ChrHONKicals of Clownworld

Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
AHM WAWKIN EEEH!!!

The upside of being fired from your job by a government mandate is the freedom to make whatever political statement you want.

...what are they gonna do?

Double-fire you?



These protestors knocked over a COVID testing tent.

I think it's funny that they're being called "anti-vaxxer protestors" as if they're against all vaccines; like they're drinking colloidal silver and trying to treat cancer with essential oils. The mandates are the problem, not so much the vaccine...If you can't control what medical procedures you're subject to, then you can be forced to be sterilized, forced to have an abortion, forced to have organs removed, experimented on without informed consent, etc.

A different group of protestors stormed a mall food court in Staten Island while chanting "FUCK JOE BIDEN!" among other slogans


No competent dictatorship would piss off mass numbers of people and then leave them loose in society to protest and knock over tyranny structures...Stalin's ghost rates it 2/10 gulags.



Fuck the MSM

All the Fauci documentaries are getting BTFO

9729

The top 2 rappers on the Apple Music chart are rightoids - Tom MacDonald has the #2 song and High Rez & Jimmy Levvy have the #1


A lot of Tom MacDonald's songs are lyrically similar to one another, but I'm not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth. The production quality of his shit's pretty good and, clearly, he's filling a void in the entertainment industry because a lot of people want to buy what he's selling. His songs may sound similar to each other, but the whole MSM is an echo chamber of the same astroturfed point of view.


Not my style, but that's the point. Not everyone wants to listen to rap, punk, and metal, so making chill protest music with a subtle message is probably a good route to go. It's like something you'd hear on the radio and there's nothing wrong with having mass appeal so long as you don't dumb yourself down and pander in the process.

Speaking of punk, though...



There's a lot of rightoid punk that has come out lately (although Red White & Blue was making music in the 90s). It's completely separate from the Neo-Nazi Skrewdriver-type RAC of the 80s, and there's enough of it that the RAC has been drowned out by normal rightoid punk and oi. I still like to look up the band to make sure they're not Neo-Nazis...'cause I'm not a red, and I'm not a bonehead.

(For anyone confused, RAC = Rock Against Communism was a largely Neo-Nazi oi movement in the 80s. Skinheads are a pro-working-class subculture, and not any particular political orientation. Only a subsection of them are Neo-Nazis, e.g. "boneheads". Legend has it that the entire NS skin subculture was inspired by a half-Asian guy's ironic band called White Pride that tried to make the most over-the-top racially offensive music possible, but some people took it dead serious and became "boneheads". This is besides the point that punk in the 80s was using Communist and Nazi imagery primarily to troll the status quo and people in authority - the cold war was going on so Commie symbols offended the normies, and the old people were a lot of WWII vets so they were offended by Nazi symbols - or a LARP at most, and probably less so out of a sincerely-held belief that they were trying to enact in any meaningful way.)

Aaaaand Nicki Minaj continues to be increasingly based

9730
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
Domestic terrorism is when you disagree with Marxism

This goes back to what I said in an earlier post that leftists believe children are state assets, and the state merely allows parents to raise them if they remain within certain boundaries of ideological acceptability.

There have been cases recently of teachers being fired when parents found out, and complained, that teachers were promoting Marxism (e.g. the Antifa teacher who was fired), kink, or "conversations about gender". One of the fired teachers was asking on Twitter about how to legally create a "space" to discuss kink and gender with elementary-age kids without the parents' consent.



"In their current work with families, Koe brings the dedicated passion and vulnerable strength of performance to support their struggling clients, filling much needed roles like 'Personal Gender Cheerleader', 'Sex-Positive Camp Counselor' & 'Polyamorous Auntie You Never Had!'"

oc.png

Get my fucking god damn helicopter



Parents have also been angry because school libraries carry books that look like something written on this site, and would be generally considered inappropriate for underage people.



Parents want to be able to see the curriculum and sources used in the classroom, and be able to veto objectionable content.

"He noted that McAuliffe 'vetoed the bill that would have informed parents that they were there.'

'You believe school systems should tell children what to do. I believe parents should be in charge of their kids’ education,' he said to his opponent.

The former governor replied that parents would have 'had the right to veto books' under the bill he vetoed.

'I’m not going to let parents come into schools, and actually take books out, and make their own decision,' McAuliffe said."


