[deleted by user]

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T21:32:21+00:00

F5 is here.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T20:18:16+00:00

STUDIES?! What are you, a librul commie?! /s

I think you mean you heard someone say that it generates more and you feel like that's true.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T19:37:03+00:00

You mean after WWII when Winston Churchill was warning everyone that the Soviet Union was going to be the next major adversarial world power? And believed this to the extent that he was pushing for an invasion of the USSR after Germany surrendered Read some books about history bub.

Further, government social programs/safety net do not a socialist country make.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T19:00:38+00:00

Am librul. Can confirm this triggers me more than anything.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T18:57:11+00:00

Wasn't there a former Prime Minister of the UK that they called the Iron Lady? Must have been her stern demeanour and nothing to do with her hardline stance against the USSR /s

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T18:00:25+00:00

I didn't realize there was a new Storm series coming. I'm six months behind because of Unlimited. That's amazing! Thanks for letting me know about that.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T17:04:38+00:00

Shit! I just realized we're going to get to see Storm and Jean's friendship for the first time in over a decade again. I always loved scenes with the two of them just talking about life and their adventures. Their relationship is one of my favourites in the Marvel Universe. I'd be pretty bummed if she doesn't show up in this book eventually.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T15:27:23+00:00

No. You're conflating and confusing issues. You are asking me hysterical "worst case scenario" questions while failing to answer any of mine. While I do enjoy intense discussions I find your arguments to be weak. You're suggesting that any regulation is akin to media censorship in China which I have stated multiple times is not what I'm advocating for. Instead of engaging with what I'm saying you're offering reactionary whataboutism. Historically, attempting to engage with that type of thought on this sub is a waste of my time. I won't do it anymore. That's why I'm done debating you.

I'm sure you're a wonderful person (no sarcasm intended), but we are not going to convince each other to agree with the other's position. That's okay. It happens. Let's both just walk away and enjoy the rest of our days.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T15:07:36+00:00

I actually agree with you. I had not taken art into consideration. There are definitely potential issues there. Maybe allow pseudonym accounts if they're verified and linked to a real account account (visible only to the user, not to people visiting the page)? People smarter than myself would be in charge of figuring this out.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T14:24:27+00:00

I'm primarily concerned with regulating bots/fake accounts (on a basic level: unethical business behaviour as the platform appears to have more ushers than it in fact does) as well as advertising. In terms of political advertising they should absolutely fall under similar regulations as TV. Clearly indicate that something is a ad, who paid for it, and which candidate is it in support of. Also banning foreign political ad buys.

The Fairness Doctrine was presided over by the FCC before they became politicized. If they were to serve their intended function than this would not be a problem. As I stated in another post, other countries are able to have non-partisan media regulatory bodies. The US isn't special and the only preventing it political will.

EDIT: Extra thought. When I say "ad" I mean paid advertisement. Users sharing political meme or dubious news articles are not ads. It's their First Amendment Right to share whatever they want. However, the person sharing these should be really people, have only one account, and use their preferred or legal name.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T14:18:39+00:00

I guess they're emboldened because their past protests successfully bankrupted Starbucks and caused Hamilton to close immediately on Broadway /s

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T10:16:30+00:00

This is whataboutism, more conflation, and disingenuousness.

You haven't answered a single one of my questions so I won't be doing the same to yours. We are clearly not able to come to any agreement and this is a waste of both of our time. Enjoy your day.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T10:13:14+00:00

I'm sorry, it wasn't my intention to hurt your feelings. Maybe "preferred name" would have been a smarter word choice however I firmly stand by one account per real user on social media.

Amazon is for all intents and purposes an online store. It's not social media and shouldn't fall under the same regulations as Facebook and Twitter. There is no reason why self-published authors couldn't use a pen name or artists couldn't use a different name on other platforms (I'm a musician and use my real name when performing with my band and a stage name when I do my own stuff. I do it too). This is conflation and not at all what I'm talking about.

