-->
@Theweakeredge
https://observers.france24.com/en/20180402-how-detect-video-been-manipulated
This does absolutely nothing to solve a potential case of mistaken identity and or a staged video.
REPORTING AN ALLEGED CRIME IS LIBELOUS SLANDER AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL
Posts
Total:
93
-->
@3RU7AL
Do you mean, like leverage to actually pay his taxes? Or not be a moral monster? Sure.
First - if you claim a video is doctored, it is your burden to prove, you have simply been assuming it to be the case. Second, it... actually does. If you read it. ;)
-->
@Theweakeredge
First - if you claim a video is doctored, it is your burden to prove, you have simply been assuming it to be the case.
Not exactly.
A doctored video is NOT evidence of innocence.
Your claim appears to be that the hypothetical video constitutes an indisputable FACT (which is not the case).
Your hypothetical video MIGHT BE evidence of a FACT, but the hypothetical video itself is not PROOF.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Do you mean, like leverage to actually pay his taxes? Or not be a moral monster? Sure.
Or it might be leverage to influence someone to commit further crimes (or merely embarrassing non-crimes), depending on who exactly has access to the data in question.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Second, it... actually does. If you read it. ;)
Please be slightly more specific.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Privacy is important, I see no reason why it is so important to justify incriminating somebody for revealing [POTENTIALLY] true information. You are assuming that every claim that somebody is a criminal is [POTENTIALLY] untrue, you are also assuming they have intentions to make their reputation fall (ARE YOU SUGGESTING SOMEONE MIGHT ACCUSE ANOTHER OF A CRIME IN ORDER TO BOLSTER THE REPUTATION OF THE ACCUSED? THIS SEEMS UNLIKELY). It does not matter if their reputation does lower, only if they meant it to (WHY WOULD SOMEONE ACCUSE ANOTHER OF A CRIME? PLEASE ENUMERATE THE POSSIBