Edit: wait, you might be right. As I understand, net neutrality is for the last mile ISPs, not the L1/L2 providers. So uh… what I explained below isn’t relevant. Eh, I’ll leave it in case people wanna learn stuff.

It was a bad explanation, assuming you had knowledge of network infrastructure things, but it does make sense. I’ll explain things if you’re interested.

Net neutrality is the idea that ISPs must treat all content providers equally. Your phone is not a content provider (most likely. You could run a web server on your phone, but… no). YouTube, Netflix, Facebook, TikTok, and your weird uncle’s WordPress site are content providers. Without net neutrality, ISPs can say, “Hey YouTube, people request a ton of traffic from you on our network. Pay up or we’ll slow down people’s connections to you.” The “neutrality” part means that ISPs must be neutral towards content providers, not discriminating against them for being high demand by consumers.

For the L1 and L2 part, that’s the networking infrastructure. The connection to your home is just tiny cables. I don’t recall how many layers there are, but it’s just “last mile” infrastructure. The network infrastructure between regions of the country or across the ocean are giant, giant cables managed by internet service providers you’ve never heard of. They’re the kind of providers that connect AT&T to Comcast. These are considered L1 or L2 providers. The data centers of giant companies, like Google for YouTube’s case, often pay these L1 or L2 providers to plug directly into their data centers. Why? Those providers are using the biggest, fastest cables to ferry bits and bytes across the planet. You might be pulling gigs from YouTube, but YouTube is putting out… shit, I don’t even know. Is there a terabyte connection? Maybe even petabyte? That sounds crazy. I dunno, I failed Google’s interview question where they asked me to estimate how much storage does Google Drive use globally. Anyway, I hope that gives you an idea of what L1 and L2 providers are.

I’m not a network infrastructure guy, though. If someone who actually knows what they’re talking about has corrections, I’d love to learn where I’m wrong

In case you were innocently using whataboutism without meaning to, here’s a tip to avoid it.

If you’re going to compare to the US or wherever, first ask yourself if that place was mentioned in the comment you’re replying to. If not, it’s whataboutism.

The lack of policing ideas is what allowed Hitler to come to power. This is a result of the tolerance paradox. A tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance, or it will erode into an intolerant society.

I have zero idea what your angle is, but for the benefit of others…

Nazi-ism is a chosen belief system with a core belief in depriving other groups of basic human rights. The depriving other people of basic human rights is the key part.

Hate speech is directed towards people with attributes that they cannot change or religion. Religion gets added in there because changing religion is not a simple thing, and in major religions doesn’t hurt people. (Don’t start citing religious terrorists - that is fundamentalism within a religion and not a commonly shared belief among all followers.

So hating on nazis is cool.

This makes sense, especially considering the features the author cited. The by design parts may just be for clickbait purposes

Maybe I’m part of the problem, and if so, please educate me, but I’m not understanding why blocking is ineffective…?

And block lists seem like an effective method to me.

The security improvements described seem reasonable, so it would be nice to get those merged.

I understand that curation and block lists require effort, but that’s the nature of an open platform. If you don’t want an open platform, that’s cool, too. Just create an instance that’s defederated by default and whitelist, then create a sectioned-off Fediverse of instances that align with your moderation principles.

I feel like I’ve gotta be missing something here. These solutions seem painfully obvious, but that usually means I’m missing some key caveat. Can someone fill me in?

Yeah, that last sentence was quite odd. Where did that come from…?

That was a really, really good article. My observations from living here for 7 years match, and I learned some stuff. It’s good to hear that these initiatives are happening. I try to teach coding in English as a non-profit, but I don’t know enough Korean to reach these other folks. I should do more

We do, actually! You should read up on immunotherapy. It’s not for everyone, but it works in many cases.

The metaphor holds up, too. With sufficient time and effort, you can make things work.

