive. i dont care if someone has piercings or not, and only someone who can't read would think i've made a personal statement on the matterit's just so absolutely simple to me, and also funny, that someone who alters their appearance on purpose to look edgy and fashionably taboo would come to regret their decisions in this manner. it makes him look like a big fat pansy bawwwing about the sudden realization that his decisions in life have consequences he has to deal with OwlFancier posted:It really isn't very dissonant to think that piercings are OK and lame hitler jokes are permissible only quoting you to let you know i've seen your post and chosen to ignore it because you have absolutely no idea what i'm arguing here despite me saying it multiple times in very plain english
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Midig posted:Your problem is that you take the poo poo I say too literally and as you made it quite clear, your need for consistency goes against common sense. The truth is that you have to treat these scenarios differently despite them having a few similarities. Of course most jokes are hurtful in some way. But to me, it seems like you are reaching when you compare a joke that is detrimental to a kid to a video that is controversial to viewers but harmless to the owner of the dog. i'm not talking about the joke necessarily, but when you can apply the "i'm pranking you" defense to excuse illegal or immoral behavior. screaming dad does and did explain his emotional abuse and horrific parenting by claiming he was just joking, because he is literally mentally ill and the product of childhood abuse himself. he is not a good judge of what is a prank and what is not, because to him it is normal to scream at children until they develop personality disorders. do we have to take him at face value, like nazi pug man, or are we capable of overriding their claim and pointing out that their behavior is not a joke? if as you have claimed the nazi pug man was just joking and therefore shouldn't be punished for violating hate speech laws - and you did make this exact claim, by saying we can't judge others by our own subjective criteria - then why shouldn't screaming dad's behavior be accepted as a joke instead of child abuse? is it just because you're less comfortable with child abuse than teaching a dog hate speech? if so, why do your emotions matter more than others here who feel like teaching a dog hate speech is not ok? OwlFancier posted:You've said something many times in very plain english but I'm not sure if it's conveying the meaning you want it to. that's fine. you may not be sure what it means, but i am sure. please stop quoting me boner confessor fucked around with this message at 19:12 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Lovechop posted:maybe i just live in a place where nobody cares (very left-leaning part of the UK) but i've never had a problems in my field looking the way i do. unless you have a very public/client-facing job who the gently caress cares what you look like. getting some piercings isn't going to necessarily make you unemployable immediately. damaging employment potential isn't the same as unemployable. most of the people i know with faddish piercings or superfluous holes above the neck remove them as they grow, mature, and try to set out on their careers. the only people i know who still have them are content to be approaching middle age while working in low effort low pay jobs in head shops or call centers. it's an ugly thing, but society generally has grooming standards which signal to others "i am a capable, sane human individual" and part of the appeal of ear plugs, septum piercings, or other body mods is that you get to playfully cross this line in a way which doesn't make you seem disgusting the way not bathing would, or having rotten teeth. maybe as more people age this will change but currently having unorthodox piercings on the visible portions of your face make a statement about one's acceptance of western society's rules, and this impacts your employment potential whether you like it or not in the context of this ongoing conscious decision on the part of nazi pug man to maintain the appearance of a young adult placing himself at odds with society's norms, it is amusing to me that he would claim to be concerned about his ability to find and hold a job as a consequence of uploading videos of himself chanting hate speech at an animal Lovechop posted:you just seem very obsessed with his appearance (or proud of your very funny take on it) i'm only responding to the people who keep quoting me, i'm no more obsessed with it than you are
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
Midig posted:Ok. Just explain to me what you think a hurtful joke is to see if we are on the same page. BTW I did not bring a chart. But stand-up comedians tend to bring up subjects that might offend people all the time. without getting into the "what is comedy" derail stand up comedians are also generally good at defusing or mitigating the offense of their humor. part of being a good comedian is saying offensive things in a way which doesn't offend people, or at least as few people as possible. that's why they are professional joke tellers instead of just people who uncomfortably repeat filthy jokes around a water cooler, since it's pretty easy for any human to come up with and verbalize an amusing statement. shock comics generally dont have much success on their career trajectory, and it's the kind of thing that can utterly destroy your career if you gently caress it up here is an american comedian with a promising career, on a comedy stage, with a comedy microphone, delivering what people widely regarded as hate speech. his career is totally shot clean dead. why can't he claim the "i was joking" defense? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoLPLsQbdt0 boner confessor fucked around with this message at 19:35 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Lovechop posted:this isn't true for myself, or a fair few other people i know, but i think we've got some very different experiences here so i'll agree to disagree on this one. i say this with no offense or insult implied, but if you're a young adult in your 20's you don't really have to worry about the kinds of jobs that having facial peircings would disqualify you for. but once you cross that line into your thirties you start to be very concerned about not working at the chip shop forever and maybe cleaning up your act a bit
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Lovechop posted:what kind of defence is that, anyway? i don't know what kind of maniac goes to that amount of effort just to annoy their girlfriend. i sing pop songs off key, works an absolute treat. turns out there's a shitload of idiots on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBt2714dcQo
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Again, being a slight annoyance isn't generally supposed to be illegal. filming yourself speaking hate speech and choosing to upload that to the internet, and encouraging people to watch it is illegal however, even if it's done "ironically" by saying it to a dog, cat, or houseplant
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:44
|
|