Intellectual Dark Web

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

Non-profits and the media claim there is a radicalization pipeline on YouTube. Its content creators would sponsor fringe ideas, and its recommender system would steer users towards edgier content.

Thank you!!! You are among the posters with the most integrity around here!

I begged this question repeatedly knowing this to be the biggest charge against them, but no one else would admit it.

Everyone is connected to everybody else, there are only 6 degrees of separation in the world.


To give you an example, here's Eoin Lenihan's research that links Antifa and left-wing journalists are more interconnected that the data which links the far-right and the IDW:



Source

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Thank you!!! You are among the posters with the most integrity around here!

I begged this question repeatedly knowing this to be the biggest charge against them, but no one else would admit it.

Everyone is connected to everybody else, there are only 6 degrees of separation in the world.


To give you an example, here's Eoin Lenihan's research that links Antifa and left-wing journalists are more interconnected that the data which links the far-right and the IDW:



Did you read it in the 5 minutes between posting it and replying?
That's not what it says at all.

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

Did you read it in the 5 minutes between posting it and replying?
That's not what it says at all.

Yes I am a fast reader. Your quote suggests that the IDW are a gate-way to the alt-right , it couldn't be clearer. I withdraw the integrity remark.

We find that Alt-lite content is easily reachable from I.D.W. channels via recommendations and that Alt-right channels may be reached from both I.D.W. and Alt-lite channels. Overall, we paint a comprehensive picture of user radicalization on YouTube and provide methods to transparently audit the platform and its recommender system.

Alt-lite is just a smear for alt-right. they use whatever words stick.

The point is there are only 6 degrees of separation in the world and everyone is connected to everyone else.

This same argument is made by Lenihan of Antifa and left-wing journalists:
https://quillette.com/2019/05/29/its-not-your-imagination-the-journalists-writing-about-antifa-are-often-their-cheerleaders/

Correlation is not necessarily causation.

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Yes I am a fast reader. Your quote suggests that the IDW are a gate-way to the alt-right , it couldn't be clearer. I withdraw the integrity remark.



Alt-lite is just a smear for alt-right. they use whatever words stick.

The point is there are only 6 degrees of separation in the world and everyone is connected to everyone else.

This same argument is made by Lenihan of Antifa and left-wing journalists:
https://quillette.com/2019/05/29/its-not-your-imagination-the-journalists-writing-about-antifa-are-often-their-cheerleaders/

You are ignoring the main point.
Youtube algorithms, it's in the title.

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

You are ignoring the main point.
Youtube algorithms, it's in the title.

That article frames the alt-light and the alt-right as though they were things that were not to be recommended.

Surely some people will find it interesting?

For example; this is what happens when google mess with their algorithms for social justice reasons.

Check for yourself if you don't believe it:

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

That article frames the alt-light and the alt-right as though they were things that were not to be recommended.

Surely some people will find it interesting?

For example; this is what happens when google mess with their algorithms for social justice reasons.

Check for yourself if you don't believe it:

Spoofing, your replied minutes after I posted it couldn't possibly have read it.
Reply's show you don't even know what it's about.

It's an academic paper researched and referenced.

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

Spoofing, your replied minutes after I posted it couldn't possibly have read it.
Reply's show you don't even know what it's about.

It's an academic paper researched and referenced.

Jesus I fully retract the integrity statement, and now wish I had never said it. I read what you wrote.. and I summed it up perfectly.

Now would you prefer to contradict me or call me a liar? This thread suggest more people are inclined to call me a liar, instead of prove me wrong; why is that?(Because they can't?)

You know how happy I was when you posted that up? I had been waiting for someone to make that argument, everyone was dancing around it. At least stand by what you posted..

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Jesus I fully retract the integrity statement, and now wish I had never said it. I read what you wrote.. and I summed it up perfectly.

Now would you prefer to contradict me or call me a liar? This thread suggest more people are inclined to call me a liar, instead of prove me wrong; why is that?(Because they can't?)

Because your replies bare no resemblance to the point made.
A common feature with alt right types.
Worked for a while but old now everyone can see it for what it is.

joseywhales

I can never engage or understand conversations about "liberals"or far left etc, it so purposefully ill defined, so as to make real argument impossible.

For example, many would say communism is a flavour of socialism and is extreme left ideology.

Yet all implementations of communist systems allowed the least personal liberty for its members, so how can a liberal be a leftist if the most left implementation(communism) allowed for the least liberty?

wtf is wrong with america?! I swear the whole thing is a long troll.

And yet conservative in the US for example are usually pro gun ownership largely due to the desire to protect personal freedom. So they are liberal, they want to protect and enhance personal freedom and rights. I think we have destroyed language so much that debate is impossible.

My only conclusion is that both left and right are liberal but some amongst both want to impose anti-liberal policy like gun control and anti-abortion.

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

For example; this is what happens when google mess with their algorithms for social justice reasons.

Check for yourself if you don't believe it:

Out of interest what conclusion are you inferring from the above?

joseywhales

Canada goose

Veritas Libertas

joseywhales wrote: »

Yet all implementations of communist systems allowed the least personal liberty for its members, so how can a liberal be a leftist if the most left implementation(communism) allowed for the least liberty?

KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov described these leftists(marxists) as "Useful Idiots". They were the ones that de-stabilized a country to the point of change; but as soon as the revolution happened the leftists were the first ones lined up against the wall and shot (Nicaragua/Cuba/Ussr..etc..). That's when the fascists and authoritarians took power.
(SKip to 1mins 35seconds for the part about useful idiots(although the entire talk is extremely interesting/relevant)

To understand why these leftists work to de-stabilize the system, I believe one must first understand how post-modernism has taken a hold on the left. The age of enlightenment is now behind us and emotion drives peoples beliefs rather than reason.
Here is a fanastic lecture from Stephen Hicks(Long but very informative if you don't know much about post-modernism)

My only conclusion is that both left and right are liberal but some amongst both want to impose anti-liberal policy like gun control and anti-abortion.

Great point I fully agree with you. I would only add the nuance that the 'classical' liberals on the left are being drowned out and their opinion suppressed by the much louder extreme minority that exists there.

How do you anger a person the right? Tell them lie.
How do you anger a person the left? Tell them the truth.

Veritas Libertas

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I find the 'secondary' reaction is often based on no first reaction beyond a few randos on social media.

What do you think about Murray's specific example of Islam being the primary problem and Tommy Robinson the secondary problem?

Murray argues that if the police came down harder on the rape gangs when they should have (instead of fearing being called racists) then people like Tommy Robinson wouldn't exist because they wouldn't have so much support.
(Look up 'edge of the city' documentary 2004)

The UK government has become really good at dealing with Tommy Robinson!

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

Out of interest what conclusion are you inferring from the above?

That google are messing with their algorithms for the purpose of 'social justice'. The outcome is disgusting.

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

That google are messing with their algorithms for the purpose of 'social justice'. The outcome is disgusting.

Thought the algorithms come from what people are searching for.

So you recon they are messing with them to put down men and put up women?
Why would they do that?

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

Thought the algorithms come from what people are searching for.

So you recon they are messing with them to put down men and put up women?
Why would they do that?

Because they believe it is the right thing to do. Akin to Harvard dropping the scores of Asian students because there were too many of them. (Do you think this is fair?)

The algorithm used to come purely based on what people search for, but as James 'O Keefe revealed, they now are framing it with social justice first.
The algorithm was accused of being racist. I kid you not. That's why they changed it.

Alexandria Occasia-Cortez- Algorithms are racist

20Cent

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Because they believe it is the right thing to do. Akin to Harvard dropping the scores of Asian students because there were too many of them. (Do you think this is fair?)

The algorithm used to come purely based on what people search for, but as James 'O Keefe revealed, they now are framing it with social justice first.

But what do you think they want to achieve?

alastair

20Cent wrote: »

But what do you think they want to achieve?

It’s a plot by Big Goose.

Veritas Libertas

20Cent wrote: »

But what do you think they want to achieve?

To promote women, and also take the legs our from under men.

The 'equalize'.

Don't men have problems too? Or do you, like Jess Phillips, laugh at the suicide statistics for men?

Tony EH

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

To your point in bold:
What do you think about James flynn's publisher being too scared to print a book? Is this not a sign of the times?

I couldn't care less.

Veritas Libertas

Tony EH wrote: »

I couldn't care less.

You're just showing yourself up at this stage. You have contributed nothing to this thread, and challenged 0 of my points.

Tony EH wrote: »

Go to bed kid. You have school in the morning.

Tony EH wrote: »

1. Get off YouTube.
2. Learn what a "Liberal" is on this side of the Atlantic before opening your mouth and shaming yourself.
3. Go outside.
4. Talk to some real people.

Tony EH wrote: »

*Red Herring*
*Red Herring*
*Red Herring*
You really haven't the first bloody clue what you are talking about.
Darkweb. :pac:

Tony EH wrote: »

You don't know what you're trying to talk about kid.

Tony EH wrote: »

However, if you aren't intelligent enough to be open to a mere point of correction, then there is nothing that can be done for you.

If you're next post isn't making a point; I'm really sorry for you.

Tony EH

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

You're just showing yourself up at this stage. You have contributed nothing to this thread, and challenged 0 of my points.

You have no "points".

Your OP was wrong and you went downhill from there.

You have nothing.

Veritas Libertas

Tony EH wrote: »

You have no "points".

Your OP was wrong and you went downhill from there.

You have nothing.

Tony EH wrote: »

I couldn't care less.

You sound like a pre-school child. I have made hundreds of points in this thread. Feel free to address whichever you like. How about the publisher who recently was scared to print a book about free speech?

I'm glad this thread is here to show people like you up for the tactics that you use. You are whats wrong with civil debate and proper discourse. A product of Vladislav Surkov.

Tony EH

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

How about the publisher who recently was scared to print a book about free speech?

I already told you. I couldn't care less.

Veritas Libertas

Tony EH wrote: »

I already told you. I couldn't care less.

You are so dismissive, yet you couldn't care less. Got you. I'm sorry for you. Here have a smilely.

Tony EH

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

You are so dismissive, yet you couldn't care less. Got you. I'm sorry for you.

I couldn't care less about that either.

Veritas Libertas

Tony EH wrote: »

I couldn't care less about that either.

So why are you still posting in this thread?

Tony EH

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

So why are you still posting in this thread?

I can post where I wish.

Veritas Libertas

Tony EH wrote: »

I can post where I wish.

Me too. You're just showing yourself up here mate. Here's another smiley for you

Brian?

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Black person walks into a restaurant.
Is told you're not allowed here in, you're black.

Tom's advice:
Stop crying and find another restaurant.

That’s the most false, false equivalency I’ve ever read. Well done.