https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/daily-blast-white-privilege_us_5b9abfd5e4b0b64a336d12a3?4q

Why did they take it down? It's fuckin savage. The internet is forever.

I guess even they realized it went too far.

One reason I heard was that twitter was a :honeypot: op for terrorists.

But if that were the case, why are only specific users being banned? Or why only certain kinds of hate are bannable

the new apple watch sucks lol

fake electrocardiogram

the fall detection sounds fishy af

it will be buggy af

Why do I want a corporation monitoring my heartbeat?

Oh boy, can't watch the video because I'm on data but the articles make it sound like another "You don't understand what it's like to have someone be racist towards you, evil whitey"

@GingaBomber I don't think it is all political bias within the company. You have share holders, you've got phone calls officials. The Independent is half owned by the Saudis. You can't trust a word it says about terrorism. Same with twitter. Ann has been calling out the government, police and Islam about these child rape gangs for months now. When South Yorkshire police put out that 'report non-crimes' tweet she flipped her lid.
There's more going on here than just a bunch of self righteous cunts sitting with their finger on the ban button.

Pretty much, Ive heard that honeypot excuse for a while

Which I doubt for the reasons you provided.

If they... really were trying to stop terrorists, does it make sense to punish shit like speech when theres jihadists preaching death on twitter openly.

They are not intrested in stopping terrorisim at all. Just keep enough of a lid on it so the the natives don't revolt. Look at now much power they have managed to grab, how many freedoms we have given up in the name of safety.

Im not disagreeing, I just find the honeypot excuse just... full of holes

I mean back then when you never heard of conservatives being censored on twitter or FB.

Or wernt aware of it.

And id say, because they never felt the need to

Well depending on the target the honeypot argument could still hold. You have to gather data before you use it. Never forget the Great Candid Shilling

Yeah.... It was alot more believable then

Honeypots are meant to ***catch*** people, and nobody is getting caught. They're still operating unimpeded.

But if it were a honeypot, then why leave those up? Theres also neo nazi groups still active on FB

Plenty of raping, stabbing, shooting, killing, etc.

Algorithms are honestly still shitter tier

Is the main problem

I think these companies are actually way less competent than people seem to want to imply

Well it dosent help that they have a very.... one sided view of whats acceptable

Like who watches the watchman

I had this argument with someone, he said that have an AI in charge of everything

But who codes the thing?

Well and they seem primarily concerned with people who have large viewerships

How do we know the AI isnt just the guy's will made manifest?

To the point where a lot of smalltime users are not punished for abusive behavior

Which may also be why extremist groups fly under the radar

So the implication being that the threshold of whats considered acceptable is higher the smaller your community is?

Which if you are free speech absolutist, you either punish everyone, or no one

Also,m they could rely on user reports like they do..

But theres also the bias there. People get banned for reposting anti white comments with white replaces.

They aren't absolutists though. This should be clear by now