When was it ever exclusively just historical figures with no pop culture or fictional ones? One of their very first videos was Hitler vs Darth Vader. They also haven't put out a legit ERB video...
When was it ever exclusively just historical figures with no pop culture or fictional ones? One of their very first videos was Hitler vs Darth Vader. They also haven't put out a legit ERB video since 26-Dec-2016, almost 2 years ago, so I am just glad they are putting out content again.
The show is literally owned by Disney (via Disney Digital Network, formerly known as Maker Studios), so that might be part of it. They even used it for a line in their Stan Lee vs Jim Henson video.
The show is literally owned by Disney (via Disney Digital Network, formerly known as Maker Studios), so that might be part of it.
Zuckerberg is a capitalist archetype: a man who earned a fortune from his business. Shady business, yes, but business. And he doesn't make a show out of himself. Musk instead is riding some sort...
Zuckerberg is a capitalist archetype: a man who earned a fortune from his business. Shady business, yes, but business. And he doesn't make a show out of himself. Musk instead is riding some sort of personality cult hype and is actually detrimental to his (!) work and harmful to the society (that pedo thing was a huge fuck up at a very personal level). Zuck can be replaced by almost anybody at this point, and not much would change in FB, but Musk is a distinguishedly toxic individual, and if Tesla etc. get rid of him, and the world stops hearing from him, it will be beneficial to everybody.
A Genocide Incited on Facebook. Indian Whatsapp lynchings. Facebook "investigating" George Soros and hiring a PR company which spread anti-Semitic attacks against him after he called them a...
I don't think we can blame the violence on them really. Maybe I did not read into it enough, but isn't Facebook and WhatsApp just the medium they used? I don't think it is fair to blame the medium...
I don't think we can blame the violence on them really. Maybe I did not read into it enough, but isn't Facebook and WhatsApp just the medium they used? I don't think it is fair to blame the medium for the message, the people are violent and they will get their message through one way or another.
Generally, as a person, Musk is worse than Zuckerberg. The company the latter runs is pure evil, but the reason for that can't be violent people using their media. It is naive to say there wouldn't be a genocide in Mnyanmar if FB blocked that posts or did not exist, the military would just go out and do their propaganda in the public. We didn't have FB back in 1915 in Turkey, but we managed to commit one of the darkest crimes of recent times regardless. The same goes with the WhatsApp thing. It is violent people using the medium, not the medium making people violent.
I absolutely don't buy the "you can't blame the platform for the messages being spread on it" line of reasoning and if I did I would still be on reddit and not Tildes. Yes, if people were...
I don't think it is fair to blame the medium for the message, the people are violent and they will get their message through one way or another.
I absolutely don't buy the "you can't blame the platform for the messages being spread on it" line of reasoning and if I did I would still be on reddit and not Tildes. Yes, if people were prevented from spreading their intentionally inciteful "news" on Facebook or Whatsapp in India they would simply find other means to do so, but that other means would not be so wide-reaching, ubiquitous nor allow for such rapid dissemination as is possible with Whatsapp and Facebook. Deplatforming works and IMO internet communications platforms absolutely should be held accountable for the messages they allow to be disseminated over them and should also be obligated to do everything reasonably in their power to curtail societal harm done via their systems.
Thanks a lot for the link to the article. I do agree it, but the situation it is talking about is different from that of Myanmar and India. The former is government/military-lead genocide, and...
Thanks a lot for the link to the article. I do agree it, but the situation it is talking about is different from that of Myanmar and India. The former is government/military-lead genocide, and Facebook was probably just a little convenience for them. For India, it is not hateful podcasts or subreddits, apparently it is the private chat of a network of networks of people, which is a whole different thing to deal with. And WhatsApp has E2E encryption. So it is more complex, if possible at all, with that platform. These interconnected mobs can easily hop platforms, and don't need a public to talk to, they are already connected. I doubt whatsapp can do more than block the region to use the service. It should be the local governments responsibility to break up these networks.
I don't disagree that the Indian government bares some responsibility as well in the Whatapp lynching cases but so does Facebook/Whatsapp too. However the unfortunate reality is that due to the...
I don't disagree that the Indian government bares some responsibility as well in the Whatapp lynching cases but so does Facebook/Whatsapp too. However the unfortunate reality is that due to the nature of capitalism and corporations, even if their product is known to cause incredible societal harm Facebook will never shut down Whatsapp so long as it's still making a profit, nor will they do anything to potentially undermine the profitability of that product like make it possible to track where the disinformation being spread through it is coming from. Which is exactly why the Indian government is currently exploring ways to completely disable Whatsapp and Facebook access in the entire country during "emergency situations".
But in the case of Myanmar it is a comparable deplatforming issue IMO. The Myanmar authorities used fake identities, celebrity impersonation accounts and "seemingly independent entertainment, beauty and informational pages" on Facebook to spread their disinformation and stoke the fires of the genocide, and so Facebook absolutely bares some responsibility in allowing that to happen on their platform, and deplatforming in that case could have potentially helped prevented the genocide from occurring. Even Facebook acknowledged it was way too slow to act despite being warned about the issue months prior.
