This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Net neutrality  (Read 1912 times)

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
Net neutrality
« Reply #90 on: September 13, 2017, 04:39:51 PM »
Quote from: Gwarh;992063
This is what I like about you sir, and other commies like you. ;-). It's that your for erring on the side of less government rather than more government as the solution to any problem. A Libertarian Marxist is harmless...

I love the Libertarian Marxists. -E seems pretty much the opposite, some kind of Rockefeller/Romney Republican maybe. Libertarian Marxists like Brendan O'Neil hate the SJWs, -E seems fine with them.

HMWHC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 480
  • OH BOY!
Net neutrality
« Reply #91 on: September 13, 2017, 04:56:12 PM »
Quote from: -E.;991945

In a dysfunctional government, though, all kinds of things can happen and if you get to the point where the people with all the guns are making the rules, you've got a problem.


Wait a second?!!? Did you just make an argument for Gun Rights?
"YOU KNOW WHO ELSE CLOSED THREADS THAT "BORED" HIM?!? HITLER!!!"
 ~ -E.

HMWHC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 480
  • OH BOY!
Net neutrality
« Reply #92 on: September 13, 2017, 04:59:49 PM »
Quote from: RPGPundit;991963
If people in control of marketing couldn't convince the public to buy stuff, no one would own a fidget spinner. No one would listen to Justin Beiber.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1577[/ATTACH]
"YOU KNOW WHO ELSE CLOSED THREADS THAT "BORED" HIM?!? HITLER!!!"
 ~ -E.

HMWHC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 480
  • OH BOY!
Net neutrality
« Reply #93 on: September 13, 2017, 05:09:27 PM »
Quote from: -E.;992028
S
More Center Right Media -- Couldn't Hurt, But It Won't Solve The Problem

-E.


I don't think anything will every solve the problem? And... maybe that is good. That is there will always be people who imp are envious of the success of others and want to have what they have be it justified or not. And there will always be people who don't want to share what they have with others for whatever reason, justified or not.

The best I can realistically hope for is shallower ups and downs on the teeter-totter of politics between the left and the right, instead of the ass banging hit the group then bouncing up in the air again swings were seeing now. Well to continue with the analogy it feels to me the Left side is cheating and holding down their side keeping the Right up in the air with their legs dangling.

Politics is an endless series of compromises never getting what you want, but hopefully never loosing everything you want either.

I'd be all for a Staunchly bottom right quarter of the political compass system for government, but I'm also realistic to know that's never going to happen and last for long.

Hard times breed strong people.
Strong people build good times.
Good times breeds soft people.
Soft people build hard times.
"YOU KNOW WHO ELSE CLOSED THREADS THAT "BORED" HIM?!? HITLER!!!"
 ~ -E.

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #94 on: September 13, 2017, 06:33:18 PM »
Quote from: Gwarh;992066
Wait a second?!!? Did you just make an argument for Gun Rights?

... you got a problem with the 2nd Amendment?
-E.
 

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #95 on: September 13, 2017, 06:44:41 PM »
Quote from: S'mon;992045
I think it's a lot easier to tell when Alex Jones is talking crap, than to tell when the mainstream media is lying. I can often pick up on their lies in areas I know well, especially since comparing BBC & Fox News on Hurricane Katrina taught me to be sceptical - in that case it was mostly the right-wing station talking crap, but the lessons I learned there stood me in good stead dealing with the BBC's subtler efforts, which had previously passed me by - like a good little liberal I believed what I was told. Eg I had believed, because they told me, that Serbs were evil and Bosniaks were good (truth: there were no good guys).

Maybe there are benefits in community cohesion of everyone believing the same lies - the community cohesion that existed when everyone clustered around the TV/radio to listen to the official narrative (not always the government narrative, eg Vietnam War). But I prefer having a diversity of media and the chance to uncover what are often some pretty shocking truths. Even with no space aliens.

To be honest, I can't get my head around people who believe Alex Jones. I had assumed everyone listened to him ironically, but no. There are plenty of people who sincerely believe him or know he might be full of shit, but honestly can't tell if any given story is true or false. They're out there.

Also, the MSM is generally fine at getting basic facts straight (not always, and not in the first 24 hours of a crisis). I can make up my own mind about good guys and bad guys.

Diversity of media is a fact of life now. I don't think we have a chance of going back... and I'm not sure I'd want to. But people need much better bullshit detectors than we've got to navigate that world.

Cheers,
-E.
 

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #96 on: September 13, 2017, 06:46:08 PM »
Quote from: S'mon;992065
I love the Libertarian Marxists. -E seems pretty much the opposite, some kind of Rockefeller/Romney Republican maybe. Libertarian Marxists like Brendan O'Neil hate the SJWs, -E seems fine with them.

I don't like SJWs, but then I don't like Nazi's either.

I think in America both of them have a right to have their say.

It's in the Constitution
-E.

Edited to add: I think SJWs are generally annoying but -- on a national scale -- harmless and I don't think White Supremacist Extremists are.
 

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #97 on: September 13, 2017, 07:15:07 PM »
Quote from: Gwarh;992063
Does Art create Culture though? or does Culture create Art? The Arts literally are cultural artifacts though. So having influence over what sort of Art is created I believe has a great impact on the values a Culture adopts.

SJW's have gained control of Google, Youtube, Twitter, GoDaddy, many many others, and have virtual (not total) monopolies on aspects of the internet. They have such a monopoly it has people on the Left or Right talking about if they should be designated as utilities and breaking them up or not. So I disagree that SJW's in charge of large companies do not "control" messaging in any real sense.

There are two ways to control "the message". Propagating your own counter message, or silencing the oppositions messaging. Doing one is effective enough, doing both is even more effective.

I envy your optimism, but if it was against the law to make a shooter with girls sporting huge breasts, that would not entirely stamp out such shooters, but it certainly would put a damper on their production and distribution. Laws do have an impact.

What if the howls became those of 200 million, or 2 billion? When they become the majority then it's a problem. They will vote for people who will enshrine their ideology into law. And those laws will in turn change our society.

I agree with you in that "people" (as in 1 person) are deluding themselves, but, when enough people start to move in the same direction it becomes a majority. And that majority absolutely can accomplish things.

This is what I like about you sir, and other commies like you. ;-). It's that your for erring on the side of less government rather than more government as the solution to any problem. A Libertarian Marxist is harmless (not saying that's you just kidding around a bit) as they would be against forcing anyone else to adopt their ideology. Their utopian commune would be 100% voluntary. And those are the lefties I can get behind.


Art & Culture
I think that if you exert actual control over art, you can impact culture -- that's what happens when a government restricts what you're allowed to say and do with art.

A sort-of example would be the Comics Code, where the industry opted for self-regulation rather than risk government action (which amounts to -- pretty much -- government censorship). That can be effective, and it's a problem. The First Amendment is explicitly designed to counter that, and is pretty (but not completely) effective.

I think that SJW's attempts control or censor art on any kind of scale are illusory: where they succeed, it's because the culture already agreed with them. Mostly, though, they fail and I think that where they're trying to control or direct the culture (in a direction it's not going or at a speed it's not changing), they fail.

I don't think SJWs are in control of Google, etc.
I don't think this is true. I think those companies are doing what all big companies do: making decisions they feel benefit their stock holders, by acting in alignment with existing, and pervasive cultural taboos against Nazis and WSEs, and those privately held acted in alignment with those taboos.

It's 100% certain that we have a handful of private companies with a huge amount of power -- which is a problem, but people seeing SJW control are really just seeing stock-standard cultural decisions (or legal self-preservation, depending on what they're looking at).

I also think that private companies have no obligation to host speech they don't want to.

Silencing v. Counter Messaging
Agreed. I think both can be effective tactics. I think that the silencing option only really works if your opponents are saying things that are broadly transgressive (e.g. Nazi crap). Getting someone thrown off Twitter isn't "silencing" them, and even that's not going to be easy unless  they're saying things that the culture at-large disagrees with.

Big Breasted Shooters Against The Law
I agree, as I said, that laws have an impact. I don't see (current) SJW tactics (especially in the RPG space) as creating laws against stuff. Shaming private companies is not the same out outlawing things. If SJWs were lobbying congress to make RPGs with boobies illegal, I'd have a problem with that.

