Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Saturday April 14 2018, @05:56PM   Printer-friendly
from the Smells-like-censorship-or-teen-spirit dept.

On the Daily Dot:

The Facebook pages of Richard Spencer, the alt-right leader who was famously punched in the face last year, have been suspended.

The pages for the National Policy Institute, a lobbying group of sorts for white nationalists, and Spencer's online magazine "altright.com," vanished on Friday after Vice sent the social network an inquiry about hate groups. They had a combined following of almost 15,000 followers.

The action was taken just days after Mark Zuckerberg emphasized during his testimony before Congress that Facebook does not allow hate speech. But it wasn't until Vice flagged the accounts that Facebook suspended them. The social network said in a statement that it identifies violating pages using human monitors, algorithms, and partnerships with organizations.

Also at Engadget and Vice.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Monday April 16 2018, @04:14AM (6 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 16 2018, @04:14AM (#667503) Journal

    My dear and squishy khallow, many, many times right here on SN soylentils have given you thoughtful debate.

    Feel free to try to include yourself among that number at some point. Seriously, it does seem that there's a real mind somewhere behind that mask, but we rarely get to see it.

    As to the rest of your post, you did get a rise out of me, but it's just not worth it to express it in words. As I said before, I respond to thoughtful debate. But when it's not, well, you might get a good response out of me or you might not. Seems to me that one should get something more out of an aristarchus debate than just pushing the same worn-out buttons [soylentnews.org] that have been pushed for years.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   -1  
       Troll=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   0  
  • (Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Monday April 16 2018, @09:33AM (5 children)

    by aristarchus (2645) on Monday April 16 2018, @09:33AM (#667557) Journal

    Yes, of course, thought so. People advocating white supremacy are just plain stupid, because anyone can see that white people are not all that smart. And, even more damning, those white people who try to advocate white supremacy are among the stupidest members of the human species. So we are going to censor you, if you want to go down that path, khallow, and to your credit I have not seen you explicitly do so, yet. But if you do, we will not have a thoughtful debate about your theory of racial superiority, we will instead post news stories about your affair with your step-mother-in-law/landlady in the trailer park, mutandis mutandum. And you will be very, very ashamed. Until that, keep pushing the whole "private property incentivication" and "prosperity gospel" snake-oil. And, oh, remember to deny climate change again. You need to meet your quota for the month!!

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 16 2018, @01:28PM (3 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 16 2018, @01:28PM (#667614) Journal

      People advocating white supremacy are just plain stupid, because anyone can see that white people are not all that smart.

      I'm not doing that. You're not doing that. So completely irrelevant. Why don't you go bug Ethanol-Fueled (whose views still aren't white supremacy, but at least much closer to that than mine)? His permaban doesn't seem to be working.

      Until that, keep pushing the whole "private property incentivication" and "prosperity gospel" snake-oil.

      What I've written on that subject (the latter, the increasing prosperity of humanity everywhere) has been backed by actual evidence (for example, here [soylentnews.org]). Two thirds of humanity as a whole has seen substantial increases in wages over a recent 20 year period. Something big is being done right.

      As to "private property incentivization"? It's its own incentive. There's no need for additional incentivization and I have never proposed such.

      and to your credit I have not seen you explicitly do so, yet

      Exactly. Why again are you being a jerk to me for things I haven't done "yet" (nor ever will)? Where were you when we had people ranting [soylentnews.org] about genocide was justified because the target did it first via mere immigration.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday April 16 2018, @06:40PM (2 children)

        by aristarchus (2645) on Monday April 16 2018, @06:40PM (#667753) Journal

        Two thirds of humanity as a whole has seen substantial increases in wages over a recent 20 year period. Something big is being done right.

        Done "right", alright! Like 1%, Old Skool Big Business Republican Right! Oh, my dear and furry khallow, has it ever entered your head to assess metrics that seem to support your ideological position, so that you might see that an increase in wages can actually be a decrease in relative income, and a lowering of standards of living?

        Please, tell us more! I just love Vienna Sausage Economics!

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 16 2018, @11:35PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 16 2018, @11:35PM (#667850) Journal

          so that you might see that an increase in wages can actually be a decrease in relative income, and a lowering of standards of living?

          The links address that. For example, from the link [voxeu.org] showing a huge improvement in the well-being of all humanity. First, they define "real income":

          Each country’s distribution is divided into ten deciles (each decile consists of 10% of the national population) according to their per capita disposable income (or consumption). In order to make incomes comparable across countries and time, they are corrected both for domestic inflation and differences in price levels between countries.

          Then view figures 1 and 2.

          When we line up all individuals in the world, from the poorest to the richest (going from left to right on the horizontal axis in Figure 1), and display on the vertical axis the percentage increase in the real income of the equivalent group over the period 1988–2008, we generate a global growth incidence curve – the first of its kind ever, because such data at the global level were not available before. The curve has an unusual supine S shape, indicating that the largest gains were realised by the groups around the global median (50th percentile) and among the global top 1%. But after the global median, the gains rapidly decrease, becoming almost negligible around the 85th–90th global percentiles and then shooting up for the global top 1%. As a result, growth in the income of the top ventile (top 5%) accounted for 44% of the increase in global income between 1988 and 2008.

          So collectively - after correcting for inflation and differences in price levels, the world got a lot wealthier over the period 1988-2008 with around two thirds of the entire human population seeing large improvements over that time period. I'm oversimplifying the interpretation a bit, but it's showing the best improvement ever in humanity to date rather than some spurious artifact. Who received what depends on the country. China did a lot better than India, for example. And some did worse such as the lower classes of Japan.

          At this point, it's looking pretty good with several decades track record, and looking to get better. Sure, we could embrace radical doubt [soylentnews.org] and assert without evidence that the presence of some confounding factor, like an all-powerful evil deity, is throwing off our economic numbers. But what would be the point?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 17 2018, @04:05PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 17 2018, @04:05PM (#668154)

          If you were to buy some stocks . . .

          Oh never mind. You would choose stocks that would leave you destitute. Don't bother.

    • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 16 2018, @09:45PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 16 2018, @09:45PM (#667815) Journal

      people who try to advocate white supremacy are among the stupidest members of the human species

      For certain values of "stupid", that may be true. On the other hand, a white supremacy regime in Europe did a damned good job of fucking up half the world when it threw a temper tantrum. If those people were so stupid, why did it take all of the rest of the world's power to stop them, and a couple of allies? It would seem that those Nazis were pretty damned intelligent, to have done so well, up until they fucked up with Barbarosa. You may or may not argue that Hitler was insane - but not even insanity negates a high intelligence. The bastard was crazy, AND smart, not to mention cunning and charismatic. That was a very, very VERY dangerous combination. Had Hitler not began losing touch with reality, he may very well have overrun Europe and it's allies.

      It really isn't necessary to display your ignorance here. Politics, prejudice, racism, religion, and similar traits are no more an indicator of intelligence than height, or hair color, or the language you speak.