- Joined
- Aug 28, 2019
Better deaddit than reddit
reddit General
- Thread starter SpessCaptain
- Start date
AmazingEagle
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2020
These are the same retards who wonder why they are constantly arrested by police.
www.reddit.com
archive.is
r/antiwork - I’m sure I don’t ACTUALLY want to live in France, but this made me consider it for a second
77,084 votes and 1,947 comments so far on Reddit
www.reddit.com
I’m sure I don’t ACTUALLY want to live in France, but this made me co…
archived 23 Jan 2023 20:58:25 UTC
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
The thing that annoys me the most about people like this is they don't even know why they hate Null. Like you ask one of these guys what Null did to become poopy pants Nazi magee and they can't answer you. They can only list of the string of buzzwords they've been taught to say. It's literal NPC "I heard from someone else this person is evil therefore they are evil". No critical thinking skills whatsoever and no questioning of the narrative.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2021
Oh interesting, I must've misunderstood nool on his date with desTiny which was super kino btw.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2021
That was what was so funny to me about fascism. It turns out there are different flavors and not all are Hilterism or even close. Then you learn how to be nuanced about things. Nuance is a thoughtcrime though.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
Our favorite consent accident shows up in google if you search for: consent accident liz (in #2) consent accident honeycomb (at about #
So it doesn't have to be specifically the farms, but it does need to be somewhat unique, as it doesn't appear if you ask for him solely by name.
Bing is amusing, it's not in the search results by name, but the suggestions(when incognito even):
Headshotmaster138
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2020
Thoughts on r/stupidpol? It's one of the few sane left-wing subbreddits I've seen, which isn't saying much.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2022
We did it reddit we made it to 1000 pages
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2016
It really is. Especially when you explain to them that one of the fundamental characteristics of fascism and especially national socialism is the revolutionary aspect of it.
And that the communism they LARP about is therefore objectively closer related to fascism (another collectivist ideology) than Conservatives.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2021
I briefly glanced through the past 5 pages and didn't see this mentioned so this about reddit jannies and the Supreme Court might be fitting for the 1000th page on this thread
Out of all these briefs, however, Reddit’s was perhaps the most persuasive. The platform argued on behalf of everyday Internet users, whom it claims could be buried in “frivolous” lawsuits for frequenting Reddit, if Section 230 is weakened by the court. Unlike other companies that hire content moderators, the content that Reddit displays is “primarily driven by humans—not by centralized algorithms.” Because of this, Reddit’s brief paints a picture of trolls suing not major social media companies, but individuals who get no compensation for their work recommending content in communities. That legal threat extends to both volunteer content moderators, Reddit argued, as well as more casual users who collect Reddit “karma” by upvoting and downvoting posts to help surface the most engaging content in their communities.
“Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act famously protects Internet platforms from liability, yet what’s missing from the discussion is that it crucially protects Internet users—everyday people—when they participate in moderation like removing unwanted content from their communities, or users upvoting and downvoting posts,” a Reddit spokesperson told Ars.
Reddit argues in the brief that such frivolous lawsuits have been lobbed against Reddit users and the company in the past, and Section 230 protections historically have consistently allowed Reddit users to “quickly and inexpensively” avoid litigation.
The Google case was raised by the family of a woman killed in a Paris bistro during a 2015 ISIS terrorist attack, Nohemi Gonzalez. Because ISIS allegedly relied on YouTube to recruit before this attack, the family sued to hold Google liable for allegedly aiding and abetting terrorists.
A Google spokesperson linked Ars to a statement saying, “A decision undermining Section 230 would make websites either remove potentially controversial material or shut their eyes to objectionable content to avoid knowledge of it. You would be left with a forced choice between overly curated mainstream sites or fringe sites flooded with objectionable content.”
Eric Schnapper, a lawyer representing the Gonzalez family, told Ars that the question before the Supreme Court "only applies to companies, like Reddit itself, not to individuals. This decision would not change anything with regard to moderators."
"The issue of recommendations arises in this case because the complaint alleges the defendants were recommending ISIS terrorist recruiting videos, which under certain circumstances could give rise to liability under the Anti-Terrorist Act," Schnapper told Ars, noting that the question of that liability is the subject of another SCOTUS case involving Twitter, Meta, and Google.
“We’re happy the Supreme Court recognized the First Amendment rights of Reddit moderators to speak to the court about their concerns,” EFF’s senior staff attorney, Sophia Cope, told Ars. “It is quite understandable why those individuals may be hesitant to identify themselves should they be subject to liability in the future for moderating others’ speech on Reddit.”
One Reddit moderator providing comment, “u/AkaashMaharaj,” runs a sub-Reddit dedicated to “all horsepeople, horse lovers, and fans of equestrian sports.” As a volunteer content moderator, this Reddit user, like all Reddit mods, has access to algorithmic tools that can be customized “to make day-to-day content moderation less burdensome and more effective.”
