| ▲ | BoxwoodSeed 6 hours ago |
| Historically it was an easy step going from "these people are not real" to "these people are now dead". |
|
| ▲ | bko 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| What does this mean? Flock CEO will start... killing people? |
| |
| ▲ | fedpost 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | He already has been. Flock cameras routinely draw the police into situations where they're not need and cause shootings/high speed chases that end in dead bodies. | |
| ▲ | ted_bunny 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | SWATting, but with a lot more resources | |
| ▲ | natebc 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In yesterday's video from Benn Jordan [0] there was a Flock employee that told 911 multiple times "I'm not sure if they are armed." when reporting that a few people were filming from the perimeter of a Flock office building in Georgia. He also said several times that "we're under lockdown here." /shrug Seems like he was certainly trying to cause some form of harm. Flock sucks. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP5GDiLZ1Nw https://youtu.be/OP5GDiLZ1Nw?t=1130 if you want a timestamp. | |
| ▲ | buildsjets 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If it generates profit, yes. | |
| ▲ | vkou 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Do you think he will shut down LEO access to its systems if the government decides to have a purge of the undesirables, or two? | |
| ▲ | alterom 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >What does this mean? Flock CEO will start... killing people? No, he'll merely facilitate that, at scale. IBM technically didn't kill any Jews too in WW2[1]. [1]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/mar/29/humanities.hig... | |
| ▲ | lawn 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Many of the Nazis didn't kill people themselves, they just helped in the process. | |
| ▲ | nilamo 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | More like another reason for cops to mow down protesters. True Citizens would never protest something so obviously beneficial to everyone /s | | |
| ▲ | bko 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | nkrisc 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Good did not hit an officer with her car, and was driving away from him when she was shot through the side window of her car. Pretti was legally armed and was shot and killed while face down on the ground. This is all corroborated with video and contradicts statements from the involved federal agents. Charitably they were “mistaken”, realistically they lied to cover themselves. There are many more instances where federal agents lied about what happened and their accounts were later refuted by eyewitness testimony and video. Just in those cases the victims did not die. Look up all the cases that were thrown out of court because government’s case rested on falsehoods. | | |
| ▲ | bko 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | nilamo 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How are people so chill about police killing anyone? These people are literally paid by the community, to protect the community. Anyone dying at their hands is an insane level of failure, we shouldn't need hundreds of examples when every single instance should be an outlier in the data. | | |
| ▲ | pesus 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | They either believe it could never happen to them and/or believe the protestors deserve it. Usually both. |
| |
| ▲ | nkrisc 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | These aren’t the only two protesters shot by federal agents in the past year, they’re just two that died from it. More have been shot and killed, but they were targets of ICE stops, not protesters. There are more cases of people being shot by ICE agents, then charged, then charges dropped because agents lied and/or evidence was tampered with or destroyed. I watched the videos of Good and Pretti being killed. It looked like vengeful executions than anything else. It should deeply bother everyone of any political party. | |
| ▲ | malfist 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Following your logic, how many people must the police murder without provocation before it constitutes "mowing down". Please, give an exact number | |
| ▲ | cxvrfr 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What's questionable about them? If people in power see that they can callously murder people and everyone is as apathetic what do you think will happen next? |
|
| |
| ▲ | alterom 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >Do cops really "mow down protestors"? Yes [1]. >The only cases I could find are ... I am aware that Google's search quality has gone down, but surely not to that extent. Or, as kids say today: skill issue. > Alex Pretti who was armed at the time and arguably resisting arrest > arguably As argued by the people who killed him, of course. In any case, ICE are not police, i.e. not cops, so I dunno why you would derail the discussion to ICE if you are talking in good faith. Cheers. [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7331505/ | | |
| ▲ | chasd00 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > >Do cops really "mow down protestors"?
