Because of the asymmetry of energy required to refute bullshit, letting people spew bullshit and cleaning up afterwards is very expensive. And because some people are very bad at updating information in their heads (worse than the average, which is already poor), people will be told a refutation, agree, and later will forget, and repeat the refuted bullshit. And I truly believe they forget, not just pretend to agree with the refutation.
So preventing some things from gaining a big platform is good.
But, the mainstream media is extremely not neutral. A lot of what is said is not strictly true, because people are pushing an agenda. People have a right to talk about it. People need to resist very bad social engineering experiments being done on them "for their own good". The fact that sometimes people have to issue retractions and apologies and are even sometimes fired proves that if you just accept the first version of every story you hear and don't let people make a fuss about lies, even more lies will be accepted as mainstream truth. There needs to be an opposition to keep people honest. The opposition must be not cranks or enemies, but reasonable skeptics.
People who simply note that men and women are not exactly the same are grouped with rapists and pimps, and that is similar to the strategy to declare classical liberals who are not leftists "far right".
Dating patterns absolutely changed, women's online culture absolutely affects them. When women choose from men they know, like work colleagues, it works out. But on dating apps, women really are only interested in the top men. When judged only based on photo, by the opposite sex, most men are not attractive, while most women are attractive. But now people don't date colleagues and rarely even friends of friends. For many men, 1 match for 10,000 swipes is reality.
Telling the average man that he needs to get in better shape, take better care of his hygiene, dress better, demonstrate that he is a provider and a protector and he wants to spend time with her not only for sex, is not misogyny.
Telling the average woman that sleeping with the most attractive man who will sleep with her is not the way to find a husband is not misogyny.
A lot of dating advice is "adulting" advice. People are immature. They don't know how people perceive them, they don't know how to change that. Their expectations are based on bad fiction. They are overconfident or they are wimps.
Some advice from "the manosphere" should be grounds for imprisonment, and some should be taught in every school, and using a single name for both is terrible.
I'm a security engineer, I have built things like this, and I made the original comment. A lot of my job revolves around developing automation for security needs.
Also, many of the top 100 domains serve user-generated content (like AWS/S3). Blindly trusting anything from them just because they are big is so woefully misguided it boggles my mind; I seriously doubt that anyone is actually doing what is described in the article.
Idk, I have done security audits for startups and small tech companies. They won't have a security engineer on staff and are "moving fast and breaking things". I've seen things much more misguided than this.
The Jews of Morocco (or Baghdad, or Tehran) can't go back. For that matter, surviving Polish Jews were chased out of Poland after WWII. Most Israeli Jews are Mizrahi and most Israeli Jews don't have a 2nd passport.
And, of course, people have a right to self determination. Jews don't have to beg to be allowed to live as dhimmi or as a minority in Europe.
One people from the middle east managed to actually decolonize their tiny piece of land from the Arabs, and people have lost their minds. Every minority in the middle east is under attack (Kurds, Druze, Christians, etc.), and Westerners always side with the Arab colonizers.
I love that you brought up right to self-determination.
However it comes with the bundle with all human rights and international laws, including Prohibion on forced displacement (like Nakhba), full recognition of Human Rights (apartheid state), territorial integrity (settlements), prohibion on genocide (ICC/ICJ is awaiting trial)
The international law has been settled on this: Two state solution, 1967 borders, full rights to Palestinian state, etc.
The vast majority of Israelis wanted the Palestinians to have a state. That's why Barak, Sharon and Olmert were elected. Israel tried twice to negotiate for a Palestinian state, and once gave the Palestinians Gaza unilaterally. The Palestinian leadership did not agree both times, and we have seen what they did with Gaza since 2005.
The problem is that the goal of the Palestinians is not a Palestinian state, it's to ensure that the Jews don't have a state. Otherwise they would have gotten a state in 1947. Except that the Palestinians didn't exist as a polity in 1947, and the West Bank was claimed by Jordan until 1988. The PLO was established in 1964, not to free the West Bank from Jordan, but to undo the 1948 war.
There is no Palestinian opposition that says not agreeing then was a mistake and they should have taken the offer (e.g. in 2008).
The main issue is not that some Palestinians are under the rule of horrible leaders like Hamas, the problem is that Hamas is the most popular party. The Palestinians completely support the goal of undoing the establishment of Israel. And apparently are mostly ok with the principle that it doesn't matter how many lives it costs, as long as Muslim land is freed, i.e. no sovereign Jews.
Basically, Israel has peaceniks and leftists, and even right wing governments were very willing to give land for peace, believing in the two state solution. The Palestinians have never had any peaceniks. The Israeli peace camp was badly wounded by the second intifada and it seems completely killed by October 7th.
The reason JPEGs still rule is because Google Chrome removed support for JPEG-XL, the actually better photo format, because the Google guys who did AVIF decided they don't want competition.
Chrome's JPEG-XL removal was officially due to low usage metrics and prioritization concerns, not just competitive motives - Google's own engineers were divided on the decision, with many supporting JXL's technical merits.
So preventing some things from gaining a big platform is good.
But, the mainstream media is extremely not neutral. A lot of what is said is not strictly true, because people are pushing an agenda. People have a right to talk about it. People need to resist very bad social engineering experiments being done on them "for their own good". The fact that sometimes people have to issue retractions and apologies and are even sometimes fired proves that if you just accept the first version of every story you hear and don't let people make a fuss about lies, even more lies will be accepted as mainstream truth. There needs to be an opposition to keep people honest. The opposition must be not cranks or enemies, but reasonable skeptics.
People who simply note that men and women are not exactly the same are grouped with rapists and pimps, and that is similar to the strategy to declare classical liberals who are not leftists "far right".
Dating patterns absolutely changed, women's online culture absolutely affects them. When women choose from men they know, like work colleagues, it works out. But on dating apps, women really are only interested in the top men. When judged only based on photo, by the opposite sex, most men are not attractive, while most women are attractive. But now people don't date colleagues and rarely even friends of friends. For many men, 1 match for 10,000 swipes is reality.
Telling the average man that he needs to get in better shape, take better care of his hygiene, dress better, demonstrate that he is a provider and a protector and he wants to spend time with her not only for sex, is not misogyny.
Telling the average woman that sleeping with the most attractive man who will sleep with her is not the way to find a husband is not misogyny.
A lot of dating advice is "adulting" advice. People are immature. They don't know how people perceive them, they don't know how to change that. Their expectations are based on bad fiction. They are overconfident or they are wimps.
Some advice from "the manosphere" should be grounds for imprisonment, and some should be taught in every school, and using a single name for both is terrible.
reply