|
| Thread: The Mike Benz interview |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted February 22, 2024 08:10 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 20:12, 22 Feb 2024.
|
@JJ
It is very different than the board here, because there is government intervention and I already underlined that very clearly. Also, you cant compare platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to HC, they are de facto the virtual equivalent of public squares of old times.
The rest is demagogy. I have also underlined that in cases of actual threats that can be realized or false accusations to individuals (he killed his wife, there are rats in his diner etc) free speech can be limited. Although it is not physics and open to some level of interpretation, there is still quite a clear consensus on what counts as hate speech (hate speech as a legal term, a speech that targets people in a realistic way, so that it falls outside the protection of free speech) and the situation is far from being exclusively about such incidents. Other than that, who decides what sort of claim is a “weapon,” you? What happens if Trump wins and his administration gets to decide which kind of claims are weapons and should be considered a public menace? The whole notion of free speech is based on the premise that governments dont get to decide that for you.
What’s ironic is, how you give Nazi Germany as an example while supporting the state executing thought control. And since you keep bringing up things I already underlined, this will be my last reply to you on the subject. I know you never change your mind anyway.
@bb
Well, 1917 is officially a state of war, and “the Great War” not just some proxy dogfight, so I guess you can expect the conditions to be far less than ideal. 1950’s on the other hand is the infamous McCarthy era and it would indeed be a set back to return to that kind of government interference when it comes to free speech.
I know what kind of journalist Carlson is, I even used to call him the Reha Muhtar of America. A similar kind of sensationalist journalist who used to be prime time anchorman here.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2024 08:29 PM |
|
|
Blizzard makes a couple of points I agree with.
The thing to keep in mind is that neither freedom nor freedom of speech are absolute values and never have been - freedom and free speech end where they violate the rights of others - that simple.
The internet and social platforms are a space where the rights of others are continuously and permanently violated. The REAL thing to do with the internet would be that you could post everything you want, but only under your real name, so if you violated the rights of others or existing law you could be held accountable.
Sure, that would be bad for people in totalitarian countries - but there is no free speech there anyway.
Seriously - here in the EU you cannot buy prepaid handys without presenting your ID and then the phone is registered to you. Also, IDs are now usable online to identify with. If your accounts in social networks were registered under your ID, things would be QUITE different.
In any case, the way it is isn't good, and it's not wrong for the authorities to try and change this.
I agree that a fact is a fact, but facts are just one part of the equation, the other is how they are presented and which story is promoted with them. It's the story and the presentation I don't accept. That (not only) the US government is active to enforce regulations on the use of the internet isn't damnable per se. The EU is at it as well, and successfully.
EDIT: And, Blizzard, since we are at it - free speech in the US? You reaally think that there gas been free speech for the black people in the US before ... well, depends. Or for women?
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
May Contain Nuts
|
|
posted February 22, 2024 09:34 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 23:49, 22 Feb 2024.
|
Constitutionally, the US has had free speech since 1776. It may have largely been a circus act for pretty much everybody, but that's when it was written down on paper in legal form. Juridically, that is relevant, because what was written down legally back in the 18th century is what was used later on to do amendments or to start enforcing it.
And it's still the case today that Americans are more sensitive to the subject than pretty much everybody else, including most everybody in Europe. The UK and Sweden are also pretty touchy with it, but that's a small slice of Europe. Germany and France are the two main powerhouses of the EU and neither of them have a strong emphasis on free speech. I'm not necessarily saying that's good or bad, because nobody in the world really believes in absolute free speech, but it is definitely somewhat different both culturally and with the application of the law itself. France will lock down a protest faster than it takes to bake a croissant, and it is not at all easy to do that in the US without people going into meltdown mode. People would be comparing Macron to Hitler (which I don't agree with) and their heads would be exploding on the camera while livestreaming.
edit: 1791 I mean.
edit: And yes, the huge drawback to using the law to punish people for things that fall in a gray area (like a vaguely-defined application of "hate crime") is that it super easily backfires as soon as a new administration and newly elected government comes into power, because those court decisions now have a legal precedent, and besides, it just means people are more likely to retaliate with the law if they've been on the receiving end of the state attacking them.