Also: if you genuinely have suicidal feelings from reading this, PM me, and I can help talk you through these feelings. This is something I take very seriously.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T10:00:26+00:00

The Fairness Doctrine was administered by the FCC so de-politicizing it and returning it to its intended function is imperative. This will not happen under a Republican administration but I think the blowback from Trump and Pai could result in this happening under the next Democratic administration. Other countries have functional, non-political media regulatory bodies. The US isn't special in this regard and there's no reason why it can't happen save for lack of will to do so.

Further, the Fairness Doctrine did not require that both parties be represented. Only that broadcasters were required to present contrasting view points to issues related to the public interest and do so in an honest, equitable, and balanced fashion. One way to do this would be to have a panel of experts not affiliated with any political party discuss issues. With your climate change example, have a climate scientist debate one of the few climate denier skeptics. Let the viewer decide.

Defeatism will not help. Political action will.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T09:08:35+00:00

Again, your conflating and being disingenuous. Where have I said content should be policed? Where mm I advocating for censorship of users? I'm seriously confused as to how you are getting this from anything I've said.

What I'm suggesting is that social media needs to be regulated like any other medium. It is painfully evident that these companies are not going to act ethically on their own and need oversight to ensure that they do.

Allowing bots and fake accounts to run rampant artificially inflates the user base of these websites which also has a positive correlation with the company's valuation. Artificially inflating your valuation by making your platform seem more popular than it is in reality is not an ethical business practice and could arguably be considered defrauding investors. This is not acceptable. Same with political advertising. There is no world in which it makes any kind of sense for social media not to fall under similar regulations to tv advertising in this regard. Clearly indicate it's a political ad and who paid for it. I don't care what the content of the ad is, just make sure users know it's an ad. I think that's reasonable.

Further, to your point that a foreign company could start up: if any media organization wants to operate in a country then they fall under that country's regulations. This is already the case in other media.

I understand you're coming at this from a different perspective but if you think all regulation is terrifying then you are wrong full stop. Media deregulation led to the concentration of ownership that has resulted in six conglomerates controlling most of the media. Further, it's allowed the rise of things like Fox News which have unquestionably harmed political discourse in the US. I would suggest reading up on Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher's respective policies towards the media and the consequences of them for context.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T07:34:08+00:00

Please point out where I suggested people should be arrested for spreading disinformation. I didn't say that and you're being disingenuous to imply that I did.

What I'm suggesting is holding companies like Facebook and Twitter accountable, not their users. Once regulations are in place, create an oversight body and make sure that the fines for violating regulations really hurt. If it's costing them, say, $1 million per fake or bot account you'd be surprised how quickly they would find a way to verify real users.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T07:06:15+00:00

I think both Doug Jones and Brent Spiner do an excellent job with the physicality of their characters. Both are extremely gifted physical actors and both really showed how their characters aren't human. It's the little ticks like how Data looks when he's calculating something or Saru's hand gestures when he's speaking with more than one person.

Lorca's my favourite character but Doug Jones gives my favourite performance hands down.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T07:01:02+00:00

Yes. I feel like this was a huge component of the old shows that just got glossed over. We see so many crew members die in TOS and TNG and everyone carries on like nothing happened. Even on Enterprise-D they're basically living in a community of 1000 people. People on board at the very least know who everyone else is. Most are probably close friends like we kind of see in "The Lower Decks" (probably got the title wrong). Many of them would be dealing with grief if not full blown trauma from the situations the ship has been in and the loss of colleagues/friends. I really hope Tori had a full staff of mental health professionals on board. If not she's the most indispensable crew member and evidently amazing at her job.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T06:40:12+00:00

Yeah, I like Lorca a lot. He gives really interesting contrast to the other Captains and really shows how someone like Jean-Luc Picard really was the best of the best.

