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

Hell On Eels replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Google obviously doesn't listen to Anasta's podcasts either. It was a while ago. I'll find the link if I have time (it won't make a difference anyway). You guys are only $1m off not including TPAs."
17 minutes ago
mongolian trotting duck replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"surely 850k for 4 years would be competetive, starting in 27"
36 minutes ago
mongolian trotting duck replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"longfin what do you mean best years are behind him at 26"
41 minutes ago
mongolian trotting duck replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"100% chief there's only 1 way to see if lorenzo is up to it"
45 minutes ago
Hector Bob Down replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Chiefy Chiefy where have i ever said we shouldn't sack either of the two YOU continually referr to on every blog that comes up . Im beginning to think one or both must have put the hard word on Mrs Chiefy or something . Most of us probably agree…"
46 minutes ago
mongolian trotting duck replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"iiongi is only 22 now yehez"
49 minutes ago
EA replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"So after one game? And he was playing like a fullback "
1 hour ago
Slippery. replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?

 I think the Burton/ Moses combination is perfect. The issue is the price tag attached to Burton and having upto 2.5 million invested in the halves,  especially when the Eels are currently struggling with quality in several areas. Signing Burton…"
1 hour ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"When to debut Lorenzo seems to an easy call. All Ryles has to do is ask himself if he is doing it to bring the lad on or whether we are looking to him to help us win. We have annointed him a chosen one, so it would behoove us to not butcher his…"
1 hour ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"All reports are 5m over 5 seasons, if you can show the 1.2m reported from Anasta that would be interesting to read?
 
Google:
'No, Braith Anasta did not state that Keaon Koloamatangi signed for $1.2 million per season.
On NRL 360 and across major…"
2 hours ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?

We don’t know, unfortunately, but Dylan is on record making a few claims and it obviously wasn't the 1.3m constantly pushed here, and less than we’ve then spent on Pezet anyway.
The Eels identified DB as a 10 year player ourselves remember (which…"
2 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Anasta was the only one who reported it the most accurately $1.2m pa. You can believe the $1m pa media reports, but you'd by out by a $1m overall plus TPAs.
Cap, would you pay $6m for him for 5 years ON the cap?
Souths passed. So did we. A stuff up…"
2 hours ago
The Captain replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Where's the $1.2m figure come from HOE?
ABC, Fox, SMH, Nine, Sporting News all report $5m over 5 years.
I know it's all hearsay anyway, but all the reporting I saw indicated the sticking point was the extra year only. I didn't see anyone reporting…"
2 hours ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Why does everything have to come down to a counter offer from the eels ffs.  There were rumours that the brown management couldn't believe the clauses that the eels management had agreed to.   
Take Sam Tuivaiti for example,  we offer him a 500 k…"
2 hours ago
Bear replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Totally agree, as Burt Kenny said  if you have potential and a cup of coffee your worth the value of the coffee, don't talk about juniors as the 2nd coming, they've obviously all got potential,  otherwise they wouldn't be there. If they are super…"
2 hours ago
Poupou Escobar replied to Fiddy's discussion Burton to Eels?
"Assuming Drown is getting paid $1.3M/year, that's a guaranteed $13M until he is 35 years old. How much would we have had to pay, and for how long, to make the Knights deal anything other than a no brainer? A five year deal would have him off…"
3 hours ago
More…

 

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