/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

Any resources allocated by any police department to arrest people over twitter comments is time not spent catching people doing actually harmful crimes

You can't both be patroling the streets and also scanning reports that someone called someone a nigger on twitter

Plus, from what I've heard the police departments in Britain are actually rather underfunded. Dunno if that's true, but still.

Except it's not.

Who the fuck patrols the streets nowadays. What is this fucking 1866.

Officer John works for the police department. So does Officer Jane.

Officer Jane works the street catching real criminals.

Officer John wastes taxpayer money by looking on the internet and arresting people for saying mean things.

Officer John could work the street catching actual criminals.

Officer John and Jane can be normal officers. The cyber department (which has a separate budget from the patrol officers) hires Marc who is part of the cyber division and can patrol the internet for hate speech.

Oh look, not only have you created more jobs, but now you can do both!

Jesus Christ this isn't fucking black and white. It's the 21st century buddy, majority of police departments have a cyber division anyway. Pretty sure the people that are behind prosecuting hate speech online is the cyber division of Scotland Yard and I'm 90% sure that it's not a case of patrolling the internet to find crimes but a report system. Just like policing nowadays. Nobody fucking goes on the beat nowadays don't be stupid lmao.

ColonicAcid wrote:ITT: people confusing the meaning of criticism with plain hate


saying that all followers of islam are a bunch of goat fucker child molesters is hate speech. It is not a form of criticism, you are not advancing any social order by shouting that at any brown person you see. That is not something you can say on a public forum and I am happy that it is that way.

You are allowed to say that muslim has a fundamentalism problem and not get arrested. That's criticism. Nobody is going to put you in prison for saying that. That's not what the anti-hate speech law is for.

That's bullshit and you know it. Islam is a terrible religion and anyone who follows it is a violent idiot, ignorant, or part of one of many subsects that are considered highly heretical by the majority.
I prefer the latter two, and indeed there are a fair amount of them ignorant. Which is fine, really. As long as they are good people.

You could just read their book (Or a translation) and find out it's not that muslims have a fundamentalism problem, it's that islam and muslims as a whole ARE the fundamentalism problem. Their religion is set up to encourage violence, hatred and negativity, while stopping any chance at science and humanism.
But, if you say that in public, this gets calls of "hate speech" because it hurts people's feelings.
And that is exactly why 'hate speech' laws don't fit in any civilised society. People need to be told these things because it will lead them to introspection on what they believe, and whether or not it is right to change their ways. But instead of that, they get to just go "Hate speech lalalalalala I can't hear you" and have people who say anything they dislike fined or worse.

And you know what else?
Governments go along with it, politicians are fine with it, and police have to betray their country on a practically daily basis. Immigrants are a protected and privileged class compared to the natives, and it is entirely normal and logical that this pisses natives off, that they speak out against this, and indeed, that they will hate these immigrants for coming to their country, bringing all the negatives from immigration with them AND then complaining that the place they immigrated to is terrible and has to change to fit their backwards goatfucking culture beliefs.
It is not hate speech to say that they come from a culture where fucking a goat is perfectly fine and acceptable. It's just the truth and facts of life. And because we (Western society) find sex with goats to be disgusting and slightly humorous we will indeed refer to them as goatfuckers if we are speaking negatively of them.
Not all muslims fuck goats. But the majority of them are from cultures where sex with goats is accepted as just a thing men do sometimes. In that way it's inaccurate to refer to all muslims as goatfuckers, but it is accurate to refer to first generation arabs, afghans or pakistanis as goatfuckers. Not that the first generation immigrants are the ones causing much trouble either, that's mostly the second generation and on, so for them the label of 'goatfucker' is not accurate either

Hope you enjoyed this text diarrhea

ColonicAcid wrote:Officer John and Jane can be normal officers. The cyber department (which has a separate budget from the patrol officers) hires Marc who is part of the cyber division and can patrol the internet for hate speech.

Oh look, not only have you created more jobs, but now you can do both!

Jesus Christ this isn't fucking black and white. It's the 21st century buddy, majority of police departments have a cyber division anyway. Pretty sure the people that are behind prosecuting hate speech online is the cyber division of Scotland Yard and I'm 90% sure that it's not a case of patrolling the internet to find crimes but a report system. Just like policing nowadays. Nobody fucking goes on the beat nowadays don't be stupid lmao.

Marc is a drain on public funds and should be canned to make way for tax cuts and so he can go out and get a real job providing a service society actually needs. Like literally anything else.

ShadowDimentio wrote:Protesting a funeral is distasteful but not a crime in any way, nor does it infringe on anyone's rights (provided it's kept civil) and isn't a crime. Threatening to kill someone, let alone the president, ostensibly the most powerful man on earth, is a VERY big crime.

The US has always erred on the side of freedom regarding speech, and basically unless you're straight up threatening someone by name then nobody can really do anything to you legally. Socially certainly, but not legally.

I'm not arguing what is a crime or what isn't. I'm just saying that protesting at a funeral is pretty shitty but is still protected by free speech but threatening the president (or pretending to threaten the president) isn't protected by free speech. Also there is libel laws and other things ect ect. The American idea of free speech isn't really totally free and has its limitations. We do error on the side of caution but if you really think about things there are consequences to what you say even if there isn't specific laws against it.

Regardless there are people (Secret service) who patrol the internet and look for hate speech against the president (and investigate said hate speech dependant on how intense it is). If someone says online "I like to kill niggers" or "I want to kill the president" they are both investigated.

Also hi secret service thank you for your duty sorry I was using a example please don't come to my house.

Council estate board neglect has already killed more British people than ISIS ever managed to. Turns out you don't need bombs or even vans, you just need to be bad at frying in a place where covering buildings in ultra-flammable Chinese cladding raises property values.

CosmicScientist wrote:but at least the Victorian era was when we started to put men and women in separate prisons.

Before that it was just called a dungeon wasn't it

It should be enlightening to realise that pretty much every societal change in Britain since the Victorian era was done utterly begrudgingly.

ColonicAcid wrote:Officer John and Jane can be normal officers. The cyber department (which has a separate budget from the patrol officers) hires Marc who is part of the cyber division and can patrol the internet for hate speech.

Oh look, not only have you created more jobs, but now you can do both!

Jesus Christ this isn't fucking black and white. It's the 21st century buddy, majority of police departments have a cyber division anyway. Pretty sure the people that are behind prosecuting hate speech online is the cyber division of Scotland Yard and I'm 90% sure that it's not a case of patrolling the internet to find crimes but a report system. Just like policing nowadays. Nobody fucking goes on the beat nowadays don't be stupid lmao.

Damn, we could create infinite jobs this way.

Finally the economy is saved.

so long as there's an infinite number of qualified people and the infrastructure and money to support them, sure

leibniz wrote:

ColonicAcid wrote:Officer John and Jane can be normal officers. The cyber department (which has a separate budget from the patrol officers) hires Marc who is part of the cyber division and can patrol the internet for hate speech.

Oh look, not only have you created more jobs, but now you can do both!

Jesus Christ this isn't fucking black and white. It's the 21st century buddy, majority of police departments have a cyber division anyway. Pretty sure the people that are behind prosecuting hate speech online is the cyber division of Scotland Yard and I'm 90% sure that it's not a case of patrolling the internet to find crimes but a report system. Just like policing nowadays. Nobody fucking goes on the beat nowadays don't be stupid lmao.

Damn, we could create infinite jobs this way.

Finally the economy is saved.

ahaha epic nice one my man

i too can completely miss the point and strawman!!!!

Now maybe I'm just a simple racist, but maybe the cyber crimes division should spend their time investigating all the indian vishing scams and ruskie ransomware attacks instead of someone calling someone a paki cunt on twatter?

ColonicAcid wrote:

leibniz wrote:

ColonicAcid wrote:Officer John and Jane can be normal officers. The cyber department (which has a separate budget from the patrol officers) hires Marc who is part of the cyber division and can patrol the internet for hate speech.

Oh look, not only have you created more jobs, but now you can do both!

