Jump to content

Uplift - Still a good idea in 2021?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 114 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

I don't like, so I don't often participate in, most political discussions, probably mostly so because I have a lot to say, and few like to hear it. It tends to get ugly, because, humans tend to do so at the very sight of anything they perceive to be a challenge. However, I do have some commentary on the actual topic, political beliefs aside.

Choosing not to do business with an entity (in THIS particular context alone, this part's important), be it person, group or even organization, does not mean you, personally, are "shutting them out" or "silencing them". It does not remove their right to be heard or to exist. It does not violate their rights as given to them by whatever government oversees their proverbial existence. It does not prevent them from being heard, dealt  or worked with other entities (that's an atrocious way to write it, my mind is wandering). No one entity is obligated to offer a platform, or relationship of any kind, with another entity. There are no universal laws of any land or man, perceived or otherwise, that state all entities must always be willing to interact with, accommodate or in any way have a relationship with all other entities. 

Personal politics and beliefs is where things get grey, very grey, and cloudy, and muddy and confused and disoriented... and I need not go on. People assume their personal interpretations of things, topics, opinions, events, whatever have you, are the very definition of those (stuff I already mentioned) and are the very reason for their existence. That is not me saying everyone believes they are always right, it is merely me offering up a basic function of how human beings think. In some cases, it very well may that they do know they are wrong, simply unwilling or not desiring to admit that. Thus, when personal politics and beliefs come into play we start hearing about censorship, rights being violated, entities being silenced, devalued stances and other such things. In some cases, it may well be true, has been, and probably will be well into the future after everyone reading this is long gone. In some cases, it couldn't possibly be further from the truth, though, too. Both are reasonable and potential outcomes, whether or not we as individuals like that. 

That is my long winded way of saying... if a business chooses not to do business with another business, because that other business has proven to be problematic for the original business, they should be able to do so. In fact, we have laws that state they can, because of problems that fall under this umbrella. One entity doesn't have any more "rights", perceived or otherwise, than another in this scenario. If I don't want to sell my wares to someone who has caused me and/or my business problems, I should be able to do so, based on that fact. While I wouldn't be able to do so based on many other things, both as governed by my own government (or that of the person that wants to buy my wares, of course) and my own ethics and morals, such as race, religion, orientation, disability, etc.. I should be able to say "you cause me problems, no thank you" and be done with it. I am not preventing that person from going elsewhere for wares, nor would I be preventing them from shouting their side of things from the rooftop somewhere else, simply by preventing them from doing so within my establishment. I don't have to give someone who causes me problems the ability to be in my establishment or buy my wares, if I don't want to.

What I see people essentially saying is that a tech company, in this case, big ones, should not be able to say "you cause me problems, no thank you". I don't agree with this stance. Even if I did agree with why the entity caused problems in the first place, I can't, personally, side with that problem causing entity and not the tech company. It goes against everything I have been taught and learned since my own inception. No one is preventing parler from existing, or telling users they cannot use it, they are simply saying "no thank you" when a desired (albeit it one way) relationship exists, and I am, personally, okay with them saying this. What other entities do, or allow, has no bearing on my opinion of the matter. The fact that other entities may also pose some problems has no bearing on my opinion, either. This isn't a whataboutism sort of thing for me. I have a difficult time understanding why it is for others. "What about facebook", "what about Twitter", "what about.....". So? If apple and google decided they no longer wanted a relationship with those entities, or never wanted one in the first place even, I would stand by my belief that they should be able to do so, whether or not I agree with the final decision. Its not my property, it's not my business, it's not my decision. 

Yes, I do think the uplift is still a good idea, primarily because it's already been done and to undo it would, knowing LL's history of...well, I won't go there...wreak absolute havoc on sl and its residents. LL doesn't have a good track record in much of any area, right now, I wouldn't trust them to be able to put things back to where they were without mucking something up terribly. It's just not in their nature to be able to undo something, without breaking something else.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yeah, but not the one you mean. Tell ya what: hosted on AWS or not, when SL becomes the next unmoderated platform for planning the a murderous coup against American democracy, PULL THE EFFING PLUG NOW

Uplift as I understand it is SecondLife's effort to move its servers onto Amazon Web Services (AWS) in the cloud. It was intended to reduce operating costs. We're watching right now as technology

What do you mean 'ourselves'? You never had control over SL. You're only using it as a commodity. You're not entitled (that's a socialist thing) to a Parler or Twitter or Second Life account. It'

Posted Images

22 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

As long as Linden Lab has rules and enforces them, SL isn’t getting Parlered. If something like Wonderland 2007 came up again, that could be a problem, but unlike Parler, LL seems to take that sort of thing seriously and cracks down on it. 

Agreed. But don´t forget that these (politically roooted) rules are variable. Imagine Trump´s coup would be successful and section 230 would be altered in the fascist way (what he already tried to do).

Also, I do not see Linden Lab regulating content in SL overly. That´s all more or less half heartened and has an alibi function. At the snow mountains at Sansara i saw an totally outrageous. prominent white supremacy propaganda set up (charcterising Obama as dude and his wife as whore) all over the Obama years. I´ll not paste the screenshots here, they are too outrageous and i want to avoid spreading fascist propagana. Hundreds of AR´s didn´t change that.

Unfortunately, the laissez faire of social media companies lead to the (bipartisan) attempts to alter section 230. And that is truly dangerous for the entire internet, not only Second Life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel this is an issue of free speech.  I feel this is an issue of public safety.  To put it simply, innocent bystanders can become hurt and fatally hurt in crowds like these.  If it were a group of punk rockers who had stampeded a club based upon a belief and were planning to do it again, I'm sure it would have been shut down in the interest of public safety and until things cooled off.  That's all I have to say.  I want a safe Inauguration Day and phooey to the rest.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

Where hate speech (which i believe isn't illegal in America) can be spoken privately amongst a like minded assembly of people

"Hate speech" becomes illegal when it includes advocating and inciting violent crime. Even in the USA. That's why AWS is taking down Parler...they have no means (and apparently no desire) to moderate their content at all. Are you using SL to plan The Revolution? Kidnap your local officials? Rehearse your next mass shooting?  No?  Then I think you (and we) are OK.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Extrude Ragu said:

I find this to be concerning, do we really want the fate of SecondLife to be in the control of anyone else but ourselves? Can SecondLife survive the political climate of 2021 if it is dependent on highly politicized hosting services? I am not so sure it can.

Think I have to agree with you from the perspective that with Big Tech's moves against Parler, it puts those using their services on eggshells. Who will be next and for what? No doubt there will be at the very least an increased moderation in forums that might discuss any political aspects because of the tendency for them to get overly dramatic and blown out of proportion.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just on an off-topic side-note...

Aren't these the weirdest and most surreal times we live in now? Imagine the most powerful person on the entire planet, with the most powerful armed forces at their command, nuclear aircraft carriers, thousands of jet fighters and bombers, stealthy submarines, military bases all over the world. Imagine having the ability to cover the entire globe in radioactive dust, rendering the planet inhabitable for centuries to come with one phone call... Imagine someone with all that power... having their Twitter account being taken away. Please pinch me. Surely, I'm living in some weird weird dream.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1 minute ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Just on an off-topic side-note...

Aren't these the weirdest and most surreal times we live in now? Imagine the most powerful person on the entire planet, with the most powerful armed forces at their command, nuclear aircraft carriers, thousands of jet fighters and bombers, stealthy submarines, military bases all over the world. Imagine having the ability to cover the entire globe in radioactive dust, rendering the planet inhabitable for centuries to come with one phone call... Imagine someone with all that power... having their Twitter account being taken away. Please pinch me. Surely, I'm living in some weird weird dream.

Took them five years and a failed coup. Not worth the medal of honor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Just on an off-topic side-note...

Aren't these the weirdest and most surreal times we live in now? Imagine the most powerful person on the entire planet, with the most powerful armed forces at their command, nuclear aircraft carriers, thousands of jet fighters and bombers, stealthy submarines, military bases all over the world. Imagine having the ability to cover the entire globe in radioactive dust, rendering the planet inhabitable for centuries to come with one phone call... Imagine someone with all that power... having their Twitter account being taken away. Please pinch me. Surely, I'm living in some weird weird dream.

To be fair, it's Twitter's @theRealDonaldTrump account, not the other way around.  I may have the handle incorrect because I never read it.  I have known the man since 1972 and would never have trusted him with anything more dangerous than a plastic leaf rake.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Think I have to agree with you from the perspective that with Big Tech's moves against Parler, it puts those using their services on eggshells. Who will be next and for what? No doubt there will be at the very least an increased moderation in forums that might discuss any political aspects because of the tendency for them to get overly dramatic and blown out of proportion.

What are you scared of? The overly dramatic and blown out of any proportion Trump mob or the moderators at the forums?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TDD123 said:

/me slaps you with a large trout.

That reminds me of the IRC chats!

5 hours ago, Orwar said:

   I saw an interesting documentary on Netflix recently about them big tech corporations. There absolutely is reason to be concerned when they get involved in deciding whose ideas should reach the public and whose shouldn't (and in doing so, only get even more attention, which is what they want to get more people to sign up).

   I'm no doomsayer though, I figure things will pan out ... Eventually. Just hoping it's within my lifetime! 

The Social Dilemma hits the nail on the head regarding the social networks. I Believe if Zuck dude has his way, he would want you to do EVERYTHING through his platform. There are like 14 of us that avoid FB like the C19 and probably same amount who don't have smart phones either. One of my nieces I told about that Netflix movie said she wouldn't bother watching it since she's heavy in to FB --- including as far as live streaming a diaper change.🤮

Anyhoo I have a feeling that if this thread goes to far on the political stuff I see a Moderator securing it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Just on an off-topic side-note...

Aren't these the weirdest and most surreal times we live in now? Imagine the most powerful person on the entire planet, with the most powerful armed forces at their command, nuclear aircraft carriers, thousands of jet fighters and bombers, stealthy submarines, military bases all over the world. Imagine having the ability to cover the entire globe in radioactive dust, rendering the planet inhabitable for centuries to come with one phone call... Imagine someone with all that power... having their Twitter account being taken away. Please pinch me. Surely, I'm living in some weird weird dream.

In truth, our President does not really have that power.  He can't do anything without quite a few other folks going along, authorizing things, and pushing all the right buttons.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kimmi Zehetbauer said:

That reminds me of the IRC chats!

Aye .. the good ol' days where tl:dr was but a bad dream and one-liners ruled supreme.

8 minutes ago, Kimmi Zehetbauer said:

I Believe if Zuck dude has his way, he would want you to do EVERYTHING through his platform.

Of course.  And these companies as run by him will certainly not cater to the extremist single individual or group, but to the large mostly silent crowd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely do not trust social media platforms, and most especially not Facebook. And yes, long term they are a threat to the free flowing exchange of ideas. But that's got more to do with their algorithms and filter bubbles than with "censorship." It's much harder to reach out to, and hear, people with different perspectives and ideas now, because these platforms insist upon serving up what they have already determined we want to see and hear.

But that's not what this is about is it? Twitter and Facebook and the others host plenty of conservatives and pro-Trump voices. That's not what is being filtered out. The issue here isn't the exchange of ideas, which is good -- it's the incitement to violence and criminality that is the problem. And Parler was clearly making little attempt to do anything about that on their platform. You have the right to tell me why you like Trump. You don't have the right to tell others to assault or murder me because I disagree.

As a side note, can I just point out that the freedom of Amazon, Google, et al. to determine the content on their own platforms is an extension of a libertarian free-market approach to culture? I find it rather ironic that it is those most vociferously in support of the "their platform, their rules" approach who are now pushing back most heavily against it.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vivienne Schell said:

Also, I do not see Linden Lab regulating content in SL overly. That´s all more or less half heartened and has an alibi function. At the snow mountains at Sansara i saw an totally outrageous. prominent white supremacy propaganda set up (charcterising Obama as dude and his wife as whore) all over the Obama years. I´ll not paste the screenshots here, they are too outrageous and i want to avoid spreading fascist propagana. Hundreds of AR´s didn´t change that.

Back when you saw those posters, LL explicitly allowed them. Their opinion was basically along the lines of "Republicans can say what they want, so can Democrats".  It was only last year, in the run-up to the 2020 elections, that LL updated the TOS with a ban on political advertising. So those snowlands ad farms you saw were allowed then, but would not be allowed now.

Parler is likely dead. No other legitimate hosting service will want to touch it with a ten-foot barge pole now, and I doubt that they have the means to finance their own server-farm. They might transfer to the Deep Web with a small hardcore of conspiracy theorists but the rank-and-file monster-truck-cheeto-cosplayers aren't that tech savvy.

Second Life itself is likely not of interest to people like that anyway. If they've even heard of it at all, they'll see it as an immoral hive of depravity and sex, and any that do decide to try it out will probably find their tiny brains melting from the effort of navigating through the new user experience. 

My concern though, is what happens if Amazon also decides that SL is an immoral hive of depravity and sex? One public child abuse scandal hitting the press could well be enough for AWS to conclude that LL is not capable of policing their own TOS, and pull the plug on SL. And it's too late to reverse the uplift now that the original servers have been shredded. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lewis Luminos said:

My concern though, is what happens if Amazon also decides that SL is an immoral hive of depravity and sex?

Well.. first they need to stop selling the "I love P()rn" - baseballcaps and various other items themselves first. It's unlikely they'll Disneyfy themselves first and then 'hit' LL with morality issues.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Lewis Luminos said:

My concern though, is what happens if Amazon also decides that SL is an immoral hive of depravity and sex? One public child abuse scandal hitting the press could well be enough for AWS to conclude that LL is not capable of policing their own TOS, and pull the plug on SL.

The difference between SL and Parler is it would be in Linden Lab's interest to come up with an effective way to deal with such a scandal. It's not just AWS that wouldn't want to be associated with that, it's practically their entire customer base. Ether LL does a cleanup, or everyone leaves. Parler's entire reason for existing is catering to people who were to scummy for Twitter.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, Freedom of Speech, as defined in the US of A's constitution, is protected from government censorship; it was never about private enterprise's censorship. Secondly, even that protection does not mean anyone can holler "Fire" in a crowded theater. Inciting criminal behavior is not a protected right - period.

Edited by kali Wylder
forgot a couple of commas
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Lewis Luminos said:

Back when you saw those posters, LL explicitly allowed them. Their opinion was basically along the lines of "Republicans can say what they want, so can Democrats".  It was only last year, in the run-up to the 2020 elections, that LL updated the TOS with a ban on political advertising. So those snowlands ad farms you saw were allowed then, but would not be allowed now.

Parler is likely dead. No other legitimate hosting service will want to touch it with a ten-foot barge pole now, and I doubt that they have the means to finance their own server-farm. They might transfer to the Deep Web with a small hardcore of conspiracy theorists but the rank-and-file monster-truck-cheeto-cosplayers aren't that tech savvy.

Second Life itself is likely not of interest to people like that anyway. If they've even heard of it at all, they'll see it as an immoral hive of depravity and sex, and any that do decide to try it out will probably find their tiny brains melting from the effort of navigating through the new user experience. 

My concern though, is what happens if Amazon also decides that SL is an immoral hive of depravity and sex? One public child abuse scandal hitting the press could well be enough for AWS to conclude that LL is not capable of policing their own TOS, and pull the plug on SL. And it's too late to reverse the uplift now that the original servers have been shredded. 

I beg to differ between upright conservative republicans and a white supremacy fascist bunch of knownothings. I never understood why Linden Lab tolerated such excesses and never will.

And moving to amazon servers is risky, too. But, frankly spoken, i do not see much benefit in tolerating people promoting child pornography (which HAPPENS in SL), even if it is legal - in graphic form - in the US (the supreme court decided that). Linden Lab should shovel the smut out of Second Life, anyway, and not only the political one. If they do, there will be no issue anywhere.

Edited by Vivienne Schell
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

But what about general medias responsibilities & behaviour?
During the Whitehouse coverage I wondered how long it would take before the first mention of "Nazis"
Sure enough it took about 2 hours and bingo, the nazis arrived. (they only get one capital N).
Remember that in this country our journalists are so incompetent that they only parrot USA stuff and once
the nazi floodgates opened they ran with it ad infinitum. 
I don't want to hear such rubbish? What do they hope to achieve?

I don't care about Trump, Biden or USA politics but I find all sides to be grossly offensive and unworthy of airtime on any platform. 😕

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kimmi Zehetbauer said:

One of my nieces I told about that Netflix movie said she wouldn't bother watching it since she's heavy in to FB --- including as far as live streaming a diaper change.

   That's been another thing which has been discussed a bit (buy clearly not enough) here.

   As people of my generation start popping out kids, my FB feed has largely turned into a peculiar mix of people screaming political nonsense back and forth, pagan crafts, and naked children sitting in sinks or being snuggled by Rottweilers. Those infants have no say and no control over how their parents portray them to basically the entire world, and if people are careless with their privacy settings (which most don't even seem to realise), that has the potential to be used against them - or worse, end up in the hands of paedophilic networks.

   Posting pictures of your kids on FB is nothing like when my parents put a photo of infant me sitting in a wash bowl in a frame on a living room side table; that could only be seen by people who were invited to our house. 

   Personally I wouldn't go as far as to say that it's an issue of not receiving consent from your infant children, but it is always risky putting up private pictures on the Internet. Especially on sites where people's private information is the primary commodity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Maryanne Solo said:


Sure enough it took about 2 hours and bingo, the nazis arrived. (they only get one capital N).
 😕

Well, in fact the capitol riot and Trump´s "March on Washington" and Mussolini´s fascist  "March on Rome" are related to each other in some ways.  And while there surely were some thugs waving Nazi flags at the capitol, the overall impression is not nazi, but 1920´s fascism paired with modern habits and clad in orange hair.

Edited by Vivienne Schell
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maryanne Solo said:

During the Whitehouse coverage I wondered how long it would take before the first mention of "Nazis"
Sure enough it took about 2 hours and bingo, the nazis arrived. (they only get one capital N).

There is the possibility of the Boogaloo Bois being involved, which are a Neo-Nazi group from readings on the internet, and apparently the Boogaloo Bois (or Boys) want a "race war".  

I'm not sure why you are upset, Maryanne, it's not your country.  Just hope for peace for us and leave it alone.

I'm upset, it's my country.

Plus, you can turn off the TV in your home.  

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

"Hate speech" becomes illegal when it includes advocating and inciting violent crime. Even in the USA. That's why AWS is taking down Parler...they have no means (and apparently no desire) to moderate their content at all. Are you using SL to plan The Revolution? Kidnap your local officials? Rehearse your next mass shooting?  No?  Then I think you (and we) are OK.

Oh please, I said hate speech isn't illegal, I never said inciting violence isn't a crime, I said the opposite. As to second life I also never said such a thing. I said it was POSSIBLE. Just like any platform moderated or not can be used for the same.

I get it USA congress was stormed due to inciting violence by a political figurehead (it was terrible, trump is and always has been an idiot and will pay I am sure), but what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Until Twitter and Facebook remove like minded individuals or those committing the same crimes (or worse) Trump is accused of and guilty of (such as other certain political figureheads inciting genocide and violence against the west who were mocking yesterday them being allowed to say such things and not the president of USA which twitter claimed yesterday to be political sabre rattling), means that any attempt by these big tech companies removal of select citizens or select competing companies, will be considered company sabotage or monopoly by certain political figures.

4 hours ago, Ardy Lay said:

To be fair, it's Twitter's @theRealDonaldTrump account, not the other way around.  I may have the handle incorrect because I never read it.

No the @POTUS (official President account) was also suspended with no tweets allowed or being shown.

4 hours ago, Ardy Lay said:

 I have known the man since 1972 and would never have trusted him with anything more dangerous than a plastic leaf rake.

It does call into question how someone like him could have ever been allowed to run for President.

Edited by Drayke Newall
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 114 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...