In the Google case, petitioners have alleged that Google-owned YouTube should be held liable for recommending terrorist recruitment videos to users via its algorithms. Therefore the primary question before the Supreme Court is whether Section 230 shields platforms from liability for how algorithms are used to recommend content. This seems to become a sticking point for Reddit because its users are primarily the ones using algorithms to recommend content.
In comments, Reddit user AkaashMaharaj argued that Section 230 makes it “possible for platforms such as Reddit to sustain content moderation models where technology serves people, instead of mastering us or replacing us.” Continuing, the Reddit user argued, “Section 230 must not be attenuated by the Court in a way that exposes the people in that model to unsustainable personal risk, especially if those people are volunteers seeking to advance the public interest or others with no protection against vexatious but determined litigants.”
Another Reddit content moderator, “u/Halaku,” manages two forums—one focused on computer science and another on a rock band. That Reddit user argues that the algorithmic tools Reddit provides are indispensable when sifting through tens of millions of individual users posting. Taking away that tool would be equivalent to removing a spam filter from an inbox, the mod argues, making sub-Reddit communities difficult to maintain. If the Supreme Court weakens Section 230 and algorithmic tools expose moderators to liability, the Reddit user says that could put entire communities at risk by “leaving users to hunt and peck for actual communications amidst all the falsified posts from malicious actors engaging in hate mail, advertising spam, or phishing attempts to gain financial credentials.”
Reddit’s entire platform runs on this engine of community engagement, with more than 100,000 active sub-Reddits putting users in charge of pointing others to the most engaging and worthwhile content. Reddit user AkaashMaharaj said in the brief that this model is what makes Reddit special. “The fact that Reddit has delegated moderation to volunteer human beings, supported by automated tools, is the platform’s single greatest strength,” AkaashMaharaj said. “It is a model that should be fostered and encouraged at other social media platforms.”
In the brief, Reddit argues that recommendations “are the very thing that make Reddit a vibrant place” and “if petitioners succeed in this case in allowing a plaintiff to overcome Section 230” immunity “merely by pleading” that YouTube should be liable for allegedly recommending extremist content, Reddit users “will not volunteer their time to moderate their communities if doing so carries a serious risk of being sued.”
In addition to tech companies filing briefs over the past few days, many industry and advocacy organizations also chimed in with briefs. Among them was a brief from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which echoed Reddit by warning the Supreme Court that weakening Section 230 puts Internet users’ free speech at risk. Cope told Ars that EFF agrees that Reddit’s concerns are valid.
“Reddit users that interact with third-party content—including ‘hosting’ content on a sub-Reddit that they manage, or moderating that content—could definitely be open to legal exposure if the Court carves out ‘recommending’ from Section 230’s protections, or otherwise narrows Section 230’s reach,” Cope told Ars.
Reddit urged the Supreme Court to leave amendments to Section 230’s interpretation to Congress and side with Google. Otherwise, the court risks “dramatically” expanding “Internet users’ potential to be sued for their online interactions.”
“It may very well be true that our society should reexamine the duties of technology companies and their users in light of the rapid evolution over the last decade of the Internet, social media, and targeted recommendations,” Reddit argued in its brief. “But it must be Congress that decides what those changes should be and how broadly they should sweep. Judicial interpretation should not move at Internet speeds, and there is no telling what a sweeping order removing targeted recommendations from the protection of Section 230 would do to the Internet as we know it.”
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...eddit-mods-to-anonymously-defend-section-230/ (Archive)
A couple of threads on this:
https://old.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/10i0sd5/supreme_court_allows_reddit_mods_to_anonymously/ (Archive)
https://old.reddit.com/r/technology...reme_court_allows_reddit_mods_to_anonymously/ (Archive)
And for the fun of it I've attached the most recent filings of a court case related to child porn that reddit was involved in that I'm aware of
Supreme Court allows Reddit mods to anonymously defend Section 230
Mods tell SCOTUS that Reddit's special formula depends on Section 230 immunity.
Over the past few days, dozens of tech companies have filed briefs in support of Google in a Supreme Court case that tests online platforms’ liability for recommending content. Obvious stakeholders like Meta and Twitter, alongside popular platforms like Craigslist, Etsy, Wikipedia, Roblox, and Tripadvisor, urged the court to uphold Section 230 immunity in the case or risk muddying the paths users rely on to connect with each other and discover information online.Out of all these briefs, however, Reddit’s was perhaps the most persuasive. The platform argued on behalf of everyday Internet users, whom it claims could be buried in “frivolous” lawsuits for frequenting Reddit, if Section 230 is weakened by the court. Unlike other companies that hire content moderators, the content that Reddit displays is “primarily driven by humans—not by centralized algorithms.” Because of this, Reddit’s brief paints a picture of trolls suing not major social media companies, but individuals who get no compensation for their work recommending content in communities. That legal threat extends to both volunteer content moderators, Reddit argued, as well as more casual users who collect Reddit “karma” by upvoting and downvoting posts to help surface the most engaging content in their communities.
“Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act famously protects Internet platforms from liability, yet what’s missing from the discussion is that it crucially protects Internet users—everyday people—when they participate in moderation like removing unwanted content from their communities, or users upvoting and downvoting posts,” a Reddit spokesperson told Ars.
Reddit argues in the brief that such frivolous lawsuits have been lobbed against Reddit users and the company in the past, and Section 230 protections historically have consistently allowed Reddit users to “quickly and inexpensively” avoid litigation.
The Google case was raised by the family of a woman killed in a Paris bistro during a 2015 ISIS terrorist attack, Nohemi Gonzalez. Because ISIS allegedly relied on YouTube to recruit before this attack, the family sued to hold Google liable for allegedly aiding and abetting terrorists.
A Google spokesperson linked Ars to a statement saying, “A decision undermining Section 230 would make websites either remove potentially controversial material or shut their eyes to objectionable content to avoid knowledge of it. You would be left with a forced choice between overly curated mainstream sites or fringe sites flooded with objectionable content.”
Eric Schnapper, a lawyer representing the Gonzalez family, told Ars that the question before the Supreme Court "only applies to companies, like Reddit itself, not to individuals. This decision would not change anything with regard to moderators."
"The issue of recommendations arises in this case because the complaint alleges the defendants were recommending ISIS terrorist recruiting videos, which under certain circumstances could give rise to liability under the Anti-Terrorist Act," Schnapper told Ars, noting that the question of that liability is the subject of another SCOTUS case involving Twitter, Meta, and Google.
Reddit mods granted anonymity to defend Section 230
The Supreme Court will have to weigh whether Reddit's arguments are valid. To help make its case defending Section 230 immunity protections for recommending content, Reddit received special permission from the Supreme Court to include anonymous comments from Reddit mods in its brief. This, Reddit’s spokesperson notes, is “a significant departure from normal Supreme Court procedure.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit defending online privacy, championed the court’s decision to allow moderators to contribute comments anonymously.“We’re happy the Supreme Court recognized the First Amendment rights of Reddit moderators to speak to the court about their concerns,” EFF’s senior staff attorney, Sophia Cope, told Ars. “It is quite understandable why those individuals may be hesitant to identify themselves should they be subject to liability in the future for moderating others’ speech on Reddit.”
One Reddit moderator providing comment, “u/AkaashMaharaj,” runs a sub-Reddit dedicated to “all horsepeople, horse lovers, and fans of equestrian sports.” As a volunteer content moderator, this Reddit user, like all Reddit mods, has access to algorithmic tools that can be customized “to make day-to-day content moderation less burdensome and more effective.”
In the Google case, petitioners have alleged that Google-owned YouTube should be held liable for recommending terrorist recruitment videos to users via its algorithms. Therefore the primary question before the Supreme Court is whether Section 230 shields platforms from liability for how algorithms are used to recommend content. This seems to become a sticking point for Reddit because its users are primarily the ones using algorithms to recommend content.
In comments, Reddit user AkaashMaharaj argued that Section 230 makes it “possible for platforms such as Reddit to sustain content moderation models where technology serves people, instead of mastering us or replacing us.” Continuing, the Reddit user argued, “Section 230 must not be attenuated by the Court in a way that exposes the people in that model to unsustainable personal risk, especially if those people are volunteers seeking to advance the public interest or others with no protection against vexatious but determined litigants.”
Another Reddit content moderator, “u/Halaku,” manages two forums—one focused on computer science and another on a rock band. That Reddit user argues that the algorithmic tools Reddit provides are indispensable when sifting through tens of millions of individual users posting. Taking away that tool would be equivalent to removing a spam filter from an inbox, the mod argues, making sub-Reddit communities difficult to maintain. If the Supreme Court weakens Section 230 and algorithmic tools expose moderators to liability, the Reddit user says that could put entire communities at risk by “leaving users to hunt and peck for actual communications amidst all the falsified posts from malicious actors engaging in hate mail, advertising spam, or phishing attempts to gain financial credentials.”
Reddit’s entire platform runs on this engine of community engagement, with more than 100,000 active sub-Reddits putting users in charge of pointing others to the most engaging and worthwhile content. Reddit user AkaashMaharaj said in the brief that this model is what makes Reddit special. “The fact that Reddit has delegated moderation to volunteer human beings, supported by automated tools, is the platform’s single greatest strength,” AkaashMaharaj said. “It is a model that should be fostered and encouraged at other social media platforms.”