It's impossible to please everyone. However, this being as big of a deal as it's become shows that objections aren't coming from a few wackadoos here and there, and it's not over some out of pocket shit about how the 3 Little Pigs is about summoning the devil. A significant portion of the population is objecting to the fact schools are teaching Marxism and responding with hostility to anyone who object.

Leftists have gotten this far calling their opposition "fascists" and counting on the fact the normies aren't going to know better. It's a tired joke.

I've only recently realized that most people don't learn about 100 million people killed by Commie mass killings and famines, Soviet gulags, The Holodomor, The Great Leap Forward, or the various Communist regimes in Africa or South America, etc. Granted they don't learn about Fascism in Spain, Italy, Japan, or South America, either.

That's why society's fucked, probably. If I were to take a wild guess.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
Defund the Police: where are they now?

A huge factor in the 2020 election was the "defund the police" movement. I'm not sure what that has to do with the federal government, but that's for another day.

Don't get me wrong. Police, as an institution, are problematic. My opposition to the police stems from the fact they enforce unconstitutional laws. Australia has demonstrated, as a group, they will enforce tyrannical laws they themselves disagree with for the sake of their paycheck. The police force, as with other respected positions of authority in society, attracts malevolent people who use their position to get away with problematic behavior like being a sadist or a hypocrite, selectively enforcing the law through nepotism or other preferences, and coercing citizens through things like sexual assault, blackmail, and extortion. When these things happen, the citizen is at a disadvantage because the cop is typically given more credibility.

However, the police, or some equivalent group, fulfill a necessary function -- whether this is in contemporary society, a commune, a covenant community, a city-state, etc. Without something approximating a police force, violence and exploitation wouldn't disappear from society. It doesn't matter if they're tax-funded police, private police, or volunteers. Bringing in a bunch of social workers to do the Care Bear Stare at someone actively on a killing rampage will accomplish nothing. It's likely that there would be a constantly teetering between a) many people getting constantly victimized by malevolent individuals, and b) angry mobs that go after the accused or destroy property without probable cause or a warrant, and punish the accused for their own emotional satisfaction.

Early civilizations' establishment of a legal system, and designated agents to enforce it, solved the major problems of the pre-legal honor culture. One of these problems was family feuds, where two aggrieved groups would go back and forth punishing each other -- Habib's son raped Aram's daughter, so Aram killed Habib's son, so Habib killed all of Aram's cows, so Aram killed all of Habib's cows, so Habib sent his son's to kill Aram's servants and wives, so Aram's son got his boys together to kill Habib's oldest son, etc. and it would go on for generations until nobody knew why they were feuding in the first place. The second problem was that everything was extremely personal, so the retaliation may or may not be in proportion to the crime. This would be a problem if the one who raped Aram's daughter was someone else and not Habib's son. Today, as then, everyone is somewhere on the spectrum of "reasonable to unreasonable", so it's conceivable that some people would consider their reaction more strategically and consider what would be required to both seek justice and prevent continued retaliation; and others would immediately start screeching like a monkey and do whatever felt good, damn the consequences.

There will always be violence and malevolence in human nature, and that exists on both the criminal and law enforcement sides, so the impartial (at least that is the ideal goal...) legal system has been very effective for thousands of years. Despite its problems, nobody's invented a better system. We're in a position where we can minimize the bad aspects and maximize the positive, but the bad aspects of the police and legal system can never be completely eliminated.

I would rather accept human imperfection than police bots that enforce the law to the letter.

Fuck robots.

What could make the police better:

- absolutely not federalizing them

- going back to "beat cops" who become familiar with the community they patrol, and the community becomes familiar with them

- hiring locally, e.g. the cops would be from the area and more likely to reflect the demographics and culture

- decentralizing lawmaking (...noticing a pattern yet?), so that the community's laws reflect their culture and whatever unique issues they have, and unnecessary laws don't create problems out of things that weren't problems

- more/better training and screening, possibly mandatory counseling for police

Taking the attitude of "crime only exists because Western Cis-Het Patriarchal White Supremacist Hegemony say it does" might apply to victimless crimes like drug use, tax evasion, plural marriage, speech laws, possession of contraband, prostitution, and nit-picking what people do on their own property that depend on the morality/aesthetics of the time and place; but it does fuck all about tangible crimes like rape, murder, and theft that have been recognized cross-culturally and for millennia. Imagine using a shotgun to remove a spider vs. a rabid wolf from your house...