However given the fact that Facebook execs were also caught "investigating" one of their detractors, George Soros, and hiring a company which spread fake news and anti-Semitic attacks against him, I genuinely wonder if the people at the top really do care about combating all this horrible shit or if they are merely pretending to in order for the company to survive. My suspicion is that it's the latter.
When was it ever exclusively just historical figures with no pop culture or fictional ones? One of their very first videos was Hitler vs Darth Vader. They also haven't put out a legit ERB video since 26-Dec-2016, almost 2 years ago, so I am just glad they are putting out content again.
The show is literally owned by Disney (via Disney Digital Network, formerly known as Maker Studios), so that might be part of it.
They even used it for a line in their Stan Lee vs Jim Henson video.
They did John Lennon vs Bill O'Reilly in the first season.
Zuckerberg is a capitalist archetype: a man who earned a fortune from his business. Shady business, yes, but business. And he doesn't make a show out of himself. Musk instead is riding some sort of personality cult hype and is actually detrimental to his (!) work and harmful to the society (that pedo thing was a huge fuck up at a very personal level). Zuck can be replaced by almost anybody at this point, and not much would change in FB, but Musk is a distinguishedly toxic individual, and if Tesla etc. get rid of him, and the world stops hearing from him, it will be beneficial to everybody.
A Genocide Incited on Facebook. Indian Whatsapp lynchings. Facebook "investigating" George Soros and hiring a PR company which spread anti-Semitic attacks against him after he called them a "menace" needing to be regulated. Musk is a narcissistic idiot and him calling that rescue diver a "pedo" simply for criticizing him was despicable, but at least he has shown his true colours now and his influence is waning as a result. Facebook and Zuckerberg are arguably the most globally influential and dangerously irresponsible corporation in the world right now. The scale of the harm that Zuck and Facebook are currently committing and allowing to be committed on their platforms is honestly scary as hell, and Musk is not even remotely in the same league as them.
I don't think we can blame the violence on them really. Maybe I did not read into it enough, but isn't Facebook and WhatsApp just the medium they used? I don't think it is fair to blame the medium for the message, the people are violent and they will get their message through one way or another.
Generally, as a person, Musk is worse than Zuckerberg. The company the latter runs is pure evil, but the reason for that can't be violent people using their media. It is naive to say there wouldn't be a genocide in Mnyanmar if FB blocked that posts or did not exist, the military would just go out and do their propaganda in the public. We didn't have FB back in 1915 in Turkey, but we managed to commit one of the darkest crimes of recent times regardless. The same goes with the WhatsApp thing. It is violent people using the medium, not the medium making people violent.
I absolutely don't buy the "you can't blame the platform for the messages being spread on it" line of reasoning and if I did I would still be on reddit and not Tildes. Yes, if people were prevented from spreading their intentionally inciteful "news" on Facebook or Whatsapp in India they would simply find other means to do so, but that other means would not be so wide-reaching, ubiquitous nor allow for such rapid dissemination as is possible with Whatsapp and Facebook. Deplatforming works and IMO internet communications platforms absolutely should be held accountable for the messages they allow to be disseminated over them and should also be obligated to do everything reasonably in their power to curtail societal harm done via their systems.
Thanks a lot for the link to the article. I do agree it, but the situation it is talking about is different from that of Myanmar and India. The former is government/military-lead genocide, and Facebook was probably just a little convenience for them. For India, it is not hateful podcasts or subreddits, apparently it is the private chat of a network of networks of people, which is a whole different thing to deal with. And WhatsApp has E2E encryption. So it is more complex, if possible at all, with that platform. These interconnected mobs can easily hop platforms, and don't need a public to talk to, they are already connected. I doubt whatsapp can do more than block the region to use the service. It should be the local governments responsibility to break up these networks.
I don't disagree that the Indian government bares some responsibility as well in the Whatapp lynching cases but so does Facebook/Whatsapp too. However the unfortunate reality is that due to the nature of capitalism and corporations, even if their product is known to cause incredible societal harm Facebook will never shut down Whatsapp so long as it's still making a profit, nor will they do anything to potentially undermine the profitability of that product like make it possible to track where the disinformation being spread through it is coming from. Which is exactly why the Indian government is currently exploring ways to completely disable Whatsapp and Facebook access in the entire country during "emergency situations".
But in the case of Myanmar it is a comparable deplatforming issue IMO. The Myanmar authorities used fake identities, celebrity impersonation accounts and "seemingly independent entertainment, beauty and informational pages" on Facebook to spread their disinformation and stoke the fires of the genocide, and so Facebook absolutely bares some responsibility in allowing that to happen on their platform, and deplatforming in that case could have potentially helped prevented the genocide from occurring. Even Facebook acknowledged it was way too slow to act despite being warned about the issue months prior.
However given the fact that Facebook execs were also caught "investigating" one of their detractors, George Soros, and hiring a company which spread fake news and anti-Semitic attacks against him, I genuinely wonder if the people at the top really do care about combating all this horrible shit or if they are merely pretending to in order for the company to survive. My suspicion is that it's the latter.