Indeed. Which standard do you, gentle Slashdot read, want: * Videos that people want to put up, and that people want to see; or * A curated selection of videos that are best for you, as judged by your betters
We know that oppressive governments the world round demand the second option. Which should you demand?
"To know who rules you, ask: who am I not allowed to criticize in public? Those are your rulers."
Indeed. Which standard do you, gentle Slashdot read, want: * Videos that people want to put up, and that people want to see; or * A curated selection of videos that are best for you, as judged by your betters
See, but here's the thing. Irresponsible speech that promotes violence will always lead to suppression. You 4chan jackoffs knew this a long time ago, but thought that it was more important to be edgelords and have lulz than it was to be responsible. So now, you reap the whirlwind and spoil it for every
A society that can't take edgelords in stride is pretty damn useless. Maybe the answer is to realize that humor, tasteless or otherwise, is unimportant, and let is pass.
A society that can't take edgelords in stride is pretty damn useless. Maybe the answer is to realize that humor, tasteless or otherwise, is unimportant, and let is pass.
And if it had no real world consequence then I would be on your side. However, hate crimes have been spiking and it turns out some edgelords aren't really being edgy at all. Should we just take people being murdered because of these internet clowns in stride?
that Hate Crime is increasing while the rest of violent crime decreases. Here's the article you're probably referencing [nbcnews.com]. Since it was the 1st hit on google.
We fought hard to delegitimize organized violence against minorities in this country. There was widespread anti-black terrorism committed with impunity right up until the 70s (and the occasional incident in the 80s and 90s).
It's not that Americans evolved some higher form of intelligence or empathy. We're the same folk we were 40 years ago minus
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Tuesday April 02, 2019 @05:27PM (#58374418)
"Hate Crimes" are like autism - a new measure of something that already existed, but people didn't call it that.
Hate crimes aren't spiking in the US. In fact, they are down from the 1960s and 1970s. Or 1980s. Or even the 1990s. Or the 2000s.
Media focus on "hate crimes" is way up, though, because it serves a political purpose right now. Notice the attention paid to Jussie for his victimization - when the opposition was to blame. As soon as it turned out to be fake, it got dropped.
The biggest "Hate Crime" advertisers are the ADL and the SPLC The ADL knowingly includes fake and non-hate crimes in its listing - for example, the "hate crime" bomb threats last year? The ones that were actually a Jewish kid harassing his own synagogue? Yeah, that's a "hate crime". The SPLC is worse, convicted slanderers that they are. They declare wearing hats to be a hate crime, and talk about the rise of "hate groups". many of which don't actually exist.
Both groups fund raise off of this stuff, so it serves them to have people worry about "the rise in Hate Crimes"... especially when it isn't actually happening.
Good (Score:1, Insightful)
I see no problem here (except with some employees who are complaining, who should probably be fired).
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. Which standard do you, gentle Slashdot read, want:
* Videos that people want to put up, and that people want to see; or
* A curated selection of videos that are best for you, as judged by your betters
We know that oppressive governments the world round demand the second option. Which should you demand?
"To know who rules you, ask: who am I not allowed to criticize in public? Those are your rulers."
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
See, but here's the thing. Irresponsible speech that promotes violence will always lead to suppression. You 4chan jackoffs knew this a long time ago, but thought that it was more important to be edgelords and have lulz than it was to be responsible. So now, you reap the whirlwind and spoil it for every
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A society that can't take edgelords in stride is pretty damn useless. Maybe the answer is to realize that humor, tasteless or otherwise, is unimportant, and let is pass.
Re: (Score:2)
A society that can't take edgelords in stride is pretty damn useless. Maybe the answer is to realize that humor, tasteless or otherwise, is unimportant, and let is pass.
And if it had no real world consequence then I would be on your side. However, hate crimes have been spiking and it turns out some edgelords aren't really being edgy at all. Should we just take people being murdered because of these internet clowns in stride?
Re: (Score:5, Informative)
Really? Fewer than 8K hate crimes per year in a country of 330M people, and you see a problem? Out of ~1.1M violent crimes, mind you....
It should also be noted that violent crime rates have fallen by ~1/3 over the last three decades.
I think the problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
We fought hard to delegitimize organized violence against minorities in this country. There was widespread anti-black terrorism committed with impunity right up until the 70s (and the occasional incident in the 80s and 90s).
It's not that Americans evolved some higher form of intelligence or empathy. We're the same folk we were 40 years ago minus
Re:I think the problem is (Score:0)
"Hate Crimes" are like autism - a new measure of something that already existed, but people didn't call it that.
Hate crimes aren't spiking in the US. In fact, they are down from the 1960s and 1970s. Or 1980s. Or even the 1990s. Or the 2000s.
Media focus on "hate crimes" is way up, though, because it serves a political purpose right now. Notice the attention paid to Jussie for his victimization - when the opposition was to blame. As soon as it turned out to be fake, it got dropped.
The biggest "Hate Crime" advertisers are the ADL and the SPLC The ADL knowingly includes fake and non-hate crimes in its listing - for example, the "hate crime" bomb threats last year? The ones that were actually a Jewish kid harassing his own synagogue? Yeah, that's a "hate crime".
The SPLC is worse, convicted slanderers that they are. They declare wearing hats to be a hate crime, and talk about the rise of "hate groups". many of which don't actually exist.
Both groups fund raise off of this stuff, so it serves them to have people worry about "the rise in Hate Crimes"... especially when it isn't actually happening.