When we think of abolishing the police, we want to abolish the police that pull people over for a "broken taillight" and search their car for drugs, or the ones that beat people during protests, or the ones that unnecessarily shoot unarmed people, or the narcs who show up at parties and festivals where there are drugs but it's not causing an issue. We don't think of abolishing the ones that show up when there's a home invasion, when someone tries to carjack you when there's a murder, or when there's human trafficking. It's a sign of privilege to think about the first scenarios but not consider the second set of scenarios. Defunding the police doesn't change the laws, but it affects the police's ability to intervene where they're actually of benefit.

So is the problem that a police force exists, period? Or is it enforcement against victimless crimes combined with policies that put police above the law?

Since Biden "won" the election, I've heard fuck-all about the police. Where are all these people who demanded and demanded police reform? I guess the Faucist leftoids shut up because they realized police are a fundamental part of the police state they want to make, to deal with all the "anti-vaxxers" and "domestic terrorists".

Houston has decided to re-fund the police, but there has been absolute silence. Where are the Antifa and BLM?

[/URL]

Austin defunded the police and the murder rate jumped 55% in 2020, to make the highest murder rate in 40 years.


Portland's murder rate increased 2000% after their police force was defunded. The Democrat leadership of the city things the problem is guns.

"Further, as the Examiner points out, 'guns are exactly as available today as they were before this 2,000% surge in murders.' Further, Oregon, as well as neighboring states such as Washington and California all have strict gun laws."

In all fairness, Antifa is still rioting there, but I presume they're just doing it to swing their dicks around and see what they can get away with, and not according to any discernible plan.


The irony of this is what protestors were under the belief that defunding the police would make the cities more safe for Black people. In reality, Black people are more likely to be victims of a crime, and the largest percentage of crime where the race of the victim and offender are know is Black on Black. This creates a bizarre situation where hot-spot enforcement would put the police where the majority of crimes occur, which often are majority-Black neighborhoods, but wokeness says that it's racist to patrol those areas under the assumption that the police are a bigger threat to people in those areas than the criminals are, and that this is evidenced by Black arrests.

[/URL]

"A Gallup poll conducted from June 23 to July 6 surveying more than 36,000 U.S. adults found that 61 percent of Black Americans said they'd like police to spend the same amount of time in their community, while 20 percent answered they'd like to see more police, totaling 81 percent. Just 19 percent of those polled said they wanted police to spend less time in their area.

Black Americans' responses to the question were nearly on par with the national average, in which 67 percent of all U.S. adults said they wanted police presence to remain the same and 19 percent said they wanted it to increase."

"The poll found that the biggest racial gaps were concerning police fairness and perceived bias. Just 18 percent of Black Americans said they felt "very confident" that local police would treat them with courtesy and respect during an interaction—a number vastly lower than the national average.The majority of U.S. adults polled (48 percent) said they were "very confident" their interaction with police would be positive."
 

humon

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Location
Canada
That last tweet sounds like something a domestic terrorist would say. In other words, it sounds like something antifa would say (ie. "let's just guillotine everyone"). A repeat of the French Revolution would only make the problem worse, in my estimation.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
Right now, that's just a morale-boosting power fantasy.

For one, however, I fux with some lefty guillotine memes. We're ruled by people who don't give a shit about us and are more than willing to exploit us all for their gain. The plandemic has really clarified that.

Who's getting fired from their jobs?

Who's been quietly exempted?

Who keeps getting caught disobeying their own mask and vax orders?

Who profited from this bullshit?


From the rightoid perspective, we're in the situation we're in because the neo-cons have been trying to capitulate and meet in the middle. They get accused of being -ist or -phobic by the left and then go "I'm not racist! My grandkid is biracial! I'm not sexist! My daughter is a CEO! I'm not homophobic or transphobic! My friend is gay and I stan Kaitlyn Jenner!"

Be that as it may, but there was never supposed to be vindication for being accused of bigotry: "Oh, your son's wife is black? Aw shit! My bad! You're fine, you're one of the good Republicans! Let's talk about solutions together..." Someone could literally be Black, Asian, etc. and if the left will call them a "White supremacist" with 0 irony.

