SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
takyon
on Thursday January 03 2019, @04:34AM
from the oppress-the-world,-make-it-a-better-place dept.
from the oppress-the-world,-make-it-a-better-place dept.
Netflix has pulled an episode of Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj from its Saudi Arabian service after a complaint from the Saudi government as the show covers the Saudi Crown Prince's alleged involvement in the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the kingdom's war with Yemen. The Saudi Government cited its anti-cyber law in its removal request, specifically Article 6, which appears to have nothing to do with the content of the show other than that the Saudis are embarrassed. Given the Streisand effect, it is likely that more people will now see the show than otherwise would have.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Netflix Pulls Episode of Show After Saudi Arabia Offended
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 40 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
It's not reality that's important, but how you perceive things.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday January 04 2019, @05:09PM (3 children)
I'll just sign off with: people who might care are profoundly ignorant about what really goes on, and kept that way intentionally. Transparency would help far more (quantity) of people than it would ever hurt, but the people it would hurt have the power to keep their secrets, and so they do.
Woo yourself.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 05 2019, @01:06AM (2 children)
What transparency? What does this have to do with money?
One of the lessons of the information age is that when you're showered with information, the very first thing you do is ignore it. Here, bombarding us with irrelevant details of our trading is just more stuff to ignore. Information has to be extremely filtered before it is of any use. That's the point of abstraction.
As to the people who have the power to "keep their secrets", whose fault is that? Getting rid of simplifying aspects of our lives, like money, isn't going to make this any better.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday January 05 2019, @04:33AM (1 child)
Money has been a great mechanism of obfuscation - I want fish, there are fish in the market, but what can I tell about these fish? Precious little beyond the price. Where does the market get the fish? Well, that depends on a lot of things, but mostly where they can get them for the lowest price. Does the market tell the customers when they get a great deal on some "fish" that is virtually indistinguishable from the normal fish they carry? Almost never. Should the customers know that these "fish" came from a different fishery, different water quality, different ecosystem? Certainly they should, but our supply chain traditionally obfuscates all that behind the single dimension of price.
Is it, though? Keep your one dimensional price, and certainly don't bore me with the details when I'm making the standard weekly grocery run, but when I'm selecting a new supplier for shrimp, or bread, or whatever... I do take the time to read the available labels, and they're usually sorely lacking on meaningful information - sometimes they're so vague that I get a sense that they're hiding something that I might reject the product for, and if there's a better described alternative I take it. I'd rather have more complete information to base the decisions on, but most of what we get is just marketing BS.
There you go, oversimplifying and hearing what you want, not what was said nor intended. Keep your money, it has its place, just don't attempt to put a price on everything.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 05 2019, @06:53AM
Quite a bit. Visual and smell inspection will tell you the quality and quantity of the fish as well as how fresh it is. If the fish is unskinned you can easily tell what family/genera it belongs to.
Why? This information is near useless to the buyer. And when you consider doing it for every little thing, it rapidly devolves to farce. People would be ignoring all that information outright because they just want to buy fish not get a damn lecture on the world's ecological systems while they starve to death.
I think it's telling that you can't articulate WHY your ideas are supposed to be good ideas. That never comes up. This is typical of the nonsense you repeated say. I'm not a mind reader, but I repeatedly see strong demonstrations of irrationality. For example, the first post you wrote on money made the observation that thinking of a product as the sum of labor was somehow a better perspective. That never was justified. It just got dropped on the internet and has lain inert every since. Then you conflated our argument with lottery players. All I can say is that if you're the sort of person who plays lotteries that return a quarter on the dollar, it goes a long way to explaining your reasoning process.
Then followed this bizarre assertion about the cost of Nike's being somehow relevant to the thread. Don't care. Moving on to the last item of that post:
You already stated several most costly alternatives such as Lamborghinis and $117 pairs of shoes that get plenty of funding. So the premise is wrong by your own admission. Owned goal.
And the idea of ridiculous complexification of routine day-to-day decisions would be utterly devastating if somehow we could force it upon mankind, especially of the lottery playing kind (the kind of person who willingly gets a quarter out for a dollar in will no doubt make great use of your ecology lecture on the fish they buy).
Here's the problem. Your views aren't self-consistent, have no bearing on the overall topic, and you can't even show that there's a benefit, even if unrelated to the present thread or overall subject, to read your posts. It has nothing to do with money, trade, Saudi Arabia, or Netflix. It has nothing to do with some elite keeping us down via "obfuscation". It certainly isn't sane with crazy proposals to dump on people completely unequipped to handle those proposals. It's just sad performance art.
I have no idea why you think money is somehow not working despite copious evidence to the contrary (such as economies that have worked for centuries), but the easy and obvious fix here is for you to perceive things differently. Maybe think a little too. It certainly beats inventing numerous ways to make our lives far more insane than they already are.