RE: Goodbye Internet. Hello Intranet. UK Gov silences the rest of the world.
As a responsible and new user of Steem, I would like to dissuade the author from rhetoric that only serves as its own echo chamber of scare mongering.
Do you really believe that the UK will be "No longer [...] be able to communicate with our friends in the US" or "probably won't even be able to use VPNs"??
Those kinds of over-the-top, in your face, cheap shots are the mainstay of the trolling trolls that troll all of the major media websites.
I do not debate the points you bring up about censorship and government controlling the web. That does concern me. But to lump all of that together and have this call to action (DO NOT VOTE FOR THE XYZ PARTY) is in itself a concerning problem. There's hardly a party out there, or a politician in any major position, who consistently upholds human values, privacy, and property rights at the expense of government power.
Voting the conservatives out, I hate to tell you, is not going to magically fix anything.
So while I dislike your post a lot, I am not here to condemn you. I'd like you to ease off your rhetoric a notch or two. Projecting your ideas so vociferously is not good for Steem, in my opinion. I would much rather see you lampoon and ridicule your opponents with candor and respect than with all that bluster.
🐝 If you want more flies, why don't you try honey instead of vinegar?
It's actually proven that flies are in fact drawn to vinegar over honey.
Just as humans crave drama more than boring articles that don't inspire emotions.
I absolutely believe it. Theresa May is insane. She is the kind-of person who would "turn off the internet" during a terrorist attack.
We're the #1 most surveilled country in the world, China/North Korea only comes second to us.
Theresa May believes that we need to keep that #1 position, as if it's a good thing.
We're living in a society where your browser history isn't protected by law any more, it can be accessed warrantless by many government agencies including the NHS (our health care), the fire services, and many others.
To think it couldn't get to the point where we're cut off from the outside, is ridiculous. The conservative party, along with Theresa May, believe the only way to stop terrorism is to lose our privacy. Her reason for leaving the European Court of Human Rights, is clearly to drop "the right to privacy" which has been a roadblock to her invasive surveillance laws. I have zero respect for May or the Conservatives.
Ok, so you are confident in your polemics. I got that. And yes, the UK government is certainly a snoopity snooping on her citizens.
But your "content" revolves around a Parade of Horribles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parade_of_horribles of what allegedly will happen unless we sack T. May. Please stick to the facts, present your case for surveillance and privacy problems, and produce content ripe for discussion.
I am willing to discuss issues. You make valid points and intersperse them with "she is the kind of person" sweeping generalisations and "zero respect" dramatizations.
What you posted here is just a rant and a diatribe. It's not interesting content.
It stinks.
You disagree that my pointed criticism will improve STEEM? Downvoted for poor and unreasonable content. Consider this my curation for the day.
There's all kinds of "content" here on Steemit, and you'll find a lot of diatribe amongst it. I support your vote usage, do whatever you like, but I don't think a statement like this can be respected.
I also agree with you this is a little echo chambery, like you might find on Facebook. However it's perfectly valid to extrapolate that a government which has consistently moved to increase surveillance and internet controls, will restrict the kinds of technology which can be run on the internet, up to and including a Great British Firewall.
Why do you think this is unreasonable?
It's unreasonable because of the disconnected thought pattern.
We all have a tendency to jump to conclusions. But when that knee-jerk reaction in the author's mind (The Internet is going to be shut off any moment now!!) is disconnected with facts (The conservatives have pushed for regulation and censorship), then the author is guilty of fantasizing.
This diatribe is fantastic. It's fantasy.
Why debate fantasy?
I say it's fantasy because the author can show no proof of these predictions, nor could I assent or dissent from made-up, fantastic, unsupported speculation.
My point is that in order to have a fair and reasonable debate, we should at least have some framework, some rules, and some parameters. The alternative is to shout each other down, invent false premises and straw men, and fabricate things.
May the best un-sourced, un-attributed, un-founded speculation win?!?
My contention with the author's points of speculation are precisely that they are ... literally ... un-reasonable, meaning that they are supported with no reason, no reasoning, except as naked assertions.
My opinion is that the author needs to change the naked reasoning into clear and convincing reasoning. Then I will debate the premises and conclusions.
ECHO.... ECHO ... echo ... echo
Hi uruiamme. I'm new here too and wondering how to spot trolls through steem ... there's a lot of people using it to just make money and troll important topics.
That actually sounds about right. I think a lot of platforms are designed to put Trolls in the driver seat. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. I think that some of the most lucrative YouTube channels are based on the fact that people want controversial, off-beat, unconventional content. Many of the major media personalities in the US are essentially accused of hyping their positions to the point that drama ensues. It's all about the ratings.
It's pretty lucrative for the talking heads, bloggers, vloggers, radio talk show hosts, political pundits, and Hollywood gossipers.
I think it's the monetization of gossip. Hello Web 3.0.
(Most) truth is relative and wholly based on perspective. The opinions expressed in the author's blog are strong, but so are those to the contrary, and the mainstream media is more or less an echo chamber, along with every social media outlet.
On trolls : On the one hand, it would be amazing if Steem could be troll free (not calling author that) - but there's no way to ensure that without clamping down on personal freedom, and drawing a bunch of arbitrary lines as to what's appropriate and what's not, what's good for the steem community, what's not...and then, bam, it's rules and regulations here too.
(deeper question - why do humans constantly need to create systems and rules that oppress us and go against our nature...or is it our nature to classify and condemn?)
I agree that the author's post is one sided, he doesn't pretend it isn't. I agree with some of his points. Now, as an American, I'm not fluent by any means in UK politics, aside from what I hear in my own echo chamber across the pond. (Every thing we learn is colored by the lens of nationalism to some degree - whether we despise our country's leaders or embrace them...whether we are conscious of it or not simply being American or British or Chinese is a lens...)
My natural reaction was to take everything he said with a grain of salt, and research it before I form an opinion. And that's the heart of the matter - censoring everything or saying people shouldn't speak their mind implies readers are too dumb/lazy to do their own research (yes, many are. maybe not dumb, but lazy).
The problem isn't what's written and where it's written it's the entire culture of wanting to have our news with our coffee - hot and ready to go.
I don't think steem pretends to be a community of hard news journalists, and the assumption should be that readers aren't so weak as to lap up every word someone writes and take it for gospel ...
That said, journalism was my first career path - as a student I was taught not to include my personal biases in articles - but I realized thats impossible. Every adjective we choose adds a slant to the story - think about Trump visiting Saudi via the lens of CNN vs Fox.
Anyway, I like the freedom of Steem. I think dialogue is important. Your comments, other critics comments, the writer's opinions, etc . Restricting any of that would be a real problem.