Dealing with leftoids as a non-leftoid is like: they absolutely will not play by your rules, and if you agree to play by theirs, they constantly change them so you always lose, then they act like victims when called out. It's like the Republicans have been trying to be seen as "respectable" to people who will never respect them.

The leftoids, Democrats, Faucists, etc. don't care if we lose our jobs, go to prison, get killed by the police, die in general, etc. How much further is there to go before they're metaphorically shooting a volley of arrows at us "uncivilized heathens", so we can either get in the river or die? In what universe do you think that the Democrat party, is going to wake up one day like "Today is the day we begin to govern cooperatively and stop monopolizing all the power. We will stop tyrannizing half the country and treating them like criminals and pieces of shit."

I would prefer to be non-violent, as far as non-violence remains conducive to my survival.
 

humon

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Location
Canada
It could also be that you're in this situation because politicians get so much regular hate that only the most crooked and cynical people would ever choose to become one (or the most idealistic and masochistic).

Survival, fair enough. It may be that a civil war is inevitable. Or maybe not. But I would just say be very careful about where the tipping point is. BLM protestors were always going on about their survival; they killing us; no justice, no peace. It's easy to say that this is different because the other side is crazy and our side is grounded in truth. But everyone is making this claim while steeped in propaganda of one kind or another. It would not be too difficult for China, as an example, to take the same social media tactics that worked so well to rile up the leftoids, and modify them slightly to rile up the rightoids. You already have a meme about that, with the ants in a jar, but I'm not so sure there's a single answer to the question of who's shaking it.

Anyways, guillotine rhetoric also smells a bit like a trap. Sometimes on a bitchute video you'll see a comment that sounds exactly like antifa rhetoric, and I'm 90% certain it's a wumao provocateur. The US government barricaded their capitol and sent dude-bros to infiltrate old people rallies because they're expecting a peasant uprising. They're expecting it because they've been provoking it, and I wonder then if such an uprising might not be playing directly into their hands. It would surely be only a slim minority of people who actually participate. They would be easily crushed, and the propaganda wins that result from it would be enormous.

I told some of my friends that Joe Biden got 80 million votes, and not all of them were dead people. It would be satisfying to see Let's Go Brandon translate into a repeat of Ceaucescu's downfall, but for some number of people that's slightly less than 80 million, they would see it as confirmation that everything CNN told them is true. And that's not the same thing as responding to accusations of isms and phobias, but it's more like the old quote about fighting with monsters and then becoming one.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
> It could also be that you're in this situation because politicians get so much regular hate that only the most crooked and cynical people would ever choose to become one (or the most idealistic and masochistic).

Machiavelli wrote The Prince in the 16th century, plus there are thousands of years of recorded history that will tell this isn't a new thing by a long shot.


> It would not be too difficult for China, as an example, to take the same social media tactics that worked so well to rile up the leftoids, and modify them slightly to rile up the rightoids.

There's been a segment of cringe-fringe rightoids that think China is an ideal society and America should let them take over, because they banned "effeminate" men from media, they're prejudiced against Bakpipo and gays, they're genociding Muslims because of some jihad stab attacks a while back, and the stereotype about Asian women being obedient. "China bans degeneracy because they actually care about their people!" K bro.


> The US government barricaded their capitol and sent dude-bros to infiltrate old people rallies because they're expecting a peasant uprising. They're expecting it because they've been provoking it, and I wonder then if such an uprising might not be playing directly into their hands.

That's why I don't go to that shit. I do not want to be around feds. I don't want to be seen by feds. I don't want to look at feds.


> I told some of my friends that Joe Biden got 80 million votes, and not all of them were dead people. It would be satisfying to see Let's Go Brandon translate into a repeat of Ceaucescu's downfall, but for some number of people that's slightly less than 80 million, they would see it as confirmation that everything CNN told them is true.

That would depend on if the media continued its propagandistic function, or went back to reporting the news and music on MTV.

The government sucks no matter who is in office, but life for everyone marginally improved under Trump. Gas and other goods were more affordable, a lot of people got extra money in their paychecks. Those were the main things that affect someone who might not care about anything else. As for the things leftoids screeched about - Trump's going to make it illegal to be gay! We're gonna be living in The Handmaid's Tale! Police are going to go around killing Bakpipo! Mexican kids are going to be tortured in cages! The glaciers are going to melt and we're going to catch on fire! - are sensationalized, hyperbolized spin-offs.

