Had no idea Ben Collins had become an executive at whatever this thing is. He was an excellent reporter and a guy who really, really understands how the internet works and how communities flourish or go toxic. He reported a lot about Kiwi Farms and Cloudflare's response to public pressure.
I'm not sure I'd call it good reporting to investigate this case and not look into Doxbin.
There has been no evidence that Kiwifarms users have coordinated harassment towards keffals; however, the website that actually coordinated the harassment gets absolutely no mention.
When the reporter brings up the Uber hack, he's insinuating that this was done by Kiwifarms, but the receipts were actually posted on Doxbin. Doxbin also goes much much further than Kiwifarms, getting addresses,bank details, and employment history of anyone related to the target. They will work together to contact hotels and employers to get the information they want. Doxbin actually does act the way the media thinks that kiwifarms act.
I can understand Keffals not speaking about Doxbin as she legitimately fears them according to leaked messages to Destiny, but it's the media's responsibility to actually understand what's going on.
It's insane that people like Ben Collins constantly use Kiwifarms as a shield for Doxbin.
The company was created just a couple of weeks ago with the purpose of buying The Onion. It doesn’t sound like the CEO responsibilities will take a lot of time away from his other work.
That's a lot of accusation. I've not heard of him before but you can view a list of his articles on NBC. He does seem left-leaning for the US, doesn't look that extremist to me. HNers can decide for themselves: https://www.nbcnews.com/author/ben-collins-ncpn858396
At the risk of engaging in what I'm sure will be a very even-headed and reasonable dialogue, I can think of a handful of things that the moderate American left would do / agree on that the more extreme elements would not. And just because you have to bend over backwards to avoid getting shadowbanned or flagged for even mentioning any of these, I'm not telling anyone where I stand on any of these things. Some I agree with, some I don't. It doesn't matter.
1. Israel has a right to exist and should not just pack up and leave Gaza.
2. Children who are not old enough to get a loan are also not old enough to consent to surgery or hormone blockers.
3. If you transition from male to female you should not be allowed to participate in women's sports.
4. Women's pro athletes getting paid a fraction of what male pro athletes do is a function of supply and demand and is not inherently sexist.
5. There are root causes to the disproportionate incarceration of African Americans that do not boil down to "the system is racist."
6. Taxes should be used to raise revenue in order to provide social and other government services, not as punishment.
None of those positions are inherently conservative and all of them could be held by a popular mainstream Democratic member of Congress or Presidential candidate. All of them (or any of them if voiced loudly enough) would get you ostracized from leftist group.
As a person firmly in the American political left, I have to disagree with all but one of those (point 6 holds true).
1. If you don’t want Israel’s genocidal war against Gaza to stop, you are not a leftist.
2. If you don’t want trans children to get correct healthcare, you are not a leftist.
3. If you want to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people, you are not a leftist.
4. If you don’t want to fix the gender wage gap, you are not a leftist.
5. If you hold racist views, you are not a leftist.
6. The radical left has many different views on taxes. I want to eat the rich, but many on the left do indeed want taxes only to be used as funding of social services.
I’m aware I’m committing No true Scotsman fallacy here. However I don’t see people that hold these views to align anywhere close to me politically—not even moderately. On the left we call people that hold these views conservative democrats, and at best we call them centrists, never moderate leftists. The only people that call them “moderates” are the conservative democrats them selves (and maybe some republicans).
I’m also aware that there is a (very small) faction of communists and tankies, particularly in the UK, which holds anti-trans and racist views, and would agree with points 2, 3, and 5, however, even among communists, they are very niche and still very extreme, so definitely not moderate American left.
The beautiful thing about about groups and diversity is you don't get to decide who is and isn't a leftist. Many would say the same about you given how polarizing your being.
You have literally zero legitimacy or authority to define what leftism is, it doesn't belong to you.
I did admit to blatantly commit the No true Scotsman fallacy. Deciding who does and doesn’t belong in you political faction is ultimately going to result in arbitrary distinction and characterization.
Me as a leftist does not want to be politically aligned with anti-LGBTQ+, anti-feminists, and racists. These aren’t a moderate versions of my and my comrade political beliefs (except the 6th one), they are counter to them. So, as a radical leftist, I do disavow these claims, and don’t want them anywhere near me on the political spectrum.
I do very much appreciate that within the spectrum of the american left/liberals we have those view points.
Edit: to clarify i mean the view points that disagreed with the 6 up above.
I would never want to be in a monoculture where those view points are censored or shut down. It has unfortunately become more common in authoritarian states and even peaceful protests here on campuses.