200 million or 2 billion
If a sizeable portion of the country's / planet's population decides something is taboo, then it's going to be impossible to say it without being judged. If the SJWs are so convincing that just about everyone is on their side, then I'm going to have to keep my damn mouth shut, aren't I?

Just like now. I can't go around saying whatever the fuck I feel like, and being spared any consequences, and neither can anyone else. That's called being an adult in society.

As for making laws: if the country decided overwhelmingly -- 2/3rds of the entire population that RPGs with Big Boobies should not be protected speech, then, yeah -- the 1A protections would crumble. That's just what happens when pretty much everyone agrees.

I'd be unhappy if everyone agreed stuff I like was forbidden, but I think it's pretty unlikely to get that level of agreement. As a bulwark against more realistic levels of agreement, I think the 1A protections are pretty good.

My Kind of Communism
I like the kind of communism where I get to work hard and get rich. Ideally everyone would have that option -- an egalitarian utopia! I'm also good with the state taking some of my money for the General Welfare and the Common Defense and to Ensure the Blessings of Liberty for Ourselves and Our Posterity.

But let's not go crazy with that, eh?
-E.
 

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #98 on: September 13, 2017, 07:24:08 PM »
Quote from: Gwarh;992069
I don't think anything will every solve the problem? And... maybe that is good. That is there will always be people who imp are envious of the success of others and want to have what they have be it justified or not. And there will always be people who don't want to share what they have with others for whatever reason, justified or not.

The best I can realistically hope for is shallower ups and downs on the teeter-totter of politics between the left and the right, instead of the ass banging hit the group then bouncing up in the air again swings were seeing now. Well to continue with the analogy it feels to me the Left side is cheating and holding down their side keeping the Right up in the air with their legs dangling.

Politics is an endless series of compromises never getting what you want, but hopefully never loosing everything you want either.

I'd be all for a Staunchly bottom right quarter of the political compass system for government, but I'm also realistic to know that's never going to happen and last for long.

Hard times breed strong people.
Strong people build good times.
Good times breeds soft people.
Soft people build hard times.


It feels like the Left is Cheating
Could you elaborate on this? You're not the only person I've heard say this.

I think that a lot of what looks like leftist positions (diversity in the workplace) is really just an effect of globalization and labor arbitrage / optimization -- I think those forces tend to bend society toward more broadly tolerant and inclusive perspectives -- to a lot of people this looks like the left is winning and has powerful corporate allies (I think the opposite is true -- the corporations are winning and the Left happens to agree with some of what they're doing).

But you're talking about cheating, which is different.

Other than that...
Other than that, and your position on the political compass (I think the last time I took it I was very near the middle) I can't find much here to disagree with. I think less extreme swings and teams would be hugely welcome, and I completely agree that things will never stabilize... just an endless cycle of change.

Cheers!
-E.
 

Dumarest

  • Vaquero
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3685
Net neutrality
« Reply #99 on: September 13, 2017, 08:27:35 PM »
Quote from: -E.;992088
I don't like SJWs, but then I don't like Nazi's either.

I think in America both of them have a right to have their say.

It's in the Constitution
-E.

Edited to add: I think SJWs are generally annoying but -- on a national scale -- harmless and I don't think White Supremacist Extremists are.

Ironically it's just the opposite because the "WSE" have no power or influence while the "SJW" have infiltrated a major political party and have pushed through parts of their agenda already.

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #100 on: September 13, 2017, 08:40:53 PM »
Quote from: Dumarest;992108
Ironically it's just the opposite because the "WSE" have no power or influence while the "SJW" have infiltrated a major political party and have pushed through parts of their agenda already.

WSE are have a philosophy that's pretty indistinguishable to me from Radical Islam -- they may not all be terrorists, but their ideology certainly supports terrorism, and I trust our law enforcement when they take that threat seriously.

I haven't seen any FBI bulletins about SJWs and I haven't seem them blow up any buildings or -- in fact -- demonstrate any political power.

They're annoying, but that's about it.
-E.
 