- Not making sexual orientation and gender identity a protected class isn't the same as gay and trans being illegal. Most people - even a signficant portion of Republicans - have a positive or neutral view of queer people. As a whole, the queer segment of Americans has done well for themselves and individual cities and states - particularly the ones where the most queer people live - have already included these categories. On the other hand, why would a queer person want to give money to or work for someone who doesn't like them? Also, people will go Agent Smith-mode on anyone who criticizes the LGBTQ movement (not all queer people are part of this ideology, not all people in the ideology are queer) for any reason, so I have a lot of doubt that any entity we're not allowed to criticize is truly oppressed.

- The "kids" are in "cages" because their parents or some other adult brought them there. I'm not going to infantilize the adults and say they didn't know the risks of attempting an illegal border crossing or the state of the overcrowded border facilities. Anyone who was screeching about this from 2016-2020 but wasn't screeching before that, or currently, needs to re-evaluate their views. [Something about Biden promising border leniency causing more people to be held in sub-standard conditions.]

- I already talked about the police.

- The only thing that's somewhat salient is SCOTUS repealing Roe v. Wade. The end result of that isn't that all American women will be used as breeding slaves. The actual end result is that abortion will return to being a states' rights issue. It won't force states that already explicitly allow abortions to ban them. When it comes to the "breeding slaves" argument from women, who is breeding them? On the other side of the argument about women "keeping their legs closed", what are they trying to keep from between their legs? Disembodied flying dicks? I feel bad for rape victims, teenagers, people pregnant with a defective fetus, and people who got pregnant despite their best efforts. The Texas abortion ban protesters going on a sex strike, as if this is all about casual sex and sex work, is really not putting forth the best possible argument for keeping abortion reasonably legal. Less casual sex and sex work is literally the positive result rightoids expect to result from an abortion ban.

Abortion isn't the only thing addressed Rv.W, as it's also the main bill that keeps the government out of the bedroom and out of your personal medical business. Abortion falls under this umbrella, but the other stuff is what I'm primarily concerned with. It's also funny that there was so much support for Rv.W when repealing it was spoken of during Trump's presidency, but since it's being eyed as a barrier to medical surveillance during tHeSe CoViD TiMeS, the leftoids have miraculously shut up about it for no reason at all.

- It's impossible to read anything anymore without it being tied back to man-made climate change. I'm somewhat environmentally-inclined myself, but every time I have to read about "MUH CLIMATE CHANGE" it makes me want to trade my 35 MPG shitbox for a V12 diesel truck and constantly roll coal at every possible instance. Is the climate changing? Yes. Has the Earth's temperature, gas makeup, and composition of animal species always been in constant flux? Also yes. This needs its own topic, but establishment climate activism pisses me off. Industry and military operations (particularly in non-Western countries) contribute the most to environmental fouling, yet us plebs (in the West, exclusively) are blamed the most. The solution is "go vegan, move to a city, don't breed, own nothing, relinquish all your rights, live on UBI, and ride a bike everywhere". IIRC a few of them are vegetarian or vegan, but the people promoting this are exempt from their own rules for some reason. Why do we always hear that we're right in time to stop "climate change"? Why isn't anyone saying "We passed the point of no return a long time ago and we're totally fucking doomed"? Why is the deadline always within the generation, and not 500-3000 years from now?

"We have to reduce our carbon emissions by 3052," doesn't inspire the same sensationalism and panic, as "[insert large city] will be underwater by 2050 if the ruling class doesn't have more money and power".
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
LET'S GO BRANDON



"'Let’s Go Brandon' became a euphemism for 'Fuck Joe Biden' after an NBC reporter hearing a crowd of Nascar fans chanting the anti-Biden slogan claimed they were cheering for racer Brandon Brown."

This song by rapper Loza Alexander hit #1 on the iTunes chart, and Tik Tok froze his account for "bullying".

I wondered if, perhaps, his content violation wasn't from the video but from something like a comment he left or something else. However, it appears to be directly related to the video. Meanwhile you can go on Tik Tok (or watch the cringe compilations on YouTube, as I do) and see Tik Tok doesn't have a problem with equivalent content aimed at Trump. If they were to ban bullying all government officials, as China does, it would be fucking stupid, but it would be less stupid in that it would be consistent.


