Replies

  • "So if you don’t do the things that Facebook approves of, they’re going to cut you off from their platform"

    Fark I'm shitting myself. Imagine if they banned me from something I don't use. Crazy lefties.

    The right would never impinge on your personal liberty or freedoms. Except for things like the US patriot act and, hmmm a little program called Cointelpro.

    One side might ban you from a social media platform, the other murders you in your bed ( See Fred Hampton)...

    3460137419?profile=RESIZE_180x180

    • I think what is starting to happen is that if a customer bad mouths a company on social media then patron search will identify them as a trouble maker and companies will ban them - like they will not be able to get an Uber. But could easily go further and you could be blacklisted for this political view or that depending on how the company decides to customise the search. The tech already exists as was done for the Chinese government to thought control its population

      • You'd have to go pretty far in your criticism to get a company to not want to use you for profit. 

        Let's say worst case scenario a company decides to stop allowing people of a certain political viewpoint to not access there service. There essentially undermining there own ability to be a profitable entity.  

        The whole point of a company is to make money for shareholders. It would be a strong decision to vote against making profit for a moral position, something I can't see being done regularly enough to become an issue.

        • It is already happening 

          • Any examples you can point to?

            • Using tech the ones in the article

              However it is nothing new 

              Racism, sexism, classes etc have been around forever and businesses have been happy to lose money and not serve people who belong to one group or another. In the US there have been businesses who have refused to serve people who wear apparel supporting a political group they dislike.

              • After reading the original article, there drawing loooong bow trying to link the tech thing to China's system.

                The insurance company examples are nothing they haven't been doing for decades just with a modern twist, rather than just your health records, the patronscan uber  / airbnb ones basically mean if you act like a carnt other businesses can be made aware, just like people get  known for there reputation in a small town, just supersized. For the majority of the population these are non issues because they don't act like twats, ergo non ban, ergo no issue. 

                Asian culture is vastly different in it's outlook on the dynamic between the individual and the group. In the west we're told to put individual wants and needs first. Asian countries it's all about being a good citizen, don't bring shame on your family, hence the greater acceptance of the idea of social monitoring and conformity.

                This is just the extension of that normal human tension between the individual and the pressure to conform to a cultural norm, not a grand technocratic minority report conspiracy.

                But these wafflers like to jump at " faceless men, deep state, silicon valley, bureaucrats, intellectuals, global elites etc etc" that are trying to secretly steal your freedoms, when in fact everybody already regulates there behaviour to some extent to fit in and comply in society.

                • One point is how does patronscan differentiate between   Someone who was wronged by a company sharing that on social media and someone unfairlly slandering a company. 

                  Another point is what is to stop the company legally  using patron scan for barring people who express support for one political group

                  Google Facebook twitter etc are explicitly trying to change the way people vote. 

                  At the moment there is a deficiency in the law where it is legal for companies to discriminate based on political views. This needs to be corrected.

                   

                  • It says in the original article that " Judgment about what kind of behavior qualifies for inclusion on a PatronScan list is up to the bar owners and managers. Individual bar owners can ignore the ban, if they like." 

                    So " bad behavior " isn t set by the company, rather the users. And can be ignored if they chose.

                    Traditional media outlets ( Cough cough Murdoch) have explicitly tried to change voters opinions for years and years. 

                    But I take your point as to the stratification of opinion and feedback loops that occur on social media. Essentially there algorithms are designed to present you with similar content with what you have interacted with in the past.

                    So that generally means things you really like, or things you really hate, and you get an polarized  view of a topic, or you come to think things are happening more than they probably are.

            • Isreal Folau and Qantas

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

The Badger replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Matti is off contract anyway so he's not an option for a trade. 
Maybe Tuilagi?"
3 minutes ago
macybrown replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Eels demand the NRL hand over all information relating to its involvement in the Lomax saga
"Yep! Arthur Moses is a champ! We need their docs to prove our case thst the storm were lying to us...that's the premise hehe. We all know why we want the verification tho ;)
this is exactly where we knew this would head... nrlww1
 Exciting!"
6 minutes ago
Eelovution replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Eels demand the NRL hand over all information relating to its involvement in the Lomax saga
"If there is any indication of a biased approach from the NRL, then Vlandys and Abdo need to resign with immediate effect. You just have to admire and respect the methodology of the SC, Arthur Moses.  He doesn't fire his bullets all at once, picks…"
11 minutes ago
LB replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Eels demand the NRL hand over all information relating to its involvement in the Lomax saga
"Here we go, let's see how it all ends up. Us against the world at this stage. If we lose this case god help us. If we win, it starts a revolution."
29 minutes ago
LB replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Does his recent ACL injury concern you at all NOS?
You say having older heads is a big concern, too many can be. We have Paulo and de Belin already. If we already know de Belin is not here in 2027 then yeah Barnett would fit in nicely."
34 minutes ago
LB replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Also, look at the depth we have for middles in 2027. Paulo (more likely stays), Hopgood, Moretti, Tuivaiti, Talagi, Doorey, Koina and perhaps Guymer if he stays. That is a fair bit. No need for de Belin. We have leadership in the club. 
If de Belin…"
35 minutes ago
macybrown replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"just read tho that Warriors want at least one in return for Beau ...hmmm wonder how matto would feel about moving? As I said would love the great MK2, but looking at our young up and comers (which we have plenty for once) I wouldn't fork out too…"
35 minutes ago
LB replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"That is what we brought De Belin in for as well."
38 minutes ago
macybrown replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"With you on that Rusty. Plus of any of the past six (whom I can't even think of atm) circumstances are completely different too. However, their barrister must have something he can draw from, maybe not hehe. Plus our new management brings new…"
41 minutes ago
The Badger replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Eels demand the NRL hand over all information relating to its involvement in the Lomax saga
"Hopefully Parra has them by their metaphorical short n curlies!"
44 minutes ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Eels demand the NRL hand over all information relating to its involvement in the Lomax saga
"Absolutely, Axel. Perfect. Very proud of the Eels, this is a big move."
49 minutes ago
The Badger replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Spot on Mace. Beau Scott Mk2."
50 minutes ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Haha... You know it, Mace."
51 minutes ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"X2, Pops. Bang on."
53 minutes ago
Axel replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Eels demand the NRL hand over all information relating to its involvement in the Lomax saga
"Great timing .... just as Abdo & V'landys land in Vegas.
Love it!"
53 minutes ago
RustyNuts replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Personally I think the Lomax team are trying to show a history of releasing players without non-compete clauses. "These 6 didn't have them so why should I" will be the Lomax defence. Is definitely clutching at straws, but that's all they seem to be…"
54 minutes ago
More…

Keaon done deal

As of Thursday, December 11, 2025, South Sydney Rabbitohs forwardKeaon Koloamatangi has reportedly agreed to a deal with the Parramatta Eels, but it is not yet officially announced by the clubs.  Soon to be announced.

Read more…
14 Replies · Reply by Poppa Jan 9
Views: 2113

 

Eels interested in Barnett

Parramatta are interested in Mitch Barnett. Now at 33 in 2027 and coming off ACL, good idea? Having Paulo and De Belin being 34 and 36 respectively is it good to have that much age? Ryles wants a Paulo replacement that can lead the forwards, Barnett…

Read more…
54 Replies · Reply by The Badger 3 minutes ago
Views: 1216

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>