Sorry to clarify I meant I appreciate the view points you posted by "those", not the ones prior to it(hence i mentioned college campuses in reference to pro-Palestine protests)
One problem with this perspective is that the American left has adopted some views that a real leftist would have some disagreement with.
Point 1 is picking a side in an ongoing war in which both side have committed many atrocities. A real leftist would acknowledge this and seek an end to the conflict in solidarity with the victims on both sides. And consider that for a war that is mostly led by groups of aggressive men, the main victims of this are women and children.
Point 2 should be considered in the context of for-profit healthcare providers and their aim of maximising profit and creating repeat customers. There is a huge conflict of interest with many of those promoting their particular idea of "correct healthcare", as they profit off it. A real leftist would give much critical consideration to the capitalist and consumerist nature of the cosmetic surgeries and pharmaceutical interventions that are used in an attempt to make individuals appear to be the opposite sex.
Point 3 is something real leftists certainly do agree on but also to acknowledge there is a conflict of rights when it comes to single-sex spaces, and that it's important to listen to left-wing feminist voices on this topic rather than cede the discussion to meet the demands of males who desire to use female spaces.
Points 4, 5 and 6 do match up with the views of real leftists.
You can be liberal / on the left and not be a leftist. Being extreme on the left should be viewed as negatively as it is to be extreme on the right. Extreme opinions of any kind are not conducive to living with people whose beliefs differ from yours.
I mean in another comment you refer to yourself as "a radical leftist" so that sort of proves my point. The points above can be held by liberal, left-of-center politicians who have a chance at holding national political office in the US. Mainstream Democrats, or at least what used to be a mainstream Democrat 10 years ago.
> There are root causes to the disproportionate incarceration of African Americans that do not boil down to "the system is racist."
To claim that there are other root causes then systematic racism behind mass incarceration of black people, is placing a lot of heavy lifting on the other. It is reasonable to assume that a person holding this belief means “cultural” or, worse, “biological”. In either case, it is a racist view to hold. A conservative democrat can hold this belief, and many indeed do, however, they cannot claim to be leftists at that point, and most actually don’t. They may call them selves “moderate democrats” but I’ve never heard them call them selves “moderately left” (I’m willing to admit I’m wrong here if shown otherwise).
The leftist belief here is that systematic racism exists, and is the reason black people are disproportionately incarcerated. To reject this belief, isn’t a moderate version of the traditional leftist belief. It is counter to it. Therefor, if you reject the existence of systematic racism, you are not a moderate leftist, you simply aren’t a leftist.
I never claimed a leftist could or would hold any of these views. To the contrary I'm pointing out that leftism is such a fringe minority belief structure in the US that you can be a wildly popular mainstream Democrat, have a change at being elected President, and have the types of beliefs above and still have most of the country be more conservative to you.
From the very first comment:
> > > > I can think of a handful of things that the moderate American left would do / agree on that the more extreme elements would not
> > > > any of [these beliefs] ... would get you ostracized from [a] leftist group.
You prove both of my points beautifully in this thread as well as my new one that leftism is a radical fringe belief system when you say even suggesting there might be any other cause than racism for #5 is itself racism.
I never said anything was "a moderate version of a leftist belief," I'm not sure where exactly you got that.
You can listen to the thing I posted. I think he crystalized really well how unfettered free speech is fundamentally a contradiction. So long as one party's speech can chill the speech of another (ie coordinated harassment or doxxing of trans influencers) then site owners are going to be obligated to pick a side and limit some kinds of speech. That just sounds like logic to me.
According to your comment history you’re a leftist who, among other things, supports Kyle Rittenhouse. I would say this is a rare configuration of positions.
The point you’re making about Collins suffers because you only labelled him an “extreme leftist”, over and over again, without examples of this behavior. So I went looking, myself. Apparently he was pulled off Twitter coverage because he made posts mocking Elon Musk for suspending the accounts of other journalists. While this might be too opinionated for a professional whose beat includes Musk, it isn’t evidence of “extreme left” views.
> Collins has been yanked off the air from NBC and MSNBC but remains on staff. He has been actively tweeting and retweeting the latest developments related to Musk’s controversial decision to ban the accounts of several left-leaning journalists who were critical of his management of the social media app.
A persons very limited comment history is not a strong measure of values, I don't use this site that much.
I'm not a Kyle Rittenhouse supporter, I merely held that he didn't commit murder which is what many legal experts held as well.
Fwiw my actual policy and culture positions are much more aligned with liberalism when its pragmatic and not pathological altruism.