Jesus Christ this isn't fucking black and white. It's the 21st century buddy, majority of police departments have a cyber division anyway. Pretty sure the people that are behind prosecuting hate speech online is the cyber division of Scotland Yard and I'm 90% sure that it's not a case of patrolling the internet to find crimes but a report system. Just like policing nowadays. Nobody fucking goes on the beat nowadays don't be stupid lmao.

Damn, we could create infinite jobs this way.

Finally the economy is saved.

ahaha epic nice one my man

i too can completely miss the point and strawman!!!!

You deserve to get memed when you make a meme argument

DemonFiren wrote:so long as there's an infinite number of qualified people and the infrastructure and money to support them, sure

This is how government works though
When the essential services are done, they start reducing the unemployment number by just giving nothing-jobs to vast amounts of people.
Just so some politician can claim he helped reduce unemployment and win votes

At zero hours contracts naturally so those people can no longer claim unemployment even though they're earning less than their expenses.

CosmicScientist wrote:

Malkevin wrote:Now maybe I'm just a simple racist, but maybe the cyber crimes division should spend their time investigating all the indian vishing scams and ruskie ransomware attacks instead of someone calling someone a paki cunt on twatter?

I assume because international policing is a little hard without extradition treaties, having state officials respond is intervention within another state's affairs (we're too civilised to want sanctions or to give others an excuse for war) and having private unofficials respond is a little hard because there's no profit in breaking apart foreign criminals and the foreign state can request you to be prosecuted by them or otherwise prosecuted by your own state for probably illegal acts.

Or at least I'm assuming that's how it might go down.

Do phishing, ransomware, cold calling scams and straight up burglary affect enough people to warrant a proactive response? I honestly don't know how the police work on anything.

We might not be able to actually arrest the criminals and bring them to justice, especially with how corrupt india's legal system is.
But having worked in the financial industry I can tell you that we do have ways to take down fraud sites, blocking ip ranges, and I imagine we can do the same to originating phone numbers.

CosmicScientist wrote:I never really understood zero hour contracts. I thought that was an agreement you get with Paddy who runs the village chippy down the road that whilst solid hours are nice, there's not enough business in the low density area to bother until the Summer when people come to the beach on a day it doesn't rain so you'd much prefer to go work with Nick up the way on making furniture out of wood for the village as everyone has a wobbly table or botched window to replace. Not an official ruling where no-one's safe in a busy, impersonal world. That and I thought part time was supposed to be the official system for less hours but not being screwed over by the goliath chain shops that chew you up and spit you out.

It's very simple
You basically give complete control over your hours to your employer. If he doesnt like you or has no work for you, you wont get any hours and thus no income. It's much easier than firing someone. Firing someone means you are breaking a contract with them, there's protections against being fired, and so on. But there are no protections against being given 0 hours when they want to get rid of you.
This basically means the employer can just tell anyone he wants to stop showing up to work without having to bother firing them. Which is why everyone, not just small businesses that dont always have work, are trying to get 0 hour contracts for all their employees.
And because you are officially employed, you do not qualify for any government assistance

It's basically removing a bunch of labour rights under the guise of 'Flexible working'

Everyone uses it

Because that's capitalism. If you don't use it, your competition has an advantage over you. And then you're running behind on everyone else and you're going to get fucked eventually.
And it's not like there's a serious difference between the UK tory and UK labour party, now is there?
Last I checked at least

leibniz wrote:

ColonicAcid wrote:

leibniz wrote:

ColonicAcid wrote:Officer John and Jane can be normal officers. The cyber department (which has a separate budget from the patrol officers) hires Marc who is part of the cyber division and can patrol the internet for hate speech.

Oh look, not only have you created more jobs, but now you can do both!

Jesus Christ this isn't fucking black and white. It's the 21st century buddy, majority of police departments have a cyber division anyway. Pretty sure the people that are behind prosecuting hate speech online is the cyber division of Scotland Yard and I'm 90% sure that it's not a case of patrolling the internet to find crimes but a report system. Just like policing nowadays. Nobody fucking goes on the beat nowadays don't be stupid lmao.