9789

9793



The Vaccine Mandate isn't real (yet)

It's been pointed out that the Biden vaccine mandate isn't even legally binding. It currently takes the form of a press release and is not a law, or even an official OSHA guideline, at this time. If OSHA attempts to adopt it, it will be as an "emergency temporary standard".


"The rule, which a senior administration official said will be published in the coming weeks, would take the form of an emergency temporary standard, meaning it will undergo an expedited review process before taking effect and won’t involve getting public comment. The president also is directing OSHA to require businesses subject to the rule to give workers paid time off to get vaccinated and to recover from any side effects."

I feel like I'm being constantly gaslit by this shit.

"It would be a stretch for OSHA to justify the standard, said Baruch Fellner, a partner with Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Washington.

The standard’s 'tenuous umbilical cord' to the Occupational Safety and Health Act, Fellner said, would be an OSHA determination that vaccinated employees are subject to substantial and unreasonable harm in the workplace because they are exposed to an individual who is not vaccinated."


9790

"'That would be the occupational safety and health argument for this kind of a move,' Fellner said.

The OSH Act limits emergency temporary standards to new hazards that pose a 'grave danger' to workers."

"The only vaccination covered by an OSHA rule is the mandate that employers whose workers could be exposed to Hepatitis B offer free shots to employees. Workers who choose not to be vaccinated for Hepatitis B are required to sign a form acknowledging that they were offered the shot and declined."


This OSHA rule was written before everyone caught brain worms.


9791
YOU ARE HERE ^

"It’s overbroad in another way: Previous Covid infection doesn’t excuse employees from the vaccine requirement. Natural immunity tends to be more robust and longer-lasting than vaccinated immunity, according to Marty Makary of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Worse, Dr. Makary says, there is evidence that people who already have natural immunity are at heightened risk of vaccine side effects caused by an augmented inflammatory response. For these reasons, lawsuits have already been filed challenging employer vaccine mandates as applied to employees with natural immunity."

"If Congress delegates discretion to an agency without a proper limiting principle, it violates the separation of powers. To avoid this constitutional problem, the courts will have to give the statute a more restrictive reading."


The major problem with government and why it sucks is the new precedent that one party or another, or the president, or one legislative body attempts to ram legislation (or even pseudo-legislation like this) through the system, because they know it won't get passed using the conventional process, while doing whatever they can to make sure the other side can't do the same thing.

The government is designed specifically so things that can't be agreed upon by the majority of legislators, between all political parties, won't pass. That's a good thing, especially at the federal level, because a bill that's rammed through without bipartisan support is likely to disenfranchise half the country.

"In imposing the vaccination requirement immediately, OSHA will bypass the ordinary notice-and-comment rule-making process and issue what’s known as an Emergency Temporary Standard. OSHA has used that legal authority only 10 times in 50 years. Courts have decided challenges to six of those standards, nixing five and upholding only one."

I hope courts challenge the fuck out of this mandate.

"The administration’s vaccine rhetoric is therefore another reason to regard the standard as legally suspect. In addition to Mr. Biden’s remark about his patience wearing thin, White House chief of staff Ron Klain retweeted a journalist’s comment that 'OSHA doing this vaxx mandate as an emergency safety rule is the ultimate work around for the Federal govt to require vaccinations.'"

"Further, if public-health benefits are sufficient to justify an OSHA vaccine mandate, what principle would limit the agency’s authority? Could it ban employees from smoking or consuming foods containing trans fats while working at home? The public-health profession has already characterized everything from gun ownership to social-media use as posing a serious public-health issue. Could OSHA legitimately police these, too, even away from the workplace?

Higher vaccination rates would be a public good. But our nation’s Founders understood that much mischief can be done under the theory of being 'for your own good' and provided limits to government authorities accordingly. Even during a pandemic, the Biden administration would do well to respect those limits."



You are now entering the snitching phase of authoritarianism


"'Would y'all report your unvaccinated co-worker(s) for $200K?' asked @RevampedCP on Twitter.

The responses came quickly.


I would report my coworkers for a bag of Flamin' Hot Cheetos. And not even a party size bag.

I'd report them to get out of work five minutes early. I'd report them to get out of work two minutes early.

I'd report them for a basket of Shake Shack fries.

I'd report them for free."