You haven’t read about the founding of modern Israel and the history of Zionism. Please do

(Before accusing me if being pro-terrorist, pro-Hamas whatever, know that I consider both entities unnecessarily violent and evil. But it is important to know why they are that way)

Don’t dare say Winnie the Pooh in China, friend.

Your reference to academic debate in a previous comment is hilarious. Academics know how to stay on topic.

The original comment you replied to was referencing Israel’s behavior as terroristic. You provided a counter argument that nation states cannot conduct terrorism based on the definition of the term terrorism. When provided with evidence supporting the opposing claim, you say the evidence is not valid because it is not authoritative. You then say there is no authoritative source for such evidence. You then use a classic goal post argument method of saying, “even if your argument is invalid, that doesn’t work because x,” rather than focusing on the original argument. You also misuse appeal to authority. Appeal to authority as a fallacy is only a fallacy when the item in question isn’t explicitly defined by that authority. When you moved the goal post, you operated under the assumption of your continued argument that dictionaries are authoritative. However, your language is imprecise enough that you’re going to claim you didn’t make that assumption.

That is not proper academic debate method. That is political debate method. This is the kind of shit that makes it difficult to make meaningful progress today. But hey, since we’re not doing proper academic debate anyway, I’ll indulge in some ad hominem. You’re a terrible person for trying to confound a serious issue with irrelevant pedantic arguments and arguments in bad faith. Fuck off. No one cares if “terrorism” - as defined by you as some authority on words - can be applied to nation states. A nation state committed an act meant to cause terror in civilians (in order to take their land). People understood that as the intent, which is the purpose of words anyway.

Ah, you were referencing English. Thank you.

Ah! I learned something recently about lingua franca. It was a combination of French and Italian jargon. https://www.britannica.com/topic/lingua-franca

What are today’s lucky 10,000?

Sorry, what is called the Lingua Franca? I missed which part you’re referencing

I only made the French comment because the French government has an official entity granted the authority to define the official French language.

Correct. There is no authority in language except French. So your pedantic arguments are also flawed. Your own argument works against you

Nah, friend. Religion does encourage superstition and such nonsense, but it doesn’t, on average, lead to violence and hate. As mentioned above, it’s usually shit situations that make people susceptible to that stuff.

Imagine you have a family. You used to be able to support your whole family, comfortably, with your job. But over the past twenty years, things have been getting more expensive. You’ve had trouble get raises to catch up. Even worse, the company is laying people off, and you’re worried you might be next. It feels like the world is going to shit. You’re too busy with work and family to keep track of all the politics and economics to know why things are happening. You just know that things suck, and you don’t know why. So you start wondering, “what changed?” Well, there’s a lot more talk of gay people. Or you’ve been seeing women with hijabs, and you never saw that before. Maybe they’re the reason. At church, you complain about your life to your friends. They claim it’s the gays and the Muslims. They tell you there’s another church where the pastor knows what’s going on. You should go there instead. So you do, and now you’ve gone from a pretty chill, “love everyone” kind of Christianity to the “gays should burn in hell” kind of Christianity.

Honestly, beyond the different denominations, I think even within denominations, it can be almost an entirely different religion, based on the congregation and pastor/priest.

Yes, curse the world because you feel powerless rather than try to do something about it.

The current system sucks, but the average human is pretty chill. Most people just want to feel safe, eat good food, and enjoy time with friends and family.

Some people are in shit situations and are easily manipulated into becoming hateful creatures, and some people in power understand this and abuse it. Systems that create these situations are the issue, and we have continuously improved systems throughout our existence. We usually change systems when they hit a threshold of hurting enough people, which is not the best strategy, but it’s how we’re wired. But it takes enough people getting pissed off and doing something about it rather than bitching and giving up.

So quit bitching and do something. Volunteer for a group that combats climate change. Find a job at a sustainable company. Advocate to friends and family why they should care and what they should do. At the very least, you can be at some peace with yourself for doing your best

Thank you

What is this firstpost.com? Why is this filed under sports? I only see this on Bloomberg, US News, and this site. I’m skeptical of accuracy

This guy works.