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

Mathew Clarke replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Agreed."
1 minute ago
Eli Stephens replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"They are pretty entitled, lose a few blokes to injury and leaving the game and think they can just grab players from other clubs like feeders lol. While still keeping guys like wishart and sua on the pine 🤣 piss off lol "
4 minutes ago
Blue Eel replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Best reply ever. "
12 minutes ago
The Badger replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Why TF would Ryles do anything for Melbourne nowadays? 
Also, laughing my guts up about the career path they put him on. "Dogged" him with the hollow promise of taking over from Bellamy for about 5 years  is what they did.
These dopes are funny as."
13 minutes ago
Eli Stephens replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Coates Leioro Stefano any of those we might get talking lol "
22 minutes ago
Eli Stephens replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Not dealing with the tigers here lol, if you want him pay up an origin winger or origin middle 🤣🤣🤣"
23 minutes ago
christeel replied to Roy tannous's discussion Brian Kelly officially signs 💙💛
"does it hurt  ?"
24 minutes ago
LB replied to Roy tannous's discussion Brian Kelly officially signs 💙💛
"I am not a massive Kelly fan, but he is better and more competent than Harper."
37 minutes ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season

Lol this is on a Melbourne fan forum. We dogged him and he has been dogged around? What a bunch of idiots down there. He wanted to go to R360 and was advised badly. He is an adult that is the way it goes. But also it is fact he is a better Winger…"
38 minutes ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"I will add, does not mean something hasn't happened, just from what i was told doesn't seem that way and he left on pretty good terms, him and Ryles were on good terms during the process of asking for a release and getting it."
42 minutes ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Maybe Parramatta do not want him at the money he is receiving. I mean again haven't heard otherwise but doesn't mean something else is there where Ryles doesn't want Lomax in the squad whether personality or anything else. 
Yeah why doesn't he want…"
43 minutes ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Yeah get a top quality player and a decent player 2 way swap."
44 minutes ago
Steel be with you replied to Roy tannous's discussion Brian Kelly officially signs 💙💛
"I am getting strong Morgan Harper vibes with this signing."
44 minutes ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Fair call actually."
45 minutes ago
Steel be with you replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Zac Lomax has zero moral compass."
46 minutes ago
Eli Stephens replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Parramatta Eels reject Melbourne Storm’s audacious bid to sign Zac Lomax for 2026 season
"Spot on 🤣🤣🤣 just hang up the phone "
50 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 Tin Tim on Wednesday
Views: 1804

ANY MORE SIGNINGS???

I've been frustrated recently about the work we have been doing in the open market. Jonah's alright for a year and JDB is solid but he's getting old. I feel we need more in the forwards and some a replacement outside back. All I have seen is links…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 172

 

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