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

Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
""
1 hour ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"and that we are not Dogs fans...because Dogs fans fucking suck"
1 hour ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
""
1 hour ago
Perpetual Motion replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"The brightside is that we are not Tigpies fans that havent even played finals since 2011."
2 hours ago
Poppa replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"Welcome to the Nursing Home Randolph....Only genius's allowed!"
2 hours ago
Poppa replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
""
2 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"Yeah, you're right. PM...and there is a chance (moses foot anyone?) that it works out really well for us...but we are a damaged fan base and we expect the worst...that someone or everyone fucked up...and while we wait for the worst to occur, as it…"
2 hours ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"But this is the thing the club created this with the options when your talking a club that doesn't develop and leaves an avenue open for another club to take our best for me is an issue.
Your right he could have chose to stay but let's be real here…"
3 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"genius"
3 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"No, nor do I think there will be. Same with Paps and Melbourne."
3 hours ago
shane replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"poppa we all want a better side but you can not rely on those who drop you as quick as Lomax, he is a winger which can be replace, no one is not replaceable, good players come and go and younger 1's take their place and become the good players. All…"
3 hours ago
Perpetual Motion replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"And we complained about that fact for weeks. But its done."
3 hours ago
Cumberland Eel replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"Is there any news on whether Lomax might return to Parra now given what's happening in R360? "
3 hours ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"How exactly does he help us going foward exactly?
All this tells me since they knee capped themselves with the DB deal and the options opening the door they had no plan b behind this is the issue.
You can arse lick this front office all you like I'm…"
4 hours ago
Adam Magrath replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"At some point Coryn you are going to have to move on from the Dylan Brown situation. I'm not sure why you keep referencing it. You seem to ignore the fact that Dylan could have chosen to stay with us, but he chose to leave (same with Zac)."
4 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion R360 Delayed Until 2028: Good News
"I see so he is defending you in this occasion? If so my response is done accordingly."
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>