• Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Sounds like an issue with their work force. Without placing my tin foil hat on they need to hire more people to moderate and clean TOS breaking content.

    puts tinfoil hat on

    Meta is purposefully allowing far right militias to organize because a libertarian/conservative hellscape would mean their corporation becomes one of the largest fiefdoms.

    • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      IME those groups aren’t very libertarian, they’re closer to American Taliban religious fundamentalism.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Thiel definitely was at one point, but American libertarians have nothing to do with liberty and probably never have.

        • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          Thiel has always been pretty fascist even if he called himself a libertarian. I mean, he wrote that women’s suffrage made capitalism and democracy incompatible in 2009 (guess which he cares about more). He was a speech writer for William Bennett, a neoconservative in the Reagan administration. He founded Palantir. He spoke at Trump’s RNC convention.

          Maybe he was a libertarian in his youth when he first read Ayn Rand or something but his actions as an adult are far closer to traditional fascism than traditional libertarianism. (Not implying he wants genocide or anything that “fascist” sometimes implies. I’m using it to mean the core of the ideology that’s reactionary, authoritarian, and willing to use the power of big government and corporations to limit freedom. Please don’t sue me Peter Thiel!)

    • ElPenguin@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      As someone that used to work for Meta as a contractor for another company that did content moderation for them: I agree completely with your first statement. They fired all of their US based contractors on content moderation and shipped it back to India where they are overworked and don’t have the cultural insight to know to take this kind of shit down when reported. They also rely heavily on AI for content moderating that was trained by contractors like myself.

    • whoisearth
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Took me a second to get this and I laughed but am now sad by how true this is.

  • mark@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Not condoning it, but all I can think is how terrible Facebook is for “coordinating” stuff like this. I mean, if FB or the feds wanted to find out who these people are, track them down or something, they can do that pretty easily. People who do stuff like this aren’t too bright, though. So not surprised, I guess.

  • Vaggumon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Tell me again how TikTok is dangerous, but Facebook is just grandmas sharing recipes.

  • Usernameblankface@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    3 months ago

    On Facebook… So there’s a clear trail of who is planning what and who is agreeing to go along. People with long histories of posting far right content, so when they inevitably cry “but a leftist plant orchestrated all this” there is evidence to the contrary.

    • Swordgeek
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Only if FB wants there to be.

      (And they don’t. They’ve actively courted extremists since leaving campus.)

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Care saying “far right.” On Lemmy some of the users will tell you that the Democratic party is “far right.”

      You don’t need to agree with what they post but it should be protected under free speech. This isn’t China

      I also think people these days can’t stand seeing anything they don’t agree with. All people see is the stuff tailored to them and there is no discomfort

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    The far left are coordinating on Lemmy. At the end of the day as long as they aren’t committing a crime you can’t and shouldn’t do anything about it.

    Racism is still free speech which sucks but the alternative is high censorship and fear

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      Facebook is not the government though?

      And why is it always “we have to respect other people calling for the erasure of the rights of minorities”? Do you have any idea how frustrating and tiresome that is, as a minority?

    • Rainonyourhead@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Racism is still free speech which sucks but the alternative is high censorship and fear

      This is incorrect, and only serves those who target marginalized groups.

      I wanna make it very clear that the conclusion that restriction of hate speech is a slippery slope for freedom of speech is not a given or universally held position

      You can absolutely introduce laws prohibiting hate speech without introducing high censorship or fear. Many countries have laws prohibiting hate speech, including most European countries and a majority of, what Wikipedia calls, developed democracies.

      Even countries that don’t have limits for hate inducing speech towards marginalized groups, with reference to the importance of freedom of speech, rarely have complete freedom of speech.

      As an example, the US limits to freedom of speech include “fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising.”

      The claim that intolerance to intolerance is dangerous, only serves the spread of intolerance.

      The paradox of tolerance states that if a society’s practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them.

      Rosenfeld contrasts the approach to hate speech between Western European democracies and the United States, pointing out that among Western European nations, extremely intolerant or fringe political materials (e.g. Holocaust denial) are characterized as inherently socially disruptive, and are subject to legal constraints on their circulation as such,[13] while the US has ruled that such materials are protected by the principle of freedom of speech and cannot be restricted, except when endorsements of violence or other illegal activities are made explicit.

      source

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I just think today’s media tends be more cult like than anything else. You either agree with the only right way to think or you are the enemy

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        There is no law that says you can’t been antisemitic. There are a bunch of antisemitic people here on Lemmy.

    • SharkAttak@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      …but dangerous nonetheless.
      At least they would be easy to eliminate, once they come out.

      • beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        They’re not easy to eliminate, they’re armed, & the military & police are mostly on their side, which is why they’re allowed on Fb in the first place, & they’re hell bent on eliminating me and all my friends & loved ones

      • Nommer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Most of these idiots are the same type who buy a .22 made to look like an AR and mag dump from 20 feet away at the range.

        • unphazed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Are .22 rounds still hard to find? Been awhile since I’ve bought any. I don’t practice much and I think before my dad died he was falling down the prepper hole.

  • Maeve@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    Even though these people are more that to anyone, including society at large, Capital Hill and the feds themselves, they leave them alone, still thinking they are in control of these groups: compare and contrast how they are treated and then how BLM, antifa, and college students protesting genocide are treated.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      The National Guard, The Pentagon, the majority of Police Departments. They might be more authoritarian than your average US Leftist, but at least they don’t want to start all over to establish their Rule of Law. Even Trump’s generals looked down on him. If you want to do your part in a potential US Civil War then owning a gun to protect your homestead might help but the best thing you can do is report the right wing extremists as you see them. If you even hear word of any sort of encampment or compound, submit an anonymous tip to the FBI, you can expect a specialized task force to deal with it pretty quickly.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t want to be in this timeline. Plus 6 months from now when Trump wins and orders assassinations with SCOTUS immunity.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Does everyone already have their guns, boots, and beans?

            Nows the time, get a couple guns (a long one and a short one) and learn how to use them. Learn some basic first aid, you really just need to know how to stabilize someone. Start networking with like-minded people in your community. The police will not protect us, they’ll happily club a senior citizen to the ground and shoot you in the face with a rubber bullet.

            If a MAGAt caravan comes rolling through your (or your friends) neighborhood with bad intentions you don’t want to be caught lacking.

            https://www.dsausa.org/

            https://www.redneckrevolt.org/

            https://www.john-brown-gun-club.org/

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_Squad

            https://mutualaiddisasterrelief.org/

            • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              I don’t think multiple guns per person are necessary tbh. Increases risk of them falling into the wrong hands and other accidents.

              • nomous@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Each person should assess their needs and prepare appropriately. Maybe a person wants one general purpose gun. Someone else might want a very long range rifle with a small sidearm as backup.

                Frankly getting bogged down in the minutiae immediately (and talking gun control of all things) is being unable to see the forest for the trees and really emblematic of why “the left” can’t get anything done. You don’t want two guns that’s great don’t get two it’s not a difficult concept. In case you missed the point your protection is on you so prepare accordingly.

                • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Yeah that sidearm totally necessary for in case the enemy is exactly 25 inches away which is a shorter distance than your 26 inch rifle. /sarcasm

  • Grant_M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Zuck is like, ‘all sides welcome!’

  • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Isn’t that a good thing? If facebook bans them they may actually learn what opsec means.