this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
30 points (96.9% liked)

Discussions related to Infosec.pub

1128 readers
1 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Hey, I just did a quick browse through the blocked instances list for infosec.pub and have a few questions about it. Seems like we are blocking sh.itjust.works which at first glance just looks like one of the bigger general purpose instances. Meanwhile more overtly problematic instances like lemmygrad (tankie instance) or exploding heads ("free speech extremists") are federated with. Generally the block list seems fairly small compared to a lot of other instances.

So are these intentional choices or is it more a matter of the admins not (having the time to be) bothering with it? If it's not intentional, maybe checking some other instances blocklists to weed out the biggest trolls/offenders could be useful.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That makes zero sense. Were the people fighting against slavery also trying to enslave the people arguing for it and deny their status as free people?

100 years ago social sciences supported segregation as a matter of science. So support for integration was a position of obstination. It would be anti-science.

The rest I'm not going to go into.

"Your honor I'm not going to address it because it's devastating to my case." ๐Ÿ˜†

Something is objective if it can be confirmed independent of a mind

Bigotry cannot be confirmed absent of a mind.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Your honor I'm not going to address it because it's devastating to my case." ๐Ÿ˜†

You're a fucking child. I've made my point why your positions do nothing to assess any potential objectivity seveal times, you completely refuse to even go into that point.or acknowledge it in any way and when I say I'm not gonna engage with that any more because you don't muster any kind of response you proceed to wear that as a badge of honor. There's no point in arguing with people like you.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Like, I don't even understand what point you think you are making in the first part. A position being endorsed by Academia at the time, or people saying they are using science as a reason, doesn't suddenly make discriminatory or hateful behaviour not that. (Especially when we are talking about social sciences where both the basis for it at that time was shoddy as fuck and where the goals you want to implent with that knowledge obviously are highly subjective).