Hall of Clowns: Keith Olberman


From his NYC penthouse, with a mask around his neck, this clown accuses the "vaccine hesitant" of being afraid.

"Afraid of doing what anyone else in the world tells them."

BiNgO BuLLsEyE RiGhT oN tHe MoNeY

Why should I do what just "anyone else in the world" tells me? Why is it is good to do that?

"They're afraid of needles!!!"

[confused tattoo and piercing noises]

I'm afraid, absolutely. I'm afraid of having my perfectly functional, healthy body being fucked with against my will.

I'm afraid of government overreach and losing my basic freedom.

I'm afraid of how people are acting about the virus.

I'm afraid of big pharma fascism.

Am I afraid of the virus, though? No, not really.

There's a massive elephant in the room, which is why "hating the unvaccinated" is a thing in the first place...

They think catching a disease with a 95-99% survival rate is a death sentence, which is why they got the vaccine which is "safe and effective" but vaccinated people can be killed by unvaccinated people, and the only way to survive is by giving the ruling class more money and power.

Also, does this look like the face of a man who's not afraid?

Screen Shot 2021-10-16 at 10.37.47 AM.png
 
Last edited:

humon

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Location
Canada
That's a catchy song, I like it. As for why Tik-Tok froze him out, it could be the lyric: "Don't nobody want this commie cause we not in China"

The Emperor disliked that

My advice on resisting the vax mandates is to organize unions to go on strike. Unions exist exactly because of top-down bullying tactics like this. Of course the state will declare the strike illegal, so that would be a situation where guns would come in handy. And the important detail in this case would be that it sets up the union as the defensive side against a state aggressor if the cops try to force them back to work (but the police union might also be on strike, so what will they do, declare martial law? Hire mercenaries? Send in antifa? We might see a return to 19th century strike-busting, but with 21st century weapons).
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Location
United States
Fuckin' Appholes

This is somewhat old information, and largely conjecture on my part, but it was bothering me. While driving, I had a revelation.

Most people already know that filters for Snapchat, Tik Tok, Instagram, etc. exist to train facial recognition technology. It's not stated to anyone who uses them, but it's not exactly hard to figure out.

I'm not sure about Snapchat or if anyone uses it anymore, but a part of Tik Tok's content algorithm involves the app looking at your face through the front camera and monitoring your facial expressions, as well as doing eye tracking to tell what you're looking at on the screen, so that the app can give you more content that it decides you want.


"The more concerning part of the new section references a plan to collect biometric data.

It states:
We may collect biometric identifiers and biometric information as defined under US laws, such as faceprints and voiceprints, from your User Content. Where required by law, we will seek any required permissions from you prior to any such collection.
The statement itself is vague, as it doesn’t specify whether it’s considering federal law, states laws, or both. It also doesn’t explain, as the other part did, why TikTok needs this data. It doesn’t define the terms 'faceprints' or 'voiceprints.' Nor does it explain how it would go about seeking the 'required permissions' from users, or if it would look to either state or federal laws to guide that process of gaining consent."



Instagram was involved in a lawsuit in 2020 alleging illegal collection of biometric data.


Depending on how fine the face-reading and eye tracking is, it could determine your latent and repressed desires. An app - a corporation, rather - knowing more about you than you know about yourself is problematic. This is very much in keeping with society's trend toward exhibitionism, as opposed to previous times where there was widely understood etiquette for what was acceptable to disclose to strangers, to friends, what stayed in the bathroom or bedroom, what stayed in Las Vegas, and what stayed in the mind. The private spaces, because you didn't know what everyone else did in theirs, were unexplored territory for yourself and the individuals you invite in. People could keep secrets.

The second reason is that it's not always healthy to indulge repressed desires. An actual example is a girl who developed an eating disorder because Tik Tok's robot determined what she was "into" and bombarded her with pro-ana and "thinspo" content. I would imagine that the various Tik Tok predators were also assisted by the robot that determined they wanted to see sexualized teen girls because that's what they kept looking at. I would imagine that being overexposed to something on a FYP would normalize things that have no business being normalized. It's problematic that the indulgences aren't consensual...like the difference between seeing porn when you specifically choose to, and a robot suggesting porn to you all day regardless of what you're doing, corrupting your auto-complete, etc. The latter is likely going to lead to consuming more porn than you would if you had control.