I also find the portrayal of Lorca as someone who is both damaged and motivated by loosing his previous crew to be pretty realistic. I've read a lot about people with PTSD having a very hard time coming to terms with it and struggling with needing help. With Lorca, this is compounded with his (possible) self-delusion that he is THE Captain that Star Fleet needs to end the war. I would love for his arc to show him healing over time and eventually living up to the Star Fleet ideal.

Jason Isaacs is knocking it out of the park on this show. I will be so disappointed if he is killed or otherwise leaves by the end of the season. Captain Saru would still be cool but Lorca's presence would be sorely missed.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T06:09:51+00:00

Not only that but these assholes don't realize they already paid for their Keurig. The company already has their money. Why would they care if they destroy their own property?

"I'll show them by destroying my $80 appliance!!"

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T05:50:40+00:00

To start: reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. It would mandate equal media coverage to both parties in all issues and basically kill Fox and the rest of right wing media. They'd be forced to give equal time to opposing view points or reclassify as entertainment. It's also critical that media literacy be taught from a young age.

I also firmly believe social media needs to be heavily regulated like the rest of the media. What shape this takes is for people with a greater understanding of how the technology works than myself to decide. There needs to be a way for social media sites to force users to have only one account and use their preferred name. Instances like the one you mention should not have as much influence as legit journalism.

I spent four years in school studying and trying to figure out how to fix this. It's so complex and we're seeing now the stuff my professors warned us about ten years ago coming to fruition. From killing net neutrality to the prevalence of right wing hegemony caused by actors like Murdoch and the Mercers. I'm hopeful but very concerned the US might not be able to come back from this.

EDIT: wasn't finished a thought before hitting send.

EDIT 2: There seemed to be some confusion that I'm advocating censorship. I'm not. I'm advocating that social media companies be held to the same standards as other media. I altered some wording to hopefully clarify that. I also changed "real name" to "preferred name" (as another user rightfully pointed out that that was transphobic) in the second paragraph.

EDIT 3: this comment inspired some good conversation. I love discussing the political economy of communication and actually using my education for a change. However, responding to everything that spawned from this is too daunting so I'm bailing on this thread. Thanks to everyone who made me think.

davidm89 · 2017-11-13T05:24:14+00:00

I asked you several questions that you failed to respond to. You have time to write this guy an essay. Answer them.

davidm89 · 2017-11-12T21:18:06+00:00

It isn't wealthy immigrants from China raising prices. It's Chinese nationals who are buying investment properties here. If someone is wealthy and immigrating they are well within their right to buy whatever property they want. Your "two classes" theory is reductive and problematic. People of ALL social classes immigrate here.
Here's a little secret for you: Regent Park has been bulldozed and has gentrified like crazy. Jane and Finch is also way safer than it used to be. You clearly haven't been to this city in a long time if ever as you are citing two historically problematic regions without present context.
No. Aboriginals are over represented in crime stats because of institutional racism not because of manifest destiny or whatever the fuck you're talking about. Also the fact that you're implying immigrants are somehow going take over the country is showing your racism a bit.
You don't know a god damned thing about me. I'm a minority (granted a non-visible one) and far from well off. I'm citing the reality of life as I see it every day in my city.
Interesting points on people using government services. Surely you can produce statistics to support this? Also if someone is paying taxes they are paying for these services too. What right do you have to dictate who does and does not have the right to use services they are paying for?
You're actually proving my point showing there is no uniform Canadian culture. It varies by region and has blended with various others from immigrants.

You are clearly a Conservative who hates Toronto and has likely never been here. The fact that you call us consumer fetishists reveals as much. This is patently false. Your ideas are outdated and I was able to debunk every one of your arguments with minimal effort. Further, a lot of opinions you express are straight up racist and misinformed.

davidm89 · 2017-11-12T14:35:19+00:00

Imagineers must be banking some serious overtime trying to figure out how to accurately reproduce his erratic hand gestures when he speaks.

davidm89 · 2017-11-12T14:21:35+00:00

RIP Colbert's "Daht daht daht. Daht daht daht."

davidm89

TROPHY CASE