Zuckerberg Comes for the Metaverse

[Nick0678]

28 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

Judge told Mr Richter he was free to go

Actually Mr Richter wasn''t even there. Such cases are a farce, unless somehow can be connected with hatred, malicious intentions. etc.

So yes Mr Richter is allowed to deny the atrocities of the Nazis that took place in Crete and publish books about it, next case please we also need to take the children from school,  life goes on. (we all live in different countries with different laws etc so no f*ks given)

[Mollymews]

1 hour ago, Nick0678 said:

Such cases are a farce, unless somehow can be connected with hatred, malicious intentions. etc.

the prosecutor would have been better off trying a prosecution under Article 365 of the Greece Criminal Code which is: "Insulting the memory of the dead with cruel or malicious defamation or libel"

the cruel insult being that in his book Mr Ritcher said that what the invading army did was no more or less atrocious than what the defenders did in fighting off the invaders. Which I think most people would find to be quite insulting and libelous to those who died defending their homes from an invader

but the prosecutor never and the court proceedings ended in a farce as you say

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Mollymews
libel

[Alazarin Mondrian]

Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing but so often it gets used as a fig-leaf by bad actors 😕

[Nick0678]

4 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

the prosecutor would have been better off trying a prosecution under Article 365 of the Greece Criminal Code which is: "Insulting the memory of the dead with cruel or malicious defamation or libel"

Would, should, could ..  it really doesn't matter, case is closed for Mr Richter and his book is selling pretty well.

[Mollymews]

17 minutes ago, Nick0678 said:

Would, should, could ..  it really doesn't matter, case is closed for Mr Richter and his book is selling pretty well.

the way you debate is really interesting

like start with some principled point. Then reference something which doesn't actually support the point. Then end up finishing with whatevs

[Nick0678]

6 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

the way you debate is really interesting

like start with some principled point. Then reference something which doesn't actually support the point. Then end up finishing with whatevs

Oh are we debating?

I thought we were simply chatting about those laws. and their effectiveness and never saw it as a debate, after all i am not a judge neither a lawyer so don't really care about such nonsense since they don't bring food to my table. We already have a lawyer in the family, my brother.. Moving on.

[Mollymews]

4 minutes ago, Nick0678 said:

Oh are we debating?

I thought we were simply chatting about those laws. and their effectiveness and never saw it as a debate, after all i am not a judge neither a lawyer so don't really care about such nonsense since they don't bring food to my table. We already have a lawyer in the family, my brother.. Moving on.

you did underline what you understood to be a principled point about law you were wanting to make. From the underlining I was expecting something a bit more than a chat that has ended in the principles of law being dismissed as nonsense

this said, sure is ok if you want to move on  

[Nick0678]

9 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

 From the underlining I was expecting something a bit more than a chat that has ended in the principles of law being dismissed as nonsense

Ahhh.. yes. Well sorry i haven't met your expectations but i just chat about such things and move on.

Same way Mr Richter does with his book regardless of what others think . (in simple words  no f*ks given)

[Luna Bliss]

49 minutes ago, Nick0678 said:

don't really care about such nonsense since they don't bring food to my table

I find it strange that people in Greece would continue to buy a book that says those in Greece defending themselves were just as bad as the Nazi's invading them. Do you think many don't know this was in the book? Or do you think there's a large percentage of people in Greece who feel if one group is stronger than the other it's okay if that stronger group dominates the one less able to defend themselves?

I hope people don't feel this way about Zuckerberg (that it's okay for him to do what he wants with the Metaverse just because he can due to having more strength via the power that money buys).

Edited November 14, 2021 by Luna Bliss

[Nick0678]

9 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I find it strange that people in Greece would continue to buy a book that says those in Greece defending themselves were just as bad as the Nazi's invading them...

 Mr Richter is a German historian not some local historian. His book is sold worldwide..

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Nick0678 said:

12 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I find it strange that people in Greece would continue to buy a book that says those in Greece defending themselves were just as bad as the Nazi's invading them...