It's a meme that FBI agents are listening to everyone's phone calls. However, my revelation was this: what if nobody had to listen to phone calls because they were automatically transcribed using the same speech-to-text technology that is used for texting, Alexa, the robot voice on Tik Tok, automatic subtitles on YouTube, etc.

I think it would go down like this: the phone calls would be transcribed to text (perhaps the phone does it automatically?), and a robot would look for words from a list ("gun", "bomb", "protest", "BitCoin", "revolution", "militia", "the Jews", etc.) The transcriptions that didn't contain any trigger words would be deleted, but the ones containing the words would be retained. To avoid false-positives, there could be an algorithm that determines how many trigger words there are per [certain number of words] and compares with a threshold (that's being constantly trained), below which the use of the trigger word is likely incidental and above which the conversation will be further analyzed.

Another strategy would be to train the robot with other word lists to determine contexts, such as to ignore words like "gun", "shoot", "kill the president", and "explode" if they're with a certain number/frequency of actor names, movie/game character names, fictional locations, because you don't want to save a conversation about an action movie or video game. (Could this be why most popular movies now are sequels of each other, or re-makes of well-known movies?) This could also be automated through analyzing YouTube videos tagged as video game or movie reviews.

Another related conspiracy theory I have is that Twitch is also contributing to machine learning by watching people play video games. There is already eye-tracking tech used on Twitch, and there are also extensions that show what keys the player is pressing. It's possible that, even if the game isn't projecting coordinates or other physics information to Twitch, if Twitch knows what game someone is playing, there could be a way to calculate more information based on what's known about the game engine. How much play time from thousands of people on the most popular multiplayer map of a given game could it take for a robot to learn to correlate game data to videos, and be able to extrapolate that to maps the robot is seeing for the first time?

Secondly, if you have the game data, eye tracking, keypresses, speech, and a face to analyze, it's probably the closest thing to seeing someone's thoughts. It seems like a lot of data that can be applied to decision-making and problem-solving, especially if the game metrics above are known, for self-driving cars and robots. There's already some research done with robots predicting antisocial personality traits (e.g. predisposition to criminality) from facial features. Analyzing facial reactions while someone is playing An Violent Video Game could provide more data to be used for that purpose. If we fast-forward to the timeline where America has a Chinese-style facial recognition camera system all over the country, it could be possible for the camera system to put you on a list of potentially dangerous people based on your facial features or expressions alone. I guarantee 100% it would be biased against men, and depending on the data source, it could be biased against certain ethnicities.

There are more malevolent possibilities such as systems that exploit weaknesses in human psyc- Nevermind, those already exist. Apps being programmed for addictiveness in ways such as indulging subconscious desires with a never-ending scroll-void. But imagine that, except in a military context. Many countries are opposing use of robots for military operations, but other countries - US, Israel, China, Russia, and the UK - argue in favor of it and are developing robots for this purpose. What human soldier, or team, could outmatch a robot with faster reactions and greater strength and resilience, and paradoxical logic that exploits human - animal, really - logical patterns? What if the soldiers learn those new patterns, but the robot is also capable of learning their reactions?

Remember how you get ads on your phone for stuff you ~thought~ about? I used to, too, until I deleted fucking Instagram. At a picnic, I talked to someone who worked at a place they were doing research into what caused this. From what I remembered the person saying, the experiment involved taking a brand new phone and unboxing it in an air-gapped network where it had no cell reception. If I remember correctly, there was part of the experiment where it was connected to WiFi without internet access, so they could analyze the packets when it tried to "phone home". There was another phase where they gave it internet access and installed some apps with brand new accounts and default settings, and it was exposed to conversations to see the correlation between the conversation and the ads. The ads correlated, but the question was when the data was being sent, because the packet capture showed data being sent at the expected times. The person who explained this to me said the suspicion was that the voice capture data was being sent in the empty parts of normal internet packets.

(Packets are how web data are sent and they're all the same size. It's something like 1500 bytes including the to/from information and payload. Data is chopped up to fit inside however many packets it takes to send, and then the last packet is usually not completely filled -- like how there's a remainder in a division problem. The remaining bytes can be 0's or they could represent additional data like "Hey Packet, since you're on your way, take this bullshit to the fucking ad robot so these idiots can start getting diaper ads after someone casually mentions their cousin had a baby.")

If a service is free you are the product, also fuck them hoe-ass robots.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom