🇧🇷 Brazil 🗣️ pt-br, en-us 🎨 Amateur artist and character designer 💰 Do commissions sometimes
Brasil
Joined April 2008
- Tweets35.1K
- Following3K
- Followers1.1K
- Likes102K
Alenonimo retweeted
I thought I knew every horrible thing about this story, but it was not until I read @neerajadeshp's interview with Sabatini that I realized how total his unpersoning was
Former MIT scientist David Sabatini just won $6 million in a landmark case against false allegations of r*pe and sexual assault, which destroyed his career.
Once on track to win the Nobel Prize, Sabatini’s ex-girlfriend accused him of r*pe in 2020 and began calling him the ‘Weinstein of science.’ He was later accused of perpetuating a “bro culture” in his lab. As a result, he was stripped of all his funding, lost his job, and went bankrupt.
We interviewed Sabatini (@DMSabatini) about the verdict, which he says made him “proud to be an American.”
@neerajadeshp reports 👇
Alenonimo retweeted
He was famous for advocating for peace between Muslims and Christians. Islamists murdered him for that.
You don’t hate the BBC enough.
Alenonimo retweeted
Canada sold C-34 as a simple ban on under-16s using social media. Now Identity Minister Marc Miller says cabinet can extend it to Roblox and Discord through an Order in Council, with no vote in Parliament required. The bill was written to allow exactly this.
Meta wants the scope widened too. When the government and Meta agree on internet policy, users should check their wallets and their passports.
To keep kids off these platforms, every user has to prove their age. That means adults handing over government ID or a face scan to play a video game. Discord already leaked 70,000 ID images through a support vendor last October. Ottawa’s plan is to make the pile bigger.
reclaimthenet.org/canada-c34…
Alenonimo retweeted
The “everything is offensive/problematic” way of thinking really is the “everything is demonic” religious thinking, but for secular people. Just goes to show that no matter how hard people try, they can’t HELP but fall into religious ways of thinking and make religions.
Alenonimo retweeted
You're talking about a country where criticizing the ruling party can get you barred from employment, housing, transportation, and a bank account.
Very funny dissonance between the ambient western media portrayal of Mao as a “dictator” and the undeniable fact that among more than 1 billion actual Chinese people that is an extremely fringe opinion
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
It is illegal to "mock" figures such as Mao in China, making it an unlikely position for the average Chinese citizen to hold.
nytimes.com/2021/11/02/wor…
cecc.gov/freedom-of-exp…
Alenonimo retweeted
There was once a shepherd who found a wolf caught in a snare at the edge of his pasture.
The wolf begged to be freed.
“I was hungry,” it said. “That is all. Spare me, and I will remember your mercy!”
The shepherd cut the rope.
The next night, three lambs were gone.
Again the shepherd found the wolf. Again it pleaded. Again the shepherd convinced himself that mercy was proof of his goodness.
By winter, half the flock was dead.
An old farmer finally asked him, “Why do you keep freeing it?”
The shepherd answered, “Because I refuse to become cruel.”
The farmer looked at the empty field and said, “Then understand what you have done. You were not merciful to the wolf. You were cruel to everything that trusted you to keep them safe.”
That’s the lesson.
Mercy without judgment isn’t virtue. When someone openly intends to destroy what has been entrusted to you, endless forgiveness doesn’t make you righteous. It makes everyone behind you pay for your vanity.
Alenonimo retweeted
Vi um post de uma pessoa que morreu, fui nos comentários pra saciar minha curiosidade mórbida em saber a causa da morte e acabei recebendo uma aula sobre o assunto
Alenonimo retweeted
Compulsory identity verification is designed to give governments and tech companies the ability to monitor everything people read, write and share online, who they communicate with and what political opinions they express. Governments are looking to outlaw online anonymity.
Jonathan Haidt, a prominent American social psychologist is pushing legislation that threatens to make this possible under the pretext of protecting children online.
I’ve challenged Haidt as a technical expert in online child safety, with experience across the entire technology stack and human behaviour. My experience in this field started 30 years ago this year. He’s a social psychologist, not an expert in the technology or technical consequences of the legislation he’s promoting.
Haidt knows that all smartphones today already have extremely effective parental controls that allow parents to restrict apps, websites and services, set time curfews and control what their children can access. Millions of parents and schools already use them.
Instead of encouraging parents to use these controls, he’s pushing legislation that would force people to verify their identity to access online services, threatening privacy and online anonymity. He also argues that parents and teenagers shouldn’t have to face peer pressure.
Compulsory identity verification links everything people read, write and share online, and everyone they communicate with, to their real identity. This enables mass surveillance, tracking across accounts and permanent bans.
When an account is linked to your real identity, or enough personal data to identify you, being banned would mean being banned for life. You can’t simply create another account with a different email address because the service can recognise you and block you again. This gives tech companies and governments the power to permanently exclude people from online services.
The threat of being banned for expressing opinions about specific people, politicians, governments, religions or their actions encourages people to censor themselves out of fear of punishment, suppressing political dissent and creating a culture of fear, obedience and unquestioning loyalty to those in power.
Haidt was also named on the leaked list of Peter Thiel’s secretive, invitation only Dialog network, which brings together powerful figures from politics, military, media, entertainment, psychology, religion, tech, and finance for private discussions. This doesn’t prove bad intent, but his motives deserve to be questioned when a behavioural psychologist spends so much time campaigning for legislation and compulsory technology mandates instead of behavioural solutions that protect children without sacrificing everyone’s privacy.
When I challenged Haidt’s proposals on LinkedIn, his colleagues attacked my motives instead of identifying a single technical flaw in my analysis. If they understand the technology and believe their proposals are sound, they should be able to explain exactly where I’m wrong. Personal attacks don’t answer technical arguments.
I don’t support Meta in any capacity. I believe it’s done more harm than good and has been a net negative for society. Social media should be treated as an adult environment that can be unsafe for children. Instead of trying to make adult services safe for every child, parents should be encouraged to restrict access based on their children’s age, maturity and capabilities.
Opposition to Meta doesn’t justify governments using child safety as an excuse to impose mass surveillance legislation on everyone.
