Internet Vigilantism
- Thread starter Berzerker
- Start date
Berzerker
Deity
I advocate privacy rights, that means restricting technology
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Good luck with that. Meanwhile, since you've made it pretty clear what you want people to have the privacy to do you aren't really a good advocate.
It's irrelevant how many people speak Greek for the purpose of my question (there are communities and extended cultural groups in Canada of Greek-speaking people; my dad was friends with some of them).
Celebrities live by the fame, so they are more likely to be open to such attacks, no? I mean... i am a writer in a language not spoken by more than 25 million people, apparently, no one really would bother with what i say about some social event.
That said, i personally don't post about social events either (eg on social networks i use for my book presentation etc).
My point is this: Do you object to Jennifer Lawrence's words because you don't like what she had to say, or do you object because she's an actress who said those words?
If you decided to air your political views publicly in Greece, or even your local area (I have no idea if you live in a large, medium, or small community) and anyone objected, would it because "I don't agree with what Kyriakos is saying" or would it be because "I think Kyriakos should shut up - what business does an author have, expressing his political views in public"?*
Do you see the difference here? It's an important one, and of course in Jennifer Lawrence's case, there's the added factor that some men don't approve of women expressing political views, period.
*hypothetical only; no insult is intended.
Okay, so it's because she's an actress, and actresses (and presumably actors) should just be quiet?You know, it is interesting that the first thing i heard Jennifer Lawrence say as a celeb - right after the original hunger games- was that she didn't get why people would want to listen to actors/actresses about anything, and that it is just a job. A few weeks later she already had become one of the most blatant attention grabbing celebrities out there. A bit bizarre
I am not sure i care about what any of the people in the acting profession have to say, though. I like very few actors, and even that wouldn't make me go out of my way to find what they said on anything.
Well, yeah - some of them should, since what they spout is absolutely nonsensical, or even obscene. But the fact is that they have the legal right to speak up, as much as anyone else. They just have a farther reach than the rest of us (for the most part). For instance, I'm not much of a Meryl Streep fan; the only movie she was ever in that I liked was Bridges of Madison County. But when she told Donald Trump off in public, I'm one of the people around the world who cheered her on for saying what so many of us were thinking but didn't have a way to really get it out in public.
And even an actress is allowed to change her mind about being publicly vocal on the issues that matter to her.
The Hunger Games is a movie series that is unusual in that it's held my interest over the years. I never saw it in the theatre, but have watched it on Netflix. It's an interesting dystopian take on a futuristic version of the French Revolution (can't miss those late 18th-century French aristocratic touches in the costuming, makeup, and attitudes of some of the elite people of that society), plus showing how the media can be used to control what messages the public receives and what the public is being conditioned to think. Katniss Everdeen has to learn to become that society's version of a reality-TV star, playing along with the backstage fakery if she wants to survive and have her family survive as well. In that society, getting voted off means you're dead.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
That isn't the kind of privacy being worried about in this conversation. The neo-nazi punks want to safely and securely use the internet to set up their gatherings, but they want to be able to then march around terrorizing their target city without having to worry that when they go home on Monday they will have to face any consequences. Posting their pictures is ruining that for them.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Not every country is as backward as USA when it comes to privacy.
Hey, i also posted that i do not ever remark on social events when using social media anyway, so it is a stance i have for myself at any rate - it is not one i produce when i notice actors/actresses doing it
That said, it would help if the post she made wasn't that (imo) bad in itself..
ps: i have seen writers remark on such on social media. I dislike that heavily too. Even with a writer i have generally a positive view of regarding his work.
Seems unrelated to my post.
Akka
Moody old mage.
I don't really see how expectations of privacy being different in less backward countries is unrelated to expectations of privacy, but whatever.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements
Those backwards Danes and Norwegians!
Berzerker
Deity
Supporting the right to protest anonymously makes me a poor advocate for free speech?
People have the right to assemble to seek redress of grievances. If others dont like the message and show up to violently confront the protesters and record their identities, they are the terrorists.
Lexicus
Deity
The actual nazis called the people who fought them terrorists, too
And had mass-reprisals, eg wiping out entire villages for any one higher race stupid zero nazi soldier killed.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
It is only terror if it effects the mind. Or so we are told. Terror is not destroying culture, not destroying property, not even destroying the lives of individuals. Terror is the destruction of the accepted ideology, whether that ideology is itself harmful or benign. Otherwise ideology would be set in stone.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
If your guys want to protest anonymously all they have to do is go back to the pointy hoods.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Well, they can't be progressive everywhere.https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements
Those backwards Danes and Norwegians!
Your post about how it's irrelevant was still both wrong and nonsensical.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
There is absolutely nothing in that about anonymity. In fact, if they 'seek redress' and they are genuinely demonstrating these 'grievances' that would preclude anonymity.
When "look, I'm terribly put upon, trust me" comes out from under a sheet and a pointy hood, who is gonna just take their word for it?
The part about this being a demonstration (ie not taking into account type of people in it) doesn't seem to help this line of argument, cause you had the same (taking out anonymity or threatening to do so) in the riots over that Milo guy
In both cases there would be protesters named, with the end to cause them harm, arguably also by non-members of the law.While a nazi rally is obviously terrible, the issue isn't easily framed as one of rallying by itself. Imo if extreme rallies have to take place then police should guard them, if only to avoid deaths (and not just on the far-right protesters; we saw now death on the other side).
I don't typically consider reducing photographers' rights to be relevant to increasing citizens' privacy rights.
Jurisdictions with the weakest photographers' rights are typically those with the weakest privacy rights for their citizens.