 Mr Richter is a German historian not some local historian. His book is sold worldwide..

Ahh, ok.

But do you know how people living in Greece feel about this particular characterization in his book?

[Nick0678]

Just now, Luna Bliss said:

Ahh, ok.

But do you know how people living in Greece feel about this particular characterization in his book?

I don't "have to know", i have very close family members who were executed by the Nazis during WW2.

[Luna Bliss]

8 minutes ago, Nick0678 said:

11 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Ahh, ok.

But do you know how people living in Greece feel about this particular characterization in his book?

I don't "have to know", i have very close family members who were executed by the Nazis during WW2.

I'm sorry that happened to your family. I have a couple of family members who came back from WW2 and were never the same...they became alcoholics and had very limited lives.

I'm a proponent of free speech, but believe it has to be limited so that atrocities like the Holocaust don't happen. If enough people stood up in Germany and said it was wrong for one group to express hatred for another in public perhaps the Holocaust where 6 million Jews were murdered would not have happened.

[Nick0678]

12 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I'm sorry that happened to your family. I have a couple of family members who came back from WW2 and were never the same...they became alcoholics and had very limited lives.

I'm a proponent of free speech, but believe it has to be limited so that atrocities like the Holocaust don't happen. If enough people stood up in Germany and said it was wrong for one group to express hatred for another in public perhaps the Holocaust where 6 million Jews were murdered would not have happened.

Nods.

[QwiQ]

It's been really interesting to read this thread and gain some understanding of the concerns of SL residents as represented by this group.

My view is however that there still isn't a true grasp of the genuine precipice humanity and society is about to leap off.

The view I take from this thread is that there's a belief that somehow the metaverse will still be a discrete virtual "country" we visit for a while and then put down our headsets and walk away from back into the "real world" whenever we want.

That's not where these guys want to take us, it's not where real species level existential omnipotence kicks in - which was until very recently the theoretical realm of the Gods, and is of course the ultimate aim here for Meta and the rest.

The subtext I took away from Zuck's keynote and subsequent interviews is that Virtual Reality is just a stepping stone to the ultimate goal of Extended Reaility (XR) - via the various interim steps of AR (Augmented Reality) and MR (Mixed Reality).

Once all experienced "reality" is an externally concocted  blend of the physical and the virtual, with no real way to tell which is which and no socially acceptable way to escape it (that is if you want to get educated, get a job, access credit, access healthcare etc) then any ideas of how we might leverage current laws and societal norms in the service of "governance" are pretty much useless.

How far away are we from this?

Zuckerberg reckons 3 to 5 years for phase one, not for simple access to the VR based metaverse, but ubiquity of AR use across wide segments of society (for me anyway a much more insidious prospect).

Even if this goal is wide of the mark, a conservative forecast annual spend of $100Bn by 2024 (as reported by Washington Post) and the fact that 20% of Meta Employees alone are now solely working on XR, means it's definitely in the pipeline.

Couple all of this with what XR means in terms of potential revenues for those who control it, and it really might be about time to dig out the tin foil hats!

Edited November 14, 2021 by QwiQ

[Sammy Huntsman]

6 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I'm a proponent of free speech, but believe it has to be limited so that atrocities like the Holocaust don't happen.

Then by definition that is not free speech. That is controlled speech. That all being said, the only way we can stop atrocities like this happening again, is A teach our Youth about the atrocities and B Stop all this divisiveness. I mean we are practically at a precipice of another genocide caused by a crazy totalarianistic person, and this divisiveness isn't helping one bit. 

[Nick0678]

18 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

That all being said, the only way we can stop atrocities like this happening again

Another great war will certainly happen one day, it simply is statistically impossible not to happen, maybe not in our lifetime because we are a lucky generation but it will and regardless of what we like to think that we can have under control or how good we educate people they will eventually kill each other as they always did for thousands of years.  All it needs is the right circumstances and poverty.

[Maryanne Solo]

On 11/14/2021 at 10:11 AM, Sammy Huntsman said:

 Or some pill ad or other ad, we are bombarded with on a day to day basis. Lol 

Zuckerberg himself - Laxatives. 😂

[Prokofy Neva]

22 hours ago, Mollymews said:

 

i don't think we disagree on this. I think tho we talking about two different things

what I first posted was about ordinary people impugning other people and using rhetoric to do this and how this is illegal in some jurisdictions. Nick then mentioned that there is a free speech principle involved here

then i said that in the USA the case that surfaced this ordinary person to person situation was Gertz

then Nick raised Richter a case from Greece. A case in which proceedings were halted, prosecutor moved for acquittal. Judge told Mr Richter he was free to go (and also gave the prosecutor and the Parliament an earful about jurisdiction)

then you (Prokofy) raised New York Times vs Sullivan. Which is a different thing. Sullivan was a public figure, and the Court ruled that the higher common law bar (malice and livelihood) applied in the public figure situation. As you rightly point out

then I said the follow on from Gretz (in the ordinary person to person case) was Milkovich. That in this circumstance the common law bar is a lot lower. Don't have to show malice caused actual harm, only have to show that actual harm occurred thru negligence. And also that when we are not negligent (even if harm to livelihood did occur) then the words used are protected free speech (fair comment)  

and yes is true, I read all court rulings literally. Court rulings literally mean what they say and are not meant to be read in any other way

can certainly tho debate these issues from a philosophical pov, but even then I am pretty literal in these kinds of debates as well. Like somebody will make a point and I think thats a good idea, then I start thinking about how it might be done in practice. And when can't work out how it might be done then leave it on the shelf along with all the good ideas til one day are able to work out how to apply it

Re: "and yes is true, I read all court rulings literally. Court rulings literally mean what they say and are not meant to be read in any other way."

I think you will find if you study law, even not as an aspiring lawyer, and court cases, you will find that judges interpret law with more common sense and meaning and reference to historical precedent than your average bear on a forums. I really think the mania of our times is that people bent their minds to computers to make them work with human language, and became like them, which is not a good thing. 

For example, with the modern Internet propensity for literalism and 0/1 thinking, people might take "incitement to imminent lawless action" can't apply because if it is on the Internet, it isn't "imminent." I don't know if that argument has stuck in any actual case, but I know it can be very hard to get Internet cases even to be taken up by courts. Yet how does some jerk even find out about a demonstration somewhere that he doesn't like or doesn't understand, and feels he needs to go to with a gun? By social media.

The cases you are citing about "ordinary people" are all great but as I said already, the Sony case undoes this by the judge referencing the TOS, unconscionable or not. So it's back to Boy Scouts of America which remember, is not undone in a court of law but undone by BSA deciding unilaterally under public pressure to change their policy.

These matter because this is about the Metaverse which is still envisioned as a unicorn realm. The UN committee that got this resolution affirming that international human rights stands apply on the Internet would then be unable to act on most cases related to the fine points in the US where the threshold is lower (or more tolerant) -- not that UN committees have much influence or anything, although they are still worth bothering with to set standards and some countries do try to apply them.

[Prokofy Neva]

12 hours ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Then by definition that is not free speech. That is controlled speech. That all being said, the only way we can stop atrocities like this happening again, is A teach our Youth about the atrocities and B Stop all this divisiveness. I mean we are practically at a precipice of another genocide caused by a crazy totalarianistic person, and this divisiveness isn't helping one bit. 

No, because incitement of "imminent lawless action" isn't protected speech in the US, and the UK has less tolerance for free speech which is why people venue shop to the UK if they can where they might bring a case that would not be accepted in the US.

The "imminent lawless action" issue is exactly what is being parsed now with the January 6 insurrection. Does placing gallows around a government building and calling for the hanging of the VP involve imminence? Etc. 

I've been re-reading some of that Nazi history again outlined in The Princess Spy about an American socialite spy in the Spanish Civil War. And it's important to remember not just what people always say, that Hitler was elected in a free election, or that Chamberlain caved to Hitler ostensibly for the sake of peace which the UK then didn't get. But that Chamberlaind's capitulation did another thing, it foiled the German Generals' Plot, whereby anti-Hitler military leaders were trying to bring him down, citing his belligerence, were then defeated by the UK making a bad peace.

Thus they thwarted the internal forces within Germany that might have stopped Hitler -- and there were many other attempts and many cases of inaction from the West (as there is today with Russia). Some things aren't about free speech but about solidarity and good people doing nothing. 

And that's what Second Life and the Metaverse is all about. 

I'm not sure which totalitarianistic personage who are talking about, but I gather it's not Putin but Johnson. BTW it's interesting to read about another country's problems sometimes; my God, the late-night Mars Bars and expensive wallpaper!

Yes, Youth should be taught about atrocities and PS that means not having a half page on Lenin and Stalin who have committed the most crimes against humanity and stayed in power over the longest period. 

But I think "stopping all this divisiveness" is not only impossible, but itself an ultimately totalitarian gesture. The point is to manage differences and diametrically opposed views that will not change and to find compromises in Congress/parliament. Many are happy to "stop all the divisiveness" by taking over all of Congress with their party. It's too bad we don't have parliamentary democracy as we really have four parties. At any rate, Second Life is good for managing differences by making it possible for people to appear not as rooted in their RL backgrounds but as a better, imagined self in many cases. But more to the point, there are more opportunities for people to find areas they have in common that they can work on without having to accept each other's ideologies -- basic infrastructure issues like "roads" or "a nice view" or activities like "sailing" or "exploring". The Marketplace represents a place where commerce can smooth over these edges because it is still not susceptible to RL boycotts at least on Twitter. People can come together in various affinity or mixed groups as casually or as deeply as they wish, then try another one more easily than in RL. 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Prokofy Neva

[Luna Bliss]

20 hours ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

On 11/14/2021 at 8:51 AM, Luna Bliss said:

I'm a proponent of free speech, but believe it has to be limited so that atrocities like the Holocaust don't happen.

Then by definition that is not free speech. That is controlled speech. That all being said, the only way we can stop atrocities like this happening again, is A teach our Youth about the atrocities and B Stop all this divisiveness. I mean we are practically at a precipice of another genocide caused by a crazy totalarianistic person, and this divisiveness isn't helping one bit. 

Free speech has always had limitations (in law terminology). Canadian restrictions on free speech are even more restricted than in the U.S. and include 'hate speech'. I think EU restrictions are even greater, which is understandable given what happened there (the Holocaust, still in living memory).

We need to approach the prevention of such atrocities on many fronts, and the clamping down on 'hate speech' is only one.

I think a lot of this divisiveness is actually fostered by the powers that be....they get us fighting and blaming each other and we tend to not see it's the oligarchs hoarding the wealth for themselves and causing our poverty. So we pick on each other instead of fighting them.

[Luna Bliss]

9 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

with the modern Internet propensity for literalism and 0/1 thinking

I've been wondering about this. It feels like some highly contagious disease that's overtaken society. I've joked about the lead in the water in the U.S. Maybe computers did make it worse somehow with the binary focus. Or are we just able to see what was always there more clearly due to so many more speaking on social media?

[Luna Bliss]

10 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I've been re-reading some of that Nazi history again outlined in The Princess Spy about an American socialite spy in the Spanish Civil War.

That book looks interesting. It's amazing how so many years later stories of those who tried to prevent Hitler and save Jewish people are still coming to light.  Quite a few stories are on the streaming service Wondrium.

I always liked the movie 'Julia', and wondered if I could have been so courageous.

https://www.janefonda.com/julia/

Edited November 15, 2021 by Luna Bliss

[Kathlen Onyx]

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-metaverse-is-a-second-second-life/

Um....someone needs to do their research a little better since they are talking about Second Life in the past tense and that it is no longer active.

 

[Sammy Huntsman]

4 minutes ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-metaverse-is-a-second-second-life/

Um....someone needs to do their research a little better since they are talking about Second Life in the past tense and that it is no longer active.

 

I mean it all depends on how people view it, calling it a second life is very subjective.