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 Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Bluey, we'll re-open it. Yep, this is the podcast all the news outlets are getting their quotes and sources from.
It's happens all the time. On that MON interview different stories with different titles and different narratives popped up everywhere.…"
1 minute ago
Hell On Eels replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Wizzy, like you, Blocker Roach neither buys it nor makes any sense of it. Each to their own, suppose. I agree with Cronk, though would've preferred Pezet longer-term."
5 minutes ago
Hell On Eels replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Thanks for that Bluey. I just read that article it's an interesting take. 
The thing is all the news outlets are sourcing their info and quotes off the same podcast."
8 minutes ago
Poupou Escobar replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"He signed with the Broncos first mate. But he couldn't start until Reynolds left (2027) so we picked him up for 2026. Otherwise he would have to stay in Melbourne. Everyone wins, except the Storm."
58 minutes ago
Wizardssleeves official receipts replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"This not buying on thing is a bit hard to take serious with the Peasant in for a year then gone agin thing. "
1 hour ago
Adam Magrath replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"I don't think they are as concerned about their reputations as some folk on here. I commented yesterday how good it is that it's all quiet since the beginning of November."
1 hour ago
Blue Eel replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Here is an article mentioning some of what was said.
https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/back-himself-to-play-liv-golf-box..."
1 hour ago
Hell On Eels replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Gucci,  You can't find this article anywhere. I took quotes from The NRL Podcast (Episode 2, 19/11) that relate to the Eels (19th-26th minute) and added a bit of extra info and organized it.
 "
2 hours ago
Gucci replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Was this a podcast or article? Can you post if possible."
2 hours ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"If I'm honest I think it's the media joining the dots nothing more it's why I hate the farkwits they paint us in a poor light."
2 hours ago
HKF replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Well I hope the eels management don't panic and pay way overs for some plodder just so they can say they signed someone to save face."
3 hours ago
EA replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Apparently Kolomtangi will stay with Bunnies "
3 hours ago
Blue Eel replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"This must be the podcast you referred to HOE, in relation to Real Reason Ryles Agreed  to Cut Lomax Blog. Its always good to see where the story originated from.
Any idea why my Blog was shut down. I didn't think it broke some rule or something did…"
4 hours ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"Honestly nothing much to see here.
I wouldn't waste my time with NAS,if it's a choice between him and Kolomatangi I'm taking the latter.I personally think NaS is looking for a way out of the nrl unless someone is stupid enough to pony big coin and…"
4 hours ago
Eelawarra replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Cooper Cronk: On the Parramatta Eels, Pezet, Lomax and Recruitment
"“I’ll give Zac credit – he was pretty honest with it and put his cards on the table,” Ryles said.
“There was no issue in regard to that. It was more how long is this going to go on for – are we going to get to February and have to do this?
“We have…"
4 hours ago
Poppa replied to Blue Eel's discussion Real Reason Parramatta Coach cut Zac Lomax Loose
"That post said a lot more about you than me GM....LOL"
5 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>