The internet is not a lawless space

if you look at the various terrorists of the last few years, you can see a pattern: they all radicalized themselves on the internet. whether breivik, the christchurch bomber, islamists and certainly also left-wing radicals. so how do operators of a social media platform deal with this? simply let it go because there are a few suitable quotes from some celebrities from the past? where are the boundaries? should pedophile networks be allowed to let off steam? should islamists continue to distribute their murder videos?

the fairy tale of the stolen election has led to violence, no one can argue that away. i have also read calls for violence on ats, and they mostly came from a certain corner. sometimes something was deleted, sometimes it stayed. but: even ats deletes content if it doesn't fit the terms & conditions.

Forum posts, private messages, PODcasts, blog entries, videos, images, and other supported content that violate these terms and conditions are subject to action that may include, but is not limited to, edits, removal, or account termination of the poster. 15). Posting: You will not Post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate. You will not solicit personal information from any member. You will not use information gathered from this website to harass, abuse or harm other people. 15a) Offensive Content: You will not Post forum posts, private messages, PODcasts, blog entries, videos, images, and other supported content, links to images or use avatars and/or signatures that are unlawful, harassing, libelous, privacy invading, abusive, threatening, harmful, hateful, vulgar, obscene, and/or disruptive. You will not use text, images, avatars or link to images or domains that contain gore, mutilation, pornography or illegal content. Doing so will result in removal of your Post(s) and immediate termination of your account. 15b.) Profanity: You will not use profanity in our forums on the Websites, and will neither Post with language or content that is obscene, sexually oriented, or sexually suggestive nor link to sites that contain such content. You will also not use common alternative spellings or net-speak alternatives for profane words.

so if you go by these conditions, would the calls for violence, incitement etc. that you can find on relevant sites stay here or would they be deleted?

in the end, it is also about the protection of children or people who are possibly not intellectually able to distinguish between lies and truth or who are not familiar with the mechanisms of the internet and are therefore easy to manipulate, which at some point can also have an influence on the lives of these people.

if we were to say: it doesn't matter what someone writes, as long as we protect their right to freedom of expression, what about the people who are victims of racism, terror and lies? what about their right to life, to feel safe?

it's not about free speech. it's only about protecting the opinions that fit into my world view, right? if facebook had started deleting the profiles of democrats, activists, etc., the outrage here on the forum wouldn‘t be great, am i correct?

hate is not an opinion. and it's no coincidence that in every civilized country there is a legal limit to when an expression of opinion becomes a crime. in germany, for example, you can pay up to 1,000 euros for an asshole. no one gets upset about that.

the internet is not a lawless space.

what if someone attack your wife, your partner, your children on the internet, insult them, threaten them? do you then say: that's his opinion and it has to be protected?

those in the kapitol were not antifas as you can see in the videos below. those were right-wing nutcases and psychotics. incited by false reports and lies. for people who know these groups, this is nothing surprising. we have exactly the same people in germany. they hate merkel. they don't want to wear masks. they don't want foreigners in the country. they dislike greta. they dislike the united nations. they dislike the european union. they dislike #metoo, #blm, #fridaysforfuture… everything is conspiracy for them. they hail putin (pretty strange uh?). they dream of civil war. for them, all those who don't agree with them are leftists, communists, traitors. journalists are evil. and trump is very popular within these radical groups. coincidence? no.

i think it's time for all those who always say that everyone else is asleep to wake up themselves before it's too late and you end up in jail or a madhouse.

peace!

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

Both sides are being played and have become radicalised to the extent where debate no longer matters.

People on both sides have been so brainwashed that their perception of reality has become blurred. But what better way than keeping control? Stir things up, get people to pick a side and ramp up the rhetoric to the extent that former rational people see violence as the only solution to the problem.

Of course this will only lead to tighter laws being introduced and even more restrictions being placed upon people.

Problem, reaction, solution. It’s been going on for years.

a reply to: oloufo

in the end, it is also about the protection of children or people who are possibly not intellectually able to distinguish between lies and truth or who are not familiar with the mechanisms of the internet and are therefore easy to manipulate, which at some point can also have an influence on the lives of these people.

In the end, it is about recognizing and considering the very great harm that can be wrought, not just the potential benefits. And no matter how much anyone wants to believe otherwise, if we give anyone the power to control our freedom of expression, that power will be used for nefarious and sinister purposes. Sooner or later, one way or another. Any time and every time that we allow someone power over others, we can be assured that it will be corrupted and abused and misused.

And make no mistake, this does not just include telling us what we cannot say, it will also involve telling us what we MUST say. "There was no fraud in the election"... "Transwomen are women"... "All hail President-for-life Kamala Harris"...

The answer is to teach children -- and everyone -- the critical thinking skills necessary to discern truth from nontruths. This is a necessary life skill in virtually every aspect of living. It is a survival skill.

No good can come from controlling speech. No good can come from compelling speech.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
Both sides are being played and have become radicalised to the extent where debate no longer matters.