> Yes [1]. That article doesn't really say anything about police mowing down protestors. It mentions civil rights clashes in the 60s and then jumps to the murder of George Floyd and then a graph of people shot and killed by police since 2015 conveniently leaving out whether the shootings were justified or not. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | monkeyshine 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] |
|
|
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | customguy 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's everywhere though. Not to detract from the massive problem of mass surveillance, but just recently when that data center in Russia got, and those derpy images of "stats about Russian" bots were circulated, I saw a lot of "the right-wing support is not organic" stuff. Something is driving people into bubbles so they only talk about the other, never with. And both agree that "centrists", "normies", etc. are the most despicable of all. Seems like a recipe for something. |
| |
| ▲ | datsci_est_2015 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Idk seems like a lot of cross-aisle discussion happens in this forum. The tech world in general is somewhat a clash of cultures across the spectrum from anarchists to neofeudalists. In fact, just look at this thread… | | |
| ▲ | twodave 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | My experience has been more talking past each other and being downvoted. Which is why I rarely engage anymore. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | atmavatar 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | Georgelemental 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Illegal alien" is a term used throughout federal immigration law, e.g. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1366 | | |
| ▲ | atmavatar 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Alien" is the term referring to the person. "Illegal" is merely a status. It's arguable that "illegal alien" is itself dehumanizing, implying that a person can be legal or illegal merely by existing, when in reality, it's the actions they perform which are legal or illegal. In this case, the action is entering the country without following proper procedure, which is more like trespassing, except at a country-level rather than individual property level. Shortening the label to "illegal" removes the last vestige of reference to the target as a person and further cements the idea that a person's existence can be good or bad. | |
| ▲ | kadoban 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You are implying that the law cannot be dehumanizing? | |
| ▲ | jmcqk6 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That doesn't make it exempt from being dehumanizing. Indeed codified dehumanization is one the primary mechanisms by which it is realized. | |
| ▲ | pesus 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The current regime is openly racist and dehumanizing towards many groups, so that doesn't necessarily mean anything. | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | ribosometronome 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "Illegals" != "Illegal alien" | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | arjie 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's just some kind of language bifurcation by political affiliation in the US. The right-wing term for immigrants who didn't enter the US through ports with documentation is indeed "illegals", though it seems the word "immigrants" is as pejorative among that crowd. The left-wing term for immigrants, both domestic and international and irrespective of arrival method is "transplant" and is fairly pejorative as well. I don't think "transplant" is any more specifically humanizing. It's just that documentation-status matters to one, and does not matter to the other. | | |
| ▲ | TFNA 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Transplant" is certainly not any kind of mainstream left term in the USA, and this is the first time I have ever heard the claim. The left counterpart of the right's "illegal immigrant" is instead "undocumented immigrant" vel sim. It is amusing to talk to actual border officials, because the term in their lingo for people running across from Mexico is usually simply "alien", which always makes me think of The X-Files theme tune. | | |
| ▲ | arjie 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Haha, I have an Alien Number so I'm familiar with that. "Transplant" as the word for "immigrant" is pretty common in coastal California. Here are a few examples that should illustrate: * The Bold Italic[0] - a popular San Francisco essay magazine talking about transplants * Eric Adams is quoted by the WaPo prior to announcing his candidacy for mayor[1] (he was eventually elected mayor): > “Go back to Iowa,” Adams, who is expected to be a top Democratic contender in New York’s 2021 mayoral race, told transplants. “You go back to Ohio! New York City belongs to the people that [were] here and made New York City what it is.” * Great Replacement Theory is reframed[2]: > ...multi-decades-old Black businesses and Black-owned or traditionally Black folk-rented homes are being replaced by a new population–some call them transplants. I think it's pretty common lingo these days on the left. If you ask an LLM what a "transplant" is in the context of people, it can easily describe the term[3]. I say that only to say that it is commonly enough used as such that it is recognizable. 0: https://www.thebolditalic.com/the-last-black-man-in-san-fran... 1: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/01/21/adams-brook... 2: https://ourtimepress.com/say-it-aint-so-developers-target-sm... 3: https://claude.ai/share/bf6cfb17-314a-4e4b-b3eb-e99bbed07e86 | | |
| ▲ | TFNA 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is OK to simply admit that you didn't understand the context in which "transplant" was used and its (ir)relevance to this particular thread. To post three separate replies where you are reaching for a way to avoid admitting this by concocting some fantastical left-right difference, is not convincing anyone otherwise. | | |
| ▲ | arjie 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I am simply conversing with people who are directly responding to me. But I hear you, and we will likely not encounter each other again on this site. |
|
| |
| ▲ | delecti 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > It is amusing to talk to actual border officials, because the term in their lingo for people running across from Mexico is usually simply "alien", which always makes me think of The X-Files theme tune. Along similar lines, it makes me think of Men in Black. |
| |
| ▲ | nemomarx 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Transplant means anyone who moves into your city, in my experience. It has a kind of NIMBY ish or anti gentrification tone, like "NJ transplants don't understand like real new yorkers" but I don't think it refers to immigration specifically. | | |
| ▲ | arjie 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Exactly, either a domestic or international migrant. While right-wing ire is usually focused on international migrants, left-wing ire doesn't discriminate between domestic/international. It's build the wall rhetoric but oriented more towards localities as opposed to the US as a whole. | | |
| ▲ | strbean 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | transplant isn't inherently pejorative. People who move cities will frequently refer to themselves by this moniker. I've always literally never heard it used to refer to someone who migrated from another country. Only someone who moved domestically. | | |
| ▲ | arjie 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > transplant isn't inherently pejorative. People who move cities will frequently refer to themselves by this moniker. A standard that also covers the n-word. > I've always literally never heard it used to refer to someone who migrated from another country. Only someone who moved domestically. Migrants are migrants. Anti-immigration sentiment restricted to domestic immigration alone is nor specifically more acceptable than that for foreigners. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | jmcqk6 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I have never heard the word transplant use that way. I prefer to simply use "immigrants." I have heard liberals emphasize "undocumented" instead of "illegal" which makes sense to me. | | |
| ▲ | arjie 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's normal to say "immigrant" if you're neither right-wing nor aiming to use it pejoratively. The blue-tribe pejorative for immigrant is "transplant". It's pretty common, I'd say, in the zeitgeist. As an example here's a popular content creator (Conan was on his show): https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vQ6TOleoCTY It's really not that different in use. A right-wing commentator might say "Immigrants need to assimilate and put down roots here, not just bring their own culture here" whereas a left-wing commentator might say (as you see in the above clip, paraphrased): "Transplants need to put down roots here and volunteer to join the community" |
| |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|