Trump Massive Rally in Washington DC (Nov. 14th) (Tens of Thousands Gather)

[HarryStotle]

I see so you are afraid you will lose your civil right to employment by being identified as “one of those.”

Kind of like gays and lesbians in past decades were targeted.

So same old malicious discrimination, just targeting a different identifiable group.

Sure is a progressive world we live in.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

You mean like Facebook?

On Facebook, that is dependent on the permissions a user applies to a post. If they give a post visibility that requires a certain association (ex: only friends can see this) then one must be signed in. If a post is made and a person chooses for all people to be able to see it, one need not sign in.

For example, this is a post from Samsung that can be viewed by anyone irrespective of them being signed in or not.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=3582699721787069

On Parler ,you would need an account to explore. But if I share a link with you, then you can view it the summary. For example, here is a recent post from PragerU

https://parler.com/post/9aabd82203f849dd9cd6152224fb16c1

You can see what it is about, but you can’t get to the information behind this without an account.

 

[sallybutler]

If they are working on a joint project, then it would be common.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

If they are working on a joint project, then it would be common.

They did collaborate on responding to COVID-19 misinformation, among other companies.

Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Reddit, Twitter, and YouTube

Though I think that list may be redundant given that Alphabet is over Google and YouTube and Microsoft is over LinkedIn.
Source.

 

[HarryStotle]

No difference. Facebook allows those who want to control access to do so. Parler has chosen the same mode of access and they are a private company that is free to set their terms of service.

Wasn’t that your argument defending the big social media companies who do limit what can be uploaded and viewed on their platforms? Suddenly a no-no?

Rules change because they are not big tech and a little to the right? Rules for thee, but …

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Wasn’t that your argument defending the big social media companies?

I’m stating differences in how content is accessed. I am not condemning any of these parties for their decisions on this matter. Some of these decisions don’t meet my preferences. And I am free to not use these services.

Perhaps this statement will clear up any misunderstanding.

Parler, Facebook Twitter, CAF, my personal blog, the corner of my yard - these are all private properties. The owners of these properties are free to allow people to post (signs in the case of my yard) and are free to decide which ones they don’t want to be there. They are free to deny or allow access, so long as that is not in violation of laws (ex: for services that cost money, commerce laws may be a consideration). They are all free to decide on the visibility of content that is posted there.

Suddenly, rules change because they are not big tech and a little to the right?

There’s no rule change.

 

[PickyPicky]

Who and what influences your speech that makes it free and, even better, fully informed?

A free press; the proceedings of Parliament; books; people I talk to. I certainly don’t need uninformed scandal-mongering and conspiracy-mongering from Twitter, or obvious untruths from President Trump.

 

[HarryStotle]

On Parler ,you would need an account to explore. But if I share a link with you, then you can view it the summary. For example, here is a recent post from PragerU
…
You can see what it is about, but you can’t get to the information behind this without an account.

I see. So you are complaining that Parler requires your email address and a phone number to subscribe at no cost, but you are not concerned that Facebook and Google mine all of your data keeping track of everything you view, everywhere you go, everyone you contact and monitor your ostensibly “private” messaging, then sell all that information to third parties everywhere on the globe that you have no idea who they are or what they will do with your data?

I think I get it…

You are so concerned about Parler because they are NOT left wing progressives that are keeping a social credit score on you or on anyone else. Your leftie ratings must be very high on those other platforms that you don’t want to lose all those brownie points.

I suppose like @(name removed by moderator) your employment prospects might also suffer.

Tell me again how we are NOT moving towards technology driven socialist authoritarianism at a rapid rate?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I see. So you are complaining

Nope.
Not a complaint.
I think you are interpreting what I wrote from a false premise.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I have views, that if known, would make me a reject to either of the two political parties here in the USA .

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Who and what influences your speech that makes it free and, even better, fully informed?

A free press; the proceedings of Parliament; books; people I talk to. I certainly don’t need uninformed scandal-mongering and conspiracy-mongering from Twitter, or obvious untruths from President Trump.

You sound very picky, PickyPicky.

Would you be averse to informed scandal mongering?

So you aren’t influenced by the BBC? Apparently it isn’t free, exactly.

 

[gam197]

Let’s not start personalising this and moving into ad hom territory hey. I don’t know what TS’s political outlooks are. I’d be rabidly left-wing by US standards mind you as I’m a member of a political party which is openly socialist in much of its views. I also hug trees at weekends for relaxation.
[/quote]

I also am one who does not like issues to be personalized but I seem to see a lot of it on these forums so it works both ways.

For years You have told people on these forums that they have no right to be involved in UK politics, that they are off limits to foreigners who do not understand all the issues. Just saying.

 

[HarryStotle]

Let’s not start personalising this and moving into ad hom territory hey. I don’t know what TS’s political outlooks are. I’d be rabidly left-wing by US standards mind you as I’m a member of a political party which is openly socialist in much of its views. I also hug trees at weekends for relaxation.
[/quote]

I’ll get my rabies shot and hide my plum tree away.

 

[HarryStotle]

He said the “free press.” I took that very liberally.

 

[HarryStotle]

Doesn’t sound ultra-left, more like ultra-sane, although I would probably quibble with the free travel part. Then, again, that might be because most of the “older people” around here are quite well-off.

I don’t necessarily disagree with expansion of access to education, provided the education is something worthwhile and not indoctrination into gender studies, identitarian/critical theory, or sensitivity training nonsense.

 

[HarryStotle]

Are you familiar with Mahyar Tousi?

Mahyar Tousi TV - YouTube

 

[Sarcelle]

I am immune-compromised so I requested a mail in ballot.

I must be one of those that shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

 

[Pattylt]

I don’t necessarily disagree with expansion of access to education, provided the education is something worthwhile and not indoctrination into gender studies, identitarian/critical theory, or sensitivity training nonsense.

Besides determining the circiculum , do you object to city, state or federal vocational training centers? Or, do you prefer they be private only?

I’m old enough to remember many public vocational training centers that later closed and now, it seems, only private ones exist and cost almost the same as universities. A friends son went to an automotive vocational school that wound up costing 40 grand for two years. He was then a certified mechanic but it still took him years to pay off his student debt and jobs weren’t paying near what he was lead to believe. Many of these kids never graduate and are still saddled with huge debts…the schools really push student loans on these kids with no real help to get them to graduate. My opinion is most higher education is partly a scam. No one should be encouraged to peruse degrees that wind up as low paying or overcrowded job markets. Nor do they push programs that do pay well and are desperate for graduates!

I have a hard deciding between restrictions on loans only for needed and well paying jobs vs letting anyone get a loan for almost worthless degrees if that’s their passion…I’m really torn on it.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I remember a specific thread that I think is being referenced here. I will add that it is good for it to be generally understood that a reading of the USA’s First Amendment doesn’t give someone an understanding of Article 10.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

I don’t necessarily disagree with expansion of access to education, provided the education is something worthwhile and not indoctrination into gender studies, identitarian/critical theory, or sensitivity training nonsense.

Besides determining the circiculum , do you object to city, state or federal vocational training centers? Or, do you prefer they be private only?

We have publicly subsidized community and technical colleges here in Canada. Generally tuition is kept affordable by government subsidies but students do pay $3 to $8,000 per year depending on the course of study.

All three of our kids went to university - medicine, education and forestry - fortunately before all the critical race and gender theory push in higher ed.

Better access to trade and technical schools would mean more young people would be trained with marketable skills and not in social activism aimed at destroying society.

I have no problem with a robust public and private blend of education. Keeps things competitive in terms of quality of programs and instruction. Vouchers are a great idea.

Where things went awry with higher ed was when the Obama administration made trillions of dollars available to naive students who were then shaken down by university administrations desirous of getting their mitts on all that ready lucre. Institutions built a giant bureaucratic superstructure on the backs of young people who will be on the hook to pay back those loans for years to come.

Part of the socialist march to undermine and destroy the middle class by making it almost impossible for millions of young people to start families and build a life.

That was my “conspiracy-mongering” for the day.