People on both sides have been so brainwashed that their perception of reality has become blurred. But what better way than keeping control? Stir things up, get people to pick a side and ramp up the rhetoric to the extent that former rational people see violence as the only solution to the problem.

Of course this will only lead to tighter laws being introduced and even more restrictions being placed upon people.

Problem, reaction, solution. It’s been going on for years.

it's not two sides. there are so many sides and motivations. you divide into left and right, don't you? left is an invention of the right. so that the enemy is easier to grasp. but i'm not left. left is a political attitude. i've never voted left but i'm always called lefty here in the forum. there are left-wing radicals, as a german i'm well acquainted with the subject (see RAF). but the greater danger today comes from right-wing radicals, that's just a fact.

but the greater danger today comes from right-wing radicals, that's just a fact.

No, it isn't a fact. The right hasn't been busting up businesses, courthouses and police precincts all last year. The right hasn't been attempting to muzzle the left through violent intimidation and technocrat means. The right hasn't been brainwashing the youth through the school systems. The left is way more dangerous, they have infiltrated the public schools, social media and the main stream media.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: oloufo

in the end, it is also about the protection of children or people who are possibly not intellectually able to distinguish between lies and truth or who are not familiar with the mechanisms of the internet and are therefore easy to manipulate, which at some point can also have an influence on the lives of these people.

In the end, it is about recognizing and considering the very great harm that can be wrought, not just the potential benefits. And no matter how much anyone wants to believe otherwise, if we give anyone the power to control our freedom of expression, that power will be used for nefarious and sinister purposes. Sooner or later, one way or another. Any time and every time that we allow someone power over others, we can be assured that it will be corrupted and abused and misused.

And make no mistake, this does not just include telling us what we cannot say, it will also involve telling us what we MUST say. "There was no fraud in the election"... "Transwomen are women"... "All hail President-for-life Kamala Harris"...

The answer is to teach children -- and everyone -- the critical thinking skills necessary to discern truth from nontruths. This is a necessary life skill in virtually every aspect of living. It is a survival skill.

No good can come from controlling speech. No good can come from compelling speech.

isn't it rather the case that children today are sensitized much earlier when it comes to tolerance, to humanity, to the fact that there are different ways of life and that each has its right to exist? i think it's good that children today already have an awareness of the environment, equality and social issues. the fairy tale about the sexualization of children is a good example, also a propaganda tool created by right-wingers.

a reply to: oloufo

First, yes the internet is a lawless place. That's why each country creates laws to regulate the use of internet. There is no internet police force.

Second, people aren't being radicalized on public content and videos. If it's important enough to blanket ban people that use the letter Q in a post then it should be bad enough to simply stop allowing private messages on these services.

That's not what it's about though. If it's a matter of safety you don't blanket ban, you keep everybody exactly where they are under surveillance. Fracturing communications between criminal elements just causes them to seek other unmonitored means of communication and eliminates any advantage you had.

a reply to: oloufo

isn't it rather the case that children today are sensitized much earlier when it comes to tolerance, to humanity, to the fact that there are different ways of life and that each has its right to exist?

Isn't that a rather presumptuous statement to make a very diverse group of people across an entire nation?

And, quite frankly, no, I do not agree. Rather, I think the entire foundation of our current identity politics is anything BUT tolerance. Further, tolerance is greatly overrated. Screw tolerance. We should be encouraging and fostering RESPECT for everyone's right to be themselves, to do for themselves and by themselves and with other consenting adults.

i think it's good that children today already have an awareness of the environment, equality and social issues.

Again, quite presumptuous, and I will add arrogant and condescending. Too much of the current "awareness" basically constitutes fearmongering and propaganda, theories and failed models passed off as truth and inevitable. It is a very limited and contrived "awareness."

On the other hand, a child growing up on a farm or a ranch would have a far greater "awareness" of the environment, would better understand its cycles and seasons, would therefore be better equipped and motivated to work with nature, rather than against it. Likewise for children whose parents garden, or are active with nature in any capacity.

the fairy tale about the sexualization of children is a good example, also a propaganda tool created by right-wingers.

Fairy tale? Oh wow. That's not even true on the face of it. That's the kind of callous and cold denial that gets people hurt... in this case, gets children hurt. (Is that your "sensitivity" and "tolerance" in action??? You couldn't even keep up your gaslighting till the end of your comment.)