In the brief, Reddit argues that recommendations “are the very thing that make Reddit a vibrant place” and “if petitioners succeed in this case in allowing a plaintiff to overcome Section 230” immunity “merely by pleading” that YouTube should be liable for allegedly recommending extremist content, Reddit users “will not volunteer their time to moderate their communities if doing so carries a serious risk of being sued.”
A question for Congress, not SCOTUS
A Reddit spokesperson told Ars that Reddit takes violations of its extremism policy seriously, relying on human review and automated tools to ensure that users who post extremist content are banned and violating content is removed at scale. The spokesperson said that a federal law already makes inciting terrorism illegal and that there are other legal actions to take to hold platforms accountable for recommending content that incites terrorism. However, Reddit agrees with Google that weakening Section 230 would cause more harm than good by introducing liabilities for platforms already moderating in good faith.In addition to tech companies filing briefs over the past few days, many industry and advocacy organizations also chimed in with briefs. Among them was a brief from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which echoed Reddit by warning the Supreme Court that weakening Section 230 puts Internet users’ free speech at risk. Cope told Ars that EFF agrees that Reddit’s concerns are valid.
“Reddit users that interact with third-party content—including ‘hosting’ content on a sub-Reddit that they manage, or moderating that content—could definitely be open to legal exposure if the Court carves out ‘recommending’ from Section 230’s protections, or otherwise narrows Section 230’s reach,” Cope told Ars.
Reddit urged the Supreme Court to leave amendments to Section 230’s interpretation to Congress and side with Google. Otherwise, the court risks “dramatically” expanding “Internet users’ potential to be sued for their online interactions.”
“It may very well be true that our society should reexamine the duties of technology companies and their users in light of the rapid evolution over the last decade of the Internet, social media, and targeted recommendations,” Reddit argued in its brief. “But it must be Congress that decides what those changes should be and how broadly they should sweep. Judicial interpretation should not move at Internet speeds, and there is no telling what a sweeping order removing targeted recommendations from the protection of Section 230 would do to the Internet as we know it.”
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...eddit-mods-to-anonymously-defend-section-230/ (Archive)
A couple of threads on this:
https://old.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/10i0sd5/supreme_court_allows_reddit_mods_to_anonymously/ (Archive)
https://old.reddit.com/r/technology...reme_court_allows_reddit_mods_to_anonymously/ (Archive)
And for the fun of it I've attached the most recent filings of a court case related to child porn that reddit was involved in that I'm aware of
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2021
You must have an IQ of a freezer in celcius if you think that froggers get 4 or 5 hours of break lmaoThese are the same retards who wonder why they are constantly arrested by police.
View attachment 4322187
r/antiwork - I’m sure I don’t ACTUALLY want to live in France, but this made me consider it for a second
77,084 votes and 1,947 comments so far on Reddit
![LinkinParkxNaruto[AMV]](http://uploads.kiwifarms.st/data/avatars/l/61/61177.jpg?1699571951){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2020
A man who is 18 year old dating a 17 year old, 11 months, 30 days and 23 hours old is grooming! anything morally questionable the girl does is inmediatly rendered null because she is a child and he is an evil grown man thats 3 minutes older than her.
Of course a 30 yr old discord mod telling a 12 yr old how to do HRT in their nsfw chatroom is NOT grooming, bigot!
Lone Star
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2021
Eight years and a thousand pages...but Reddit still somehow manages to get worse by the day...
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2021
redditors need to work on their salad, IMVE&REMVE have no ring to it
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2022
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2021
I dunno. In general, Reddit is a shithole, but I have seen some posts in popular subs like Public Freakout where people have not been downboated for citing the 13% stat. It is...interesting...because I swear some bot is posting intentionally racewar inflammatory shit, but the randos who aren't bots there just don't take the bait most of the time.
Where Reddit is an insane shithole is at any point where children are involved or might be. Adoption is the same as murder to them so might as well murder them through abortion because my life was so terrible and not worth living I keep living it and complaining on Reddit about it instead of offing myself, doing what my mother should have and aborting me. The amount of self-lothing here is off the charts and yet people who might want to have children are the problem. All these other children should die because I feel I was wronged, but no I won't off myself because reasons. Either life is worth living or it isn't. Pick a lane. It is very curious.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2021
1000 pages of reddit autism... dear lord 1000 pages of reddit autism.
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2022
I can't believe these fucking people, man
(A)
Things have escalated. Now I'm in hiding from the Canadian government.
(A)
Things have escalated. Now I'm in hiding from the Canadian government.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2020
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2020
The main page doesn't show up if you just search "kiwi farms," you have to actually search for a specific page.