Russian protests in Moscow.

(trump admin) voted no - not surprising (the resolution included neo-nazism)

EU abstained

that map incorrectly colors canada, which voted No. https://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/docs/voting_sheets/L56.Rev1.pdf

it's a strange choice for a data visualization, and the error indicates it was done manually, not by actual data vis people.

it is an interesting vote tally, i will admit. looking into it a bit i find

  Quote

Speaking to European Voice before the vote, Lithuania’s foreign minister, Linas Linkevičius, said that “no one should doubt that we are condemning fascism”, but, he continued, “under cover of this condemnation, Russia is pursuing its own agenda”.

“De facto, Russia is trying to attack the Baltic states and to determine history in its own way,” he said.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-abstains-from-un-vote-on-nazism/

once again i find myself wondering if milkface is consuming info from a russian disinfo den. discord server?

@very honest Aren'T you the guy who thinks Vice is a Russian disinfo operation?

no ding. do you still think america should socialize social media?

Yes

edit: here's the post in which I explain it (off topic & and can't directly quote bcs topic is closed):

 Chinese social media is an absolute shitshow of censorship, I'd think strong regulation is more effective (i.e. allowing free speech until it is viewed as causing harm/seditious/racist/etc.) but it has be done early and it has to be consistent. It's a tough ask, you'd need huge amounts of resources to monitor effectively, and AI isn't there yet. Not absolving the social media companies of any wrongdoing, just pointing out a couple of the issues they would need to address. As well, they'd have to hire therapists for the content review teams, they see some truly horrific shit (much worse than two absolute munters going at it over grammar points).

^Doesn't need to be monitored particularly well, tho, it would be enough if the data wasn't used to target vulnerable individuals and turn them into political tools. Removing propaganda from social media would ruin their business model so it needs to bw funded publicly instead, imo. Also, notice the difference between public media and state media

  On 1/25/2021 at 5:32 PM, very honest said:

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-abstains-from-un-vote-on-nazism/

 

once again i find myself wondering if milkface is consuming info from a russian disinfo den. discord server?

nah my bad i wanted a visualisation of the data on a map rather than the data in word form on the UN site so i just googled 'un nazi vote' or whatever and nabbed the image from there.

anyways, the data you're looking at is old. the vote where canada voted no was in 2014 (link below) - this specific data (map) is from 2020.

https://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/docs/voting_sheets/L56.Rev1.pdf

here's the data for the 2020 one:

https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3894841?ln=en

  On 1/25/2021 at 6:04 PM, milkface said:

nah my bad i wanted a visualisation of the data on a map rather than the data in word form on the UN site so i just googled 'un nazi vote' or whatever and nabbed the image from there.

 

anyways, the data you're looking at is old. the vote where canada voted no was in 2014 (link below) - this specific data (map) is from 2020.

https://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/docs/voting_sheets/L56.Rev1.pdf

Expand  

oh ok. the image seems to come from a reddit thread, then, from a few years ago, which could account for the data discrepancy. it seems this is a recurring resolution vote. 

i find this in the replies

  On 1/25/2021 at 5:51 PM, dingformung said:

^Doesn't need to be monitored particularly well, tho, it would be enough if the data wasn't used to target vulnerable individuals and turn them into political tools. Removing propaganda from social media would ruin their business model so it needs to bw funded publicly instead, imo. Also, notice the difference between public media and state media

I'm talking about social media. China censors the shit out of social media, never mind the state media. Russia censors their own homegrown social media services VK and Telegram: https://biztechclub.com/2018/09/12/blocking-telegram-will-russias-internet-take-another-hit-of-censorship/

I doubt removing propaganda ruins their business model, which is predicated on their ability to keep your eyeballs on the screen. You don't think they could keep users hooked with an algorithm showing NASCAR races/meth wars/IDM review channels?

Also: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-politics-navalny-message-idUSKBN29R2BE

Navalny says he has no thoughts of suicide. Someone's learning from Epstein.

I view advertising as capitalist propaganda. Sorry mate  (Though I was referring to political ads here, namely the Trump campaign)

But I agree that well regulated private-sector social media platforms could work as well - I still like the idea of public-sector social media. It's such an important public infrastructure.

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:06 PM, dingformung said:

I view advertising as capitalist propaganda. Sorry mate

But I agree that well regulated private-sector social media platforms could work as well - I still like the idea of public-sector social media. It's such an important piece of public infrastructure.

Fair enough re: propaganda.

I think that public-sector social media should exist alongside well-regulated private  sector. Not only one or the other. But imagine public-sector social media under *shudder* Trump.

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:09 PM, chenGOD said:

But imagine public-sector social media under *shudder* Trump.