Damn, we could create infinite jobs this way.

Finally the economy is saved.

ahaha epic nice one my man

i too can completely miss the point and strawman!!!!

You deserve to get memed when you make a meme argument

you literally picked the point that had nothing to do with the subject at hand which I added as a bonus and you didn't talk at all about the actual main point

are you pretending to be retarded and obtuse or are you actually retarded and obtuse? please give me an answer as it will help me write more apt responses in accordance to your current affliction... whatever they may be.

zero hour contracts are a double edged sword.

i like what they do for younger people, it makes it easier for them to get jobs as it's less of a investment in hiring new people and having an actual contract drafted, but when full time workers get shafted and put into one that's not cool.


like everything it should be regulated but you know the tories only care about stupid shit like bringing back fox hunting.

We should hunt violent criminals

There's far more people desperately looking for work than there are jobs on offer pretty much anywhere, worker's rights are poor and getting worse almost everywhere, and large chains can and will close down entire stores rather than let their workers unionise. Of course businesses are increasingly fucking over their workers every possible way, there's absolutely no one stopping them, and no incentive not to. (Except that young people can't afford to buy all the crap that keeps those stores in business, but no one's allowed to think long term anymore)

Poor worker rights are pretty great for all kinds of discrimination too. Unpaid internships are popular with political parties, since no one who isn't independently wealthy enough to work for free can afford to work them, and thus it keeps the people who might actually need help from having any real say in government. At-will employment and zero-hour contracts mean you can get rid of employees who are the wrong colour, orientation, political views or perceived likely to get pregnant (and take the dreaded maternity leave) by effectively firing them for literally any other reason, and they can't challenge you even if they had any money to afford a lawyer.

ColonicAcid wrote:zero hour contracts are a double edged sword.

i like what they do for younger people, it makes it easier for them to get jobs as it's less of a investment in hiring new people and having an actual contract drafted, but when full time workers get shafted and put into one that's not cool.


like everything it should be regulated but you know the tories only care about stupid shit like bringing back fox hunting.

I spent years in "temporary" jobs that were in every way identical to a permanent job except it was impossible to get any kind of loan off the back of them.

When I got out of that trap my living expenses went through the floor, and that's the real killer for younger people. I was paying £550/mo to rent a 1-bed flat, a near-identical flat in the same development would have run me repayments of £300. Even a straight-up house with a garden and private driveway was a net reduction in costs, but nooooo, you "can't afford it" even though it's half what you're paying already and the only thing keeping you from saving is the fact that you're pissing away 250 quid a month extra paying off someone else's mortgage.

Is that 300 for a mortgage?

Yeah, takes the piss mortgages are cheaper than rent

Mates tbh you should pack bags and leave Europe before it gets worse tbqh

D&B wrote:Mates tbh you should pack bags and leave Europe before it gets worse tbqh

There's nowhere to run except mars since we're running out of space, this is why enviromentalists are morons on foreign policy when they bring up arguements about how 'protecting the earth should come before colonising our next mistake' in the face of toxic dogmas we see see in this day and age.

The US still has plenty of space, outside of like NY. Come live here before Drumph builds the Wall(TM) across the Atlantic

The issue with going somewhere with space is simple
Enjoy not having internet or having to go back to dial-up

Ideally, we'd just have controlled population shrinkage so there actually is enough space for people. But no, the economists will have a heart attack because shrinking population means there's less people buying stupid shit and higher wages with actual labour rights.
As it is now, if you don't accept your 0 hour contract, they'll find someone else who will.

The only way to get labour rights or non-minimal wages is if they don't have a choice and have to hire people or go without staff.
Or the old fashioned 1800s "Bomb the factory owners for exploiting us" style attacks. Not exactly a moral thing to do, but they did have results

We could get better labor righrs if a pandemic killed a bunch of people. Worked for the serfs in medieval times

plagues in europe had less impact on labour rights and more impact on social mobility.

labour rignts weren't exactly a thing up until liberal and marxist rhetoric became popular

what the black death and other big plagues did was allow peasants to become burghers and burghers to become nobility. if you stayed a peasant you weren't exactly given an 8 hour working day and a mininum wage, in fact you were probably worked harder since there were less of you.