I'm happy to provide references on ben collins bias, he has been called out multiple times for spreading misinformation despite claiming to be an expert on it.
He has been objectively criticized by multiple legit journalists like glenn greenwald and even moderates like nate silver.
Ben collins is a promoter of this left right war, he was literally suspended for being biased. That is not a good reporter, he is a beneficiary of the culture war and its disrespectful to actual factual journalism to call him anything else but a political stereographer who is out to push ideology above facts.
Worth noting that this reply has a lot of the same content as your first one but isn't flagged. This is mostly due to it being phrased in a far less inflammatory manner I think.
You do have a valid point in what you are trying to say (that Collins got suspended for his strong bias), but the way you communicate it is really doing harm to your message - you are antagonizing too much.
It’s so niche that it regularly wins the popular vote in the US despite massive voter suppression.
The only reason the god n guns lobby wins in the US is 1. the constitutional settlement which massively overweights rural voters and 2. corporate lobbying in a winner takes all system which is prepared to hold its nose and bankroll racist hicks if it means they get their corporate welfare.
You are a great nation, but very little that anyone admires about the US has come from the flyover states (and even then probably because of federal pork barrel science and defence funding for those educated elites you hate so much).
You misinterpreted Democrats and progressives, most Democrats, minorities and liberals are closer to the center left rather than extreme left. Polling from many reliable places, including pew, shows Progressive ideology is dominated by upper class white people.
Why do you think stripping resources from the police was so popular amongst upper class intectuals but not what black Americans actually wanted according to the actual data. Progressivism in America is an ideology that represents the upper class, not minorities nor traditional liberals nor the working class.
I'm downvoting your comments for their strong foaming at the mouth unhinged vibes, and I'd do the same if they ranted in a similar manner against some other part of US culture.
I dare say you could make a comment with fewer empty buzz phrases if you tried.
Further south in the wheat belt, and often called BnS Inseminators Balls with the <cough> Hay day being more the late 1980s and 1990s.
Lot's of burnouts, circle work, lube slides, burning wrecks, food dye, and actual ball in a tent, fire engines, drinking, limousines (both real hires and "bush mechanic" stretched tractors), etc.
Being so far away I either flew in from the Kimberleys or hitch hiked across from Perth to go to a couple.
EDIT: and I guess the B&S was part of the answer to this 1959 question?
> An American psychologist, Mrs Graham Bell, said she wondered how Australian men and women ever got together enough to get married. But it is not true that Ordinary Australians fail to recognise the value of women. Any man will tell you they are indispensable for packing picnic-baskets, and for keeping other women company while you are drinking with their husbands
I'm so square that if I'd tried a pun like that, everyone would've baled.
Looks very reminiscent[0] of Carnival[1], except not seasonal, no utes[2], and we have very few bogans or muppets[3] so ours are usually urban[4]. Also, confetti[5] instead of food colouring.
(good that Sister Sanguinista has a way to relax; people-helping jobs, like vet practice, seem to be a real ticket to burnout)
[0] especially the slogan "where the rams get used and the ewes get rammed"
[1] some balls are held for charity, and some for fancy dress[6], but holding them for pleasure is the course which we profess.
[2] boots and roots, yes. Does "pull" originate from pulling someone into your swag?
[3] coming from an anglophone culture, I was amazed that instead of making "glass pinecones"[7], everyone, despite elevated BAC, piles their dead soldiers in ranks by the recycle bins.
[4] if you're into Analogue Dance Music, there's nothing quite like doof doof in a medieval guild hall or old town alleyway[8]. The recent shopping malls are not so scenic, and the roman coliseums are historic but are too open for gut-felt acoustics.
[5] there's a song somewhere on YT by a young dutch lady about how Karneval is wonderful but it still is a little annoying, mornings, to be picking the confetti out of your pubic hair — with enough compressed air, one can send confetti tens of meters into 2nd storey windows. (we colour our faces via airbrush, and use markers only on exposed skin)
Speaking of exposed skin, some of those blokes might could be risking the worst sunburns of their lives.
> If the female is receptive, she will stand for mating.
So that we know when a ewe has been mated, we place a coloured liquid underneath the ewe or place a harness on the tup which hold a coloured crayon. We change the colour at certain intervals so we know who has been mated when. This explains why you see sheep with different coloured bottoms all over Yorkshire!
I think the downvotes are because we don't really want the culture war on hackernews. It tends to not be a very productive topic and makes people emotional, making discussion quality even worse than most other politics (like economic policy, regulations or international relations).
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/worst-plac...