Just recently here, Trump was fined over 350 million dollars for lying on his loan applications, all of which he paid back and the banks made a bunch of money off of the loans. I am not a Trump voter, but just to be clear: this ruling from the deep blue state of New York is bat**** insane. Nobody would ever be fined over 350 million dollars for that crime. Nobody. Biden is currently trailing in the polls and unless something significant changes between now and early November, Trump will be president soon and Republicans are currently set to control Congress. He will be coming into office and he's probably looking for revenge. The courts are not suppose to be a political weapon to scourge people that are disliked. And then it just cascades from there, because people will want payback in 2026 midterms and in 2028. The way things are going right now are scary as hell for anybody who is capable of thinking longer than 4 years into the future.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 01:51 AM |
|
|
American voting system is like a few people picking out 2 movies for everyone to vote on.
I won't elaborate much. There are like a million movies.
And a bunch of committees put 2/1,000,000 up for us to vote on basically.
Anyone who believes in this system and actually votes after all the times they caught fraud and suppression of the people, I feel for them.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 07:57 AM |
|
|
@ Blizz
What about NDAs? With your signature you forego your right to free speech. AFAIK, if the corp you signed for does something illegal and you rat on them, they will be dealt with, but the corp will still sue you for breach of your NDA (at a civil court) - and will prevail.
Shouldn't NDA be illegal?
What about secrets of state? Where is free speech there? McCarthy era?
Free speech is just another concept like justice that's difficult to maintain in practice, since it stops where it violates the rights of others. And "rights" are of course something to be defined by law as well.
In my eyes the video is a typical propaganda peace where a couple of factually true things are taken and woven into a propaganda story.
And Trump and New York? It's just law. When you embezzle money and later pay it back, you still embezzled money and can and will be tried for it. You can't just break the rules and afterwards claim no-one was hurt, no damage done. Or you CAN do it, but what you did was ILLEGAL. In these cases, it's correct to say, what if everyone would do it?
Then there is a question of motive. WHY did you do it? Are there mitigating circumstances?
If you look at the internet - or actually ANYwhere, as it is - you'll always get a large number of people complaining about the bigwigs getting away with everything, and that those with money and power can do everything they want without being punished.
And TRUMP is now a VICTIM?
As I said 8 years ago, Trump is a criminal and therefore someone not to be trusted. I think it was the democrats who asked about Nixon, Would you buy a (used) car from this man? With Trump, you need to hear him for a minute and you know you can't buy ANYTHING from him, because everything is only ever about HIM. You cannot have an narcissistic egomaniac as president (The presidency will only deepen that tendencies).
All that said - sure, inhiting "rights" does never sound good, although it's done all the time, since humans have a tendency to abuse freedom and leeway and then another rule must be made. It's just as if, you know, they would actively search for holes in the rules and regulations to ... oh, wait ... they DO that, right?
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 09:50 AM |
|
|
What is funny is how many many journalists from BBC for example, have asked for YEARS for an interview with Putin, but he has refused them all. He needed the right person, someone who has praised him constantly, to bring his propagandist message. Every dictator has done the same, especially at time of war or when his message needs to be as clear as possible.
Instead of an actual journalist asking him tough questions we got exercise in sycophancy. Now some narrative lurks that only Tucker was brave enough to upheld free speech and asked for an interview with him lol. We live in a crazy world.
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 10:41 AM |
|
|
Putin gave many interviews - some really sharp - to BBC, CNN, NBC and other leftist outlets before 2022, so "for years" is just not true, type "Putin interview" in Youtube and you will find them.
Since 2022 he refuses crossing swords with the militants of the deep state financing the war against him, why would him be interested. While Tucker is a Trump messenger, so there is hope of better chances of negotiating with, as all what the actual senile up the White House can propose is obscenities about Putin's mother.
