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

Wizardssleeves official receipts replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Nelson Asofa-Solomona quits footy for new $1M boxing career
"We manage to fluke a signing of a decent player , and we only manage to keep him for one season before he wants out without even a paycheque to go to . If that ain't the biggest red flag there's something wrong at our club then I don't know what is.…"
3 hours ago
Perpetual Motion replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Your questions to the Eels bosses
""
4 hours ago
LB replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Or have you not let go your ludacris justification of the fallicy you tried to convince everyone of yesterday so you try to be smart with me, i thought you don't care what people think yet i seem to be living rent free in your head, similar to pops…"
4 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Nelson Asofa-Solomona quits footy for new $1M boxing career
"I agree it doesn't seem to be r360, but I guess it all depends how much he wants out. He seems strong-willed. 
This misled by Schitcocksy talk feels bogus"
4 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Chiefy, we may disagree, but the logic's bulletproof: The Galvin quest proves the club has no genuine interest in pathways, while Pezet proves we want to develop players for others. Soon, we'll announce the closure of pathways & recruitment.
 "
6 hours ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐 replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Jesh have you always been so negative. I remember you being much more positive when the bush coach was around.  Is that right or am.i dreaming?"
7 hours ago
Mitchy replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Nelson Asofa-Solomona quits footy for new $1M boxing career
"He probably has the bed under the desk, as per George! Having a sleep during they day..."
7 hours ago
The Badger replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Your questions to the Eels bosses
"Uncle Nick is rumoured to be a poor golfer who makes equally poor bets. "
7 hours ago
The Captain replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Your questions to the Eels bosses
">Politis gets TPA's from his connections
"At arms length" is the test that is used. Obviously the NRL is one of the worst regulated bodies on the planet and routinely applies rules inconsistently, but by the letter of the rules if either Politis or…"
8 hours ago
LB replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Well think about it Coryn, we went hard for Galvin. Offering him a 4-5 year deal on good money. We had Fletcher signed by then and Talataina was at the club too. So yeah invest in pathways.......unless someone comes up."
8 hours ago
Joel K replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Overrated."
9 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Yes, we went hard for Galvin. Yes, if Ryles sees someone as the answer, he might go for it. Yes, Wiz's "bench fantasy" is a scene out of a LaLaLand movie.
But again, Luai & Galvin aren't the same, right? A $1.1-1.5m six with POs?  Mmm. Would you? If…"
9 hours ago
Wizardssleeves official receipts replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Nelson Asofa-Solomona quits footy for new $1M boxing career
"Arguably the best winger in the comp when he's in his happy place , on what 600 or 650k?  Ryles needs his head examined if he thinks that's overs.  
Unfortunately me thinks Ryles coaching inexperience was what drove Lomax's decision.  He went…"
9 hours ago
Wizardssleeves official receipts replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Nelson Asofa-Solomona quits footy for new $1M boxing career
"No, you find a soulution .  Real clubs manoeuvre around this shit all the time with unsettled players. We offer him a bump up, or make a deal beneficial for both parties.  As in , champ you give us a great 2026 and if you still wish to leave , we…"
9 hours ago
Wizardssleeves official receipts replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Nelson Asofa-Solomona quits footy for new $1M boxing career
"Lomax was on a deal of all deals in our favour.  Probably the only player in the squad outside of rookies that we were getting his paycheque worth out of.  When a blokes on less than Matto and is a current Australian and NSW rep player , it's not in…"
9 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Blue Eel's discussion Jerome Luai Has More Get Out Clauses!
"Woof "
9 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>