It wouldn't be under government control, though, otherwise it would be state-media. I'm thinking something like European countries have with broadcasting - only for social media. No state influence here

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:09 PM, chenGOD said:

Fair enough re: propaganda

See my edit

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:11 PM, dingformung said:

It wouldn't be under government control, though, otherwise it would be state-media. I'm thinking something like European countries have with broadcasting - only for social media. No state influence here

Do you really think that under a regime like Trump's (I hate coming back to him) or Putin's, this wouldn't be abused? Canada has the CBC (state owned, but managed at arms' length), and people still accuse it of bias (both liberal and conservative, so they must be doing something right lol).

Speaking of state media: Palace not mine, Putin says.

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:34 PM, chenGOD said:

Do you really think that under a regime like Trump's (I hate coming back to him) or Putin's, this wouldn't be abused? Canada has the CBC (state owned, but managed at arms' length), and people still accuse it of bias (both liberal and conservative, so they must be doing something right lol).

How could it be abused? If all that happens is that they get money from the government each year the only influence the government has is defunding it, but that goes for all areas of public life that are dependent on government money, and there could be a legal framework that makes defunding not easily possible. Though I'm not sure if in case of the US an executive order couldn't bypass such legal boundaries. Which brings us back to the problems of a presidential system - particularly one that we see in the US where the president seems to be above the law similar to a dictator.

But I agree that there is a lot that can be done even without public-sector social media. Through respective laws you could force social media platforms to be compatible with each other - kinda like phone providers - so there is a more reasonable competition: You can send a message from Twitter to Facebook and from Xing to Instagram, etc. - I'm sure there are a lot of possibilities.

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:43 PM, dingformung said:

How could it be abused? If all that happens is that they get money from the government each year the only influence the government has is defunding it, but that goes for all areas of public life that are dependent on government money, and there could be a legal framework that makes defunding not easily possible. Though I'm not sure if in case of the US an executive order couldn't bypass such legal boundaries. Which brings us back to the problems of a presidential system - particularly one that we see in the US where the president seems to be above the law similar to a dictator.

But I agree that there is a lot that can be done even without public-sector social media. Through respective laws you could force social media platforms to be compatible with each other - kinda like phone providers - so there is a more reasonable competition: You can send a message from Twitter to Facebook and from Xing to Instagram, etc. - I'm sure there are a lot of possibilities.

Expand  

Getting people in positions of power who subscribe to the same political philosophy of the party in power? I'm sure giving it more than 30 seconds of thought it would be easy to come up with a few ways to abuse such a platform.

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:51 PM, chenGOD said:

Getting people in positions of power who subscribe to the same political philosophy of the party in power? I'm sure giving it more than 30 seconds of thought it would be easy to come up with a few ways to abuse such a platform.

Yes, that's how democracies can be eroded. Democracies only function if you have democrats (lower case). The same goes for privately owned media as well: Put people in power positions who aren't interested in a balanced reporting and you have Rupert Murdoch levels of mind control.

The difference is that public-sector media isn't financially dependent on sensationalism & on being entertaining - they can provide a balanced in-depth analysis and reporting even if they risk losing viewers. Or in case of social media they wouldn't be dependent on ad money.

My apologies for going dangerously far off the topic again. Carry on

  On 1/25/2021 at 7:42 PM, chenGOD said:

Speaking of state media: Palace not mine, Putin says.

I vaguely recall from the 2016 election interference hearings a testimony from a well-informed gentleman describing just how Putin flexes w/ his circle of oligarchs - that is, whatever a particular oligarch may appear to own, the tacit understanding is that half of it is Putin's.

Can't own a palace if you only own half of it and your half isn't on the books.

  On 1/25/2021 at 6:53 PM, chenGOD said:

Russia censors their own homegrown social media services VK and Telegram: https://biztechclub.com/2018/09/12/blocking-telegram-will-russias-internet-take-another-hit-of-censorship/

Telegram isn't a "homegrown social media service" by the Russian government. Even your linked article contradicts that. I use Telegram all the time as a more private alternative to WhatsApp (belongs to Facebook). Islamists use it to coordinate so it seems to actually be pretty safe. No wonder Russia wants to block it (but can't).

I’m not saying it was developed by the Russian government. Neither was VK. They were both developed by the same guy and they both face issues around censorship. 
 

You should use signal instead. 

what's the deal with russians? why are they in such a hurry?

  On 1/25/2021 at 5:37 PM, very honest said:

no ding. do you still think america should socialize social media?

no it should be decentralized. code is stronger law than paper law.  it should socialize software development in general when it comes to projects like that

oof. lot's of arrests. 

MOSCOW (AP) — Chanting slogans against President Vladimir Putin, tens of thousands took to the streets Sunday across Russia to demand the release of jailed opposition leader Alexei Navalny, keeping up nationwide protests that have rattled the Kremlin. Nearly 5,000 people were detained by police, according to a monitoring group, and some were beaten.

https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-moscow-coronavirus-pandemic-arrests-russia-085b16035e9c89ffb9919e4d94a2309c

hearts and minds

Im gonna protest if I dont get my vodka