Bedrockbrendan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12695
Net neutrality
« Reply #101 on: September 13, 2017, 08:43:16 PM »
Quote from: S'mon;992045
I think it's a lot easier to tell when Alex Jones is talking crap, than to tell when the mainstream media is lying. I can often pick up on their lies in areas I know well, especially since comparing BBC & Fox News on Hurricane Katrina taught me to be sceptical - in that case it was mostly the right-wing station talking crap, but the lessons I learned there stood me in good stead dealing with the BBC's subtler efforts, which had previously passed me by - like a good little liberal I believed what I was told. Eg I had believed, because they told me, that Serbs were evil and Bosniaks were good (truth: there were no good guys).

Maybe there are benefits in community cohesion of everyone believing the same lies - the community cohesion that existed when everyone clustered around the TV/radio to listen to the official narrative (not always the government narrative, eg Vietnam War). But I prefer having a diversity of media and the chance to uncover what are often some pretty shocking truths. Even with no space aliens.


I don't get the shift from realizing there are bias issues in regular reporting, to completely abandoning everything one has stood for and embracing a conspiracy theory loon. The guy cherry picks everything to fit the world he wants to live. You are going to get a lot more clarity from a journalist who is at least trying to be unbiased and report reality. Obviously though, you have to consider the biases of anyone reporting. And reporters do have biases like anyone else (not to mention papers and media outlets have advertising dollars to consider). I don't know to me it sounds like people realized things are not perfect, and used that as an excuse to create fantasies for themselves.

-E.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1198
Net neutrality
« Reply #102 on: September 13, 2017, 08:50:57 PM »
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;992114
I don't get the shift from realizing there are bias issues in regular reporting, to completely abandoning everything one has stood for and embracing a conspiracy theory loon. The guy cherry picks everything to fit the world he wants to live. You are going to get a lot more clarity from a journalist who is at least trying to be unbiased and report reality. Obviously though, you have to consider the biases of anyone reporting. And reporters do have biases like anyone else (not to mention papers and media outlets have advertising dollars to consider). I don't know to me it sounds like people realized things are not perfect, and used that as an excuse to create fantasies for themselves.

... I pretty much... agree with all this.

It's always tricky to guess what [a bunch of] people are thinking, but when I hear people talk about news bias, they seem to imagine that all MSM is agenda driven to the point where it's pretty much manufactured or that bias is so strong and pervasive that it's impossible to overcome.

I don't get that. As you point out, of course the news (or anything produced by human beings) is biased. That doesn't mean you give up on reporting and science and decide the truth is ultimately unknowable, so why not believe comforting / terrifying fantasies.

Chomsky was / is saying the same thing from the left -- that all "news" is military/industrial complex propaganda. I didn't believe it coming from him, and I don't believe it coming from Alex Jones or the people who follow him.

Cheers,
-E.
 

Dumarest

  • Vaquero
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3685
Net neutrality
« Reply #103 on: September 13, 2017, 09:20:52 PM »
Quote from: -E.;992113
WSE are have a philosophy that's pretty indistinguishable to me from Radical Islam -- they may not all be terrorists, but their ideology certainly supports terrorism, and I trust our law enforcement when they take that threat seriously.

I haven't seen any FBI bulletins about SJWs and I haven't seem them blow up any buildings or -- in fact -- demonstrate any political power.

They're annoying, but that's about it.
-E.

WSE and radical Islam are both evil, but there are a ton more adherents of the latter, making them the larger problem at the moment.

You don't need to kill or blow up building to cause lasting harm. SJW have already infiltrated bureaucracies and judiciaries and abused authority and, possibly even worse, look what has become of American colleges and universities that are supposed to be bastions of free speech and inquiry.

Dumarest

  • Vaquero
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3685
Net neutrality
« Reply #104 on: September 13, 2017, 09:23:02 PM »
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;992114
I don't get the shift from realizing there are bias issues in regular reporting, to completely abandoning everything one has stood for and embracing a conspiracy theory loon. The guy cherry picks everything to fit the world he wants to live. You are going to get a lot more clarity from a journalist who is at least trying to be unbiased and report reality. Obviously though, you have to consider the biases of anyone reporting. And reporters do have biases like anyone else (not to mention papers and media outlets have advertising dollars to consider). I don't know to me it sounds like people realized things are not perfect, and used that as an excuse to create fantasies for themselves.


Wait, confirmation bias surprised someone? Generally you can tell by whether someone is willing to change his mind based on new evidence, or if they deny as fake/false/invalid/etc. any and all evidence that contradicts his belief.