Putin himself told after the interview he was disappointed that Tucker wasn't more aggressive, as he was prepared to some tough questions. Now, if you mean a tough question is interrupting him every 2 seconds until you get the answer you want, we don't have same view of journalism. But as those who you talk about aren't journalists but militants, I get you, sure.
I get also the frustration around, 200 million views in a few days, the diehard bigots are panicking.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 01:25 PM |
|
|
|
Who needs to hear the lies Putin's mouth tells when the truth coming out of his guns speaks louder than any words?
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
May Contain Nuts
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 01:42 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 13:55, 23 Feb 2024.
|
@JJ:
Correct. He is a victim now. If he is being fined over 350 million dollars for lying on loan applications, that is insanity. It's a weaponization of the court. Now, a person might think that he's guilty of so and so and such and such, and he wasn't caught, so it doesn't matter. He's guilty of "stuff", so hit him as hard as absolutely possible on the thing that he was caught with. No. That's not how it works. It's a weaponization of the court and it's creating a precedent that is bad for the country.
---
@Minion & Sal
If a normal journalist interviewed Putin, they would come in angry and they would hit him hard with a bunch of questions about Ukraine, and jailing his political opponents, and being a bad man who does bad things, and then Putin would use the exact same talking points that he has used since 2022. NATO "expansion." "Denazification." "Security of the Russian state." Nothing would happen in the interview besides bringing up a bunch of recycled material. And then afterwards, one side would clip chunks of the interview to show how evil Putin is. The other side would clip chunks of the interview to show Putin "decimating" his opponent, probably when he is talking about an unverified conversation he had with somebody two decades ago where they said something evil.
Btw, if anybody does watch Tucker's interview with Putin, the first 30 minutes are ideal right before bedtime while you are laying down.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 02:06 PM |
|
|
@ Blizz
No, he isn't. He's guilty as sin and he's been arrogant about it. The 350 mil isn't that outrageous considering we are talking about billions here. If you lend a couple billions and you blow up your actual assets and wealth in order to get a much diminished interest rate you save hundreds of millions in interest rates - illegally. Basically the same thing than tax fraud.
The fine must not be lower than what you illegaly earned, otherwise everyone would try to illegally get money and then pay part of it back as a fine. The 350 mil are just a measure of what he earned illegally.
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
May Contain Nuts
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 08:31 PM |
|
|
It’s not hard to make me change my mind. All I need to see is a well-established record of court rulings in the state of New York that sentence people with brutally and obscenely harsh fines the same way in similar situations (proportional to the loan that was taken out). That’s it.
Otherwise, it’s just the weaponization of the court in a state that hates Trump possibly more than any other state in the country. They are triggered.
Anyway, this is getting off-topic.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2024 10:38 PM |
|
|
It's not an obscenely large fine (for a billionaire) in relation to the advantage gained illegally.
For precedence, look at the billions corpss has to pay in compensation.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 01:24 PM |
|
|
So we've reached the next step: Sora.
This new software will upgraade fake news to fake reality. A KI program that will create a video from a few commands sketching it.
The next step will be to connect the next iteration of chat gpt with sora. This will create interessting options:
"Create 10 videos to convince as many people as possible that Donald Trump/Wladimir Putin is the only hope for the USA/Europe."
Post it on TikTok.
This will get interesting, don't yyou think?
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 03:11 PM |
|
|
You can make one million videos, fake, not fake, about anything, is not the number which will make switch people's opinions, but how you explain things in, the relevancy. In general, I would say a majority of people lost trust in state medias - they see reality not matching what they read/listen, they are hungry to hear another message, but not enough hungry to swallow ANY jabbering - fred style, it must match, diagnose and propose proper healing to specific anxieties and concerns.
Maybe you think all others are idiots and need to be closely monitored, who they listen to, what tools they are allowed to use, good luck with that. There is certainly propaganda on alternative medias, but way less than on mainstream, which function now only on emotion, then unfortunately are omnipresent in our lives - radio, television, undesired phone advertising and so on.
I mean, take an example : my specific email at my work place, initially created to facilitate work-related activities, was shared without my consent with political corporations, which regularly use it to explain me - and consequently millions others - what is happening, how to interpret it then how to react. This is how desperate they are.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 03:45 PM |
|
|
|
It was clear that you wouldn't get the relevance and ramble something along the lines you did.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 04:43 PM |
|
|
The relevance? JJ panicking about potentially AI-made videos promoting his two scapegoats, the very evil Putin and the mega-gaga evil Trump.
You live in a cave? There are already thousands of well made and well argued man-made videos and articles promoting those two, and such will always have the drop on any artificial manufacturing, no matter how realistic the images are. And many people buy the ideas, as I said, because they make sense and is not just jabbering.
Maybe not to you, open minds are rare nowadays.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 05:14 PM |
|
|
Lol, yeah, okay, for you Sora will be overkill, obviously, since for you it can't be totalitarian enough. Pity, you live in France, Russia would probably be a lot better place to live.
Still, even someone like you should realize that this will be usable by anyone for anyone/anything - and of course, let's say, "interest groups" with financial backing and enough personell will be able to flood message boards with their versions of reality - states, corporations, secret services, drug cartells, political parties, private persons.
Authenticating or falsifying videos will give thousands work - think about how difficult it will become for courts.
You can expect falsification to become always better and better - but what you actually should do is think about who will have (and have had) the biggest interest to construct "fake realities"; hint: it's those who don't like the ACTUAL reality or narrative.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 06:59 PM |
|
|
I see you coming, from a mile. Next step, prohibit any video not certified by mainstream, the paragons of the "true" and only one reality, right? This is how it starts.
Look, technology is a bless, but also can be dangerous, is not that we didn't know. At some moment, you have to put in balance what is good and what isn't. Communication, work and education are almost impossible without technology today. It has both improved our lives in many ways but created new problems and challenges. We just have to be aware of both the positive and negative impacts of technology so that we can use it wisely. Let the people handle themselves, they are capable of.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 07:06 PM |
|
|
I have been following the news about AI and the creme de la creme of people envolved, top notch computer engineers, coders etc. say they are expecting drastic evolution in 5 years since recent developments. They used to foresee such evolution in 30 years or so but the tech accelerated exponentially and unexpectedly.
Of course, this means post-truth 2.0 for us. I think conspiracy theories will skyrocket even more than they already did with only “words.” Now that video and sound can be instantly produced, it will be like the nuclear phase of disinformation wars. I have listened to Radiohead’s Creep from Frank Sinatra and if you know his moves, you kind of sense somethings’s not right but the voice itself is indistinguishable from the real Sinatra. Imagine this tech used as fake, fuzzy phone call. It will be almost impossible to detect.
Of course, this may also have a reverse effect, people may now start to treat video and sound like hearsay: False until proven otherwise. But everybody almost always pick the narrative they want to anyway. Post-truth 1.0 already achieved that.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2024 07:37 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
I see you coming, from a mile. Next step, prohibit any video not certified by mainstream, the paragons of the "true" and only one reality, right? This is how it starts.
Look, technology is a bless, but also can be dangerous, is not that we didn't know. At some moment, you have to put in balance what is good and what isn't. Communication, work and education are almost impossible without technology today. It has both improved our lives in many ways but created new problems and challenges. We just have to be aware of both the positive and negative impacts of technology so that we can use it wisely. Let the people handle themselves, they are capable of.
Yes, do you really think, if everyone had access to every technology we would still exist?
There are too many people with a grudge and an agenda, and people AREN'T handling themselves - HAVEN'T anywhere, anytime. Instead, there will always be people telling what's right and what's wrong, who's to blame for what and what will bring eternal, bliss and happiness for all. Take us. You think you are right, I think I'm right and you are wrong. We are both people. Let the people handle themselves? Won't happen.
@ artu
It's not 2.0 - it's another dimension.
|
| |
|
|