Of course there are creepy perverts who want to sexualize children! They even admit it and advocate for it... and hell no I won't provide links for their disgusting perversions. If you wanted to make distinctions, that is entirely fair enough. But fairy tale? Wow.

a reply to: oloufo

the very foundation of your argument is flawed. you assume:

a.) all those minority who foment illegal acts represent the majority of those who peacefully object to a "fairy tale" election. proof your logic failure requires looking no further than the same exact argument the left uses to defend much more destructive and more deadly violence done in the name of the 'peaceful' BLM an ANTIFA movements. it just so happens you have conveniently picked an example to use which aligns with your ideology. where was your same argument earlier this year???

b.) you wrongly assume these protests and objections are against the founding principles of this democratic republic which they are not. quite the contrary actually. again, proof can easily be seen with the fact that you don't see these protestors carrying anarchy flags, but rather national red white and blue flags. the same flags YOU so eagerly welcomed in 1945. the flags which removed the nazi banner permanently from your land! so you were wrong then? or, did the rules change when you ideology did? hypocrite much?

you may not like the man, but don't let your dislike for him blind you from the importance of the underlying message.

perhaps it is really YOU who is the one who needs to awaken from their slumber.

the fairy tale of the stolen election has led to violence, no one can argue that away

Not a fairy tale when your trying to silence people about it.

And way to IGNORE all the violence that lead up to it.

That were using the net to coordinate.

a reply to: oloufo

Do you think pedophilia is a fairy tale?

a reply to: oloufo

The hyper polarization of politics has been an amazing process to witness, and though it is terrifying, social engineering is an incredibly fascinating subject if observed from a safe distance.

It's been shocking to see the role that contemporary conspiracy has played in the most recent social experiments. A cult of personalty has always been a good way to rally people behind a faux cause, but it seems that when it's coupled with sensational propagandized conspiracy theories it becomes the new crack for the masses. It's caused our reality to fracture, and not in a fun star trek way where we end up with 1000 enterprises, but in a darker more intentional way that only disrupts our senses and erodes our ability to distinguish fact from fiction.

This fracturing of reality and hyper polarization seems to be a global issue right now, and all of the madness in the states is merely a symptom of a much larger problem.

a reply to: oloufo

Enforcing the Law is done in physical countries and it is enforced on physical persons that reside in these countries. You can't enforce Law on a virtual person in a virtual world.

I've been actively engaged in setting up public access to the Internet in the 1990's. In those days we already had thought through the consequences of establishing an international ,multi-owner network like the Internet. Therefore the early ISP's of this world abstained from any responsibility for content. In other words: the most vile things could be said, shown, written - we would not intervene in our role as ISP's. Content was not our business. Ensuring that content was safely transported and available was.

However, if a physical person (either working for an ISP or not..) did not like certain types of content, he could report this to the Law Enforcement agency of his country. And they would check if the content violated the Law. And if so, they would try to get hold of the physical person that violated the Law, arrest him and bring him to Justice.

That's still how it is, IMHO. And unless we have a unified world with a unified Law, it can't be otherwise.

Boot meet licker.

a reply to: oloufo

And once again there is scant mention of the thousands of peaceful protestors who didn't participate in the lawless parts of this demonstration.

The ones who kept to public spaces and then went home.

originally posted by: oloufo


it's not two sides. there are so many sides and motivations. you divide into left and right, don't you? left is an invention of the right. so that the enemy is easier to grasp. but i'm not left. left is a political attitude. i've never voted left but i'm always called lefty here in the forum. there are left-wing radicals, as a german i'm well acquainted with the subject (see RAF). but the greater danger today comes from right-wing radicals, that's just a fact.

So in your world, the right wingers are all the bad guys, and they just dream up Antifa and BLM, those are just figments of alleged Nazi's imagination.

Complete brainwashing.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

Just fact: the names "left" and "right" stem from a long time ago, when the role of the King was debated in the National Assembly, that oversaw the revolution. Members who thought the king should have an absolute veto sat on the right of the president of the assembly, and those who thought he should not - radicals! - sat on the left of the president of the assembly.

So, the terms "right" and "left" have not been invented by either side, but were simply labels that gradually became statements.

Sure, the fact checkers and ant-violence people are just trying to help...when it suits them.

Threats and Violence Twitter wont Police
Hypocrisy of Twitter
Democrats who have Called for Violence BUT not been Censored
Why Hypocrisy on Violence Matters
Democrats Hypocrisy on Elections

Censor when convenient.

Some of the worst censorhip has been COVID related, Front Line Doctors group has been trying to spread the word about Ivermectin for a while now. NIH says they will finally update their protocols next month after a hearing a with the aforementioned doctors. In the meantime, Facebook and Youtube have been censoring the info while 15k-17k people die each week, despite all the positive evidence for this already approved drug(just not for covid).

Self hacked discusses the censorship of wellness sites that Google has deemed quackery(ie not Mother May I Please FDA)
Health Websites that have been Crushed by Googles Censorship

a reply to: oloufo

isn't it rather the case that children today are sensitized much earlier when it comes to tolerance, to humanity, to the fact that there are different ways of life and that each has its right to exist? i

Well, you know, unless they don't like what you think, how you live, etc., and then you get canceled for it out of "polite" society.


Don't believe in the traditional family. Don't you dare think you have the right to keep what you earn. Don't you dare think you ought to believe in God over the state. Only believe what they tell you to believe and only when they tell you to.

Heck, they're canceling gardening groups now for daring to use the word "prepare".

a reply to: oloufo

"the internet is not a lawless space."


Says someone who has never looked into the dark web.



Deny ignorance.