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

Michael W. replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"This is how much the NRL looks after the "glamour" clubs. Shibasaki, current SOO and Australian rep, is on a miserly $140k this year. How does the NRL accept this."
1 hour ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"He will fight for the vacant Port Kembla Heavyweight title and make a motza in pay-per-veiw...because everyone hates him now and watching him take some head-shots would be cathartic....villans get paid."
3 hours ago
KENDOZA replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Teancum Brown pushing his case for R1
"Love how ryles is giving the young ones a crack"
5 hours ago
LB replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"They have never been in a position of not getting what they want. They said when first started Ryles should just tell the board to let him go as they let him go, despite not letting him touch Storm players for 12 months, they also said the Sydney…"
9 hours ago
LB replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Yeah they have backs but also how often do they get Origin talent?"
9 hours ago
Troy Wade replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"I'm sick of all the attention this bloke is getting. Go play bush footy for 3 years. End of story. You made your bed - now sleep on it..The NRL and the Storm can well and truely go get f....."
9 hours ago
DYNASTY.LOADING replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Only reason I think he remains at the club is on a minimum wage deal to have someone integrated in the culture available as an experienced head in NSW cup to help steer the team around. I agree he is not going to be a priority signing and he hasn't…"
10 hours ago
Prof. Daz replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"LB, that's fake news. It's bright as F down here in Melbourne. Except for 5 mins from now when it will be snowing. But bright again 2 mins later. Then a solar eclipse. Then sunny. Maybe that's why Storm have are grasping, they just don't know what's…"
10 hours ago
Prof. Daz replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Brett Kenny is the howwwwwse?"
10 hours ago
mongolian trotting duck replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"very much doubt volkman will get extended dynasty"
10 hours ago
Clintorian replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"They have a great young backline, I'd be surprised if Sticky tried to bring Lomax in and break that. Could be wrong though"
10 hours ago
Mr 'BringBackFitzy' Analyst replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Please explain!!!"
10 hours ago
EA replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Lorima Seuseu has the potential to be our best outside back produced at the club in a very long time. He is like Makisini from the Tigers. I rate him more than any other centre and winger in the juniors at the eels. However he only turns 16 this…"
10 hours ago
DYNASTY.LOADING replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Swap out Jackson Ford for Marata then. Ford is a goer who is from Wollongong I believe. "
10 hours ago
DYNASTY.LOADING replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"No AI"
11 hours ago
Poppa replied to Johnny Suede's discussion Lomax legal promise could create salary-cap headache for Storm
"Dynasty, do you realise that Walker is 32 next birthday and De Bellin is 34 and Paulo 33. I could not imagine seeing Walker in great demand, 2 years may see him out of Parra into retirement. The 2 forwards De Bellin and Paulo will have there time…"
11 hours 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: 2089

 

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