Just make sure all the rich people get sick first

At the time, serfs were still fucked as far as labour rights go.
But the burghers and free folk suddenly found themselves getting a lot more for the same work when there's less people to do it.

The peasantry didn't have to work much harder as far as I know, there were less lords and courtiers to work for as well so it balances out. Plus a whole lot of housing just became available so you didn't have to build new hovels either.

XSI wrote:At the time, serfs were still fucked as far as labour rights go.
But the burghers and free folk suddenly found themselves getting a lot more for the same work when there's less people to do it.

The peasantry didn't have to work much harder as far as I know, there were less lords and courtiers to work for as well so it balances out. Plus a whole lot of housing just became available so you didn't have to build new hovels either.

It affected many different classes women's rights were severely reduced due to the church's growing influence (people believe more when there's people dying all around you). Muslims and mongols took advantage of the situation and spread their respective empires bringing the byzantine empire to heel. Farmers were given more leniency so they could provide more food to the surviving areas (and land reassignments were constant). It was a huge shakeup.

>In his country, you could not sell serfs like cattle
Get on my level

bman wrote:HAPPENING, get in here faggots

What board game is this? It's rather abstract.

President: the Trumpening

Thinking he meant the /pol/ thread

oh shit
>go to pol 2k17
>copypaste
>come here
>woops
>4D chess tabletop general

On a scale of 1 to /pol/ how fucked is CNN?

Meme jihad/10

jihad isn't enough to describe it

https://archive.is/ayKCR

from linked articles

CNN stop
You already pissed off everyone on the right, now you're pissing off everyone left too

Is this attempted suicide?

neither american political party is worth a damn as a group

this is because to endure as groups, they must focus their efforts entirely upon enduring as a group. theoretically, universally applicable regulations that hard-capped their ability to purse that goal would prevent this, however, any such laws would have to be implemented by the group who are focused entirely upon enduring.

i vote democrat because they are more likely to rectify this situation, simply because they have less money than the GOP and therefore potentially stand to gain from a monetary reform in american politics. (I do agree with their stated stance on many other issues, but feel the democratic party as a group does not pursue them except as a means of sustaining themselves.)

I'm not even conservative and I love Merkel.
She somehow managed to become prettier with age.

When you're at the bottom, the only way to go is up anyway

DemonFiren wrote: She somehow managed to become prettier with age.

She is draining the life force of the continent.

Drynwyn wrote:neither american political party is worth a damn as a group

this is because to endure as groups, they must focus their efforts entirely upon enduring as a group. theoretically, universally applicable regulations that hard-capped their ability to purse that goal would prevent this, however, any such laws would have to be implemented by the group who are focused entirely upon enduring.

i vote democrat because they are more likely to rectify this situation, simply because they have less money than the GOP and therefore potentially stand to gain from a monetary reform in american politics. (I do agree with their stated stance on many other issues, but feel the democratic party as a group does not pursue them except as a means of sustaining themselves.)

this is some edgy bullshit right here


i bet you weren't feeling very happy when you posted this

Drynwyn wrote:

Drynwyn wrote:neither american political party is worth a damn as a group

this is because to endure as groups, they must focus their efforts entirely upon enduring as a group. theoretically, universally applicable regulations that hard-capped their ability to purse that goal would prevent this, however, any such laws would have to be implemented by the group who are focused entirely upon enduring.

i vote democrat because they are more likely to rectify this situation, simply because they have less money than the GOP and therefore potentially stand to gain from a monetary reform in american politics. (I do agree with their stated stance on many other issues, but feel the democratic party as a group does not pursue them except as a means of sustaining themselves.)

this is some edgy bullshit right here


i bet you weren't feeling very happy when you posted this

oh yeah because that's what's important, how i was feeling when I posted it and being 'edgy'
no wonder you think the american political system is working great, it's just how you find boyfriends, you pick a guy who gets to rail you in the ass for 8 years and then decide doing the same thing with a different guy will make sitting down the next day easier