• Science
    • Planetary Material Conditions
    • Society
    • Politics
    • Doom
    • Doom Philosophy
    • Solutions
    • General category
    • Revolution
  • Move
  • Topic
  • Back
  • Next

    What is Shadow Banning

    Started by K-Dog Feb 15, 2024, 11:46 AM

    Message path : / Politics / War / Gonzalo Lira, Accused of Shilling for Putin, Arrested in Ukraine #5


    Selected path :

    K-Dog

    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Chief Intellectual Dry Humper
    • Posts: 1,538
    • Location: Seattle
    Feb 15, 2024, 11:46 AM
    Shadow banning, is blocking or partially blocking a user or the user's content in such a way that the ban is not readily apparent to the user.  I decided to see what the Charles Manson of Doom is up to last night.  That being Sam Mitchell.  I 'had' to leave a comment, which you can clearly see in this screenshot from my computer.




    Now I look at the same page using a remote connection.  I see that I am SHADOW BANNED.  Which is not new news to me.  After you are gangstalked by the federal government, shadow banning is a logical consequence.




    The page on my home computer uses a dark theme and the remote computer uses a light theme.  I made the comment at Mitchell's website 8 hours before I took the screenshots for this post.  You can see that I have been deleted. Nobody can see my comment but me.  (Unless they connect their computer to my WiFi.  Free coffee to anyone who does.  Just park in front of the house, there is room for two of you.) 

    Here is what is being censored.

    Quote@KEITHHAYES001
    8 hours ago (edited)
    Fishing has  caused depletion.  This depletion is masked by improved technology, in the same way oil depletion is masked by improved technology.  The underlying principle is Jevon's Paradox, but in a more general sense than which the principle is normally applied.  I shall explain.

    The technology of extraction improves, so the efficiency gain of the paradox is in the extraction rather than in the consumption of the resource in question.  But dialectically this is two sides of the same coin when we consider the whole process.  George Dillard is wrong, very wrong.  But he may be ignorant rather than outright deceitful.  He fooled himself into thinking the buffalo recovered.  His reality certainly is not yours.  He seems not to have visited the land of numbers.

    The point of bringing improved technology into all this is to make the point that the oceans are more empty than they seem.  That alone brings George's close into doubt. 

    But two minutes of research makes the close more ridiculous.  I discovered that quick that about 20% of fish are caught illegally.  Closing with any optimism knowing that there is no law enforcement and that illegal fishing is out of control would be negligent.  I hope George spends at least as much time on research as readers will spend reading his pulp when he writes his next article.

    And to all who think this is no big deal, fuck you.

    This is a

    new Diner page

    Logged in as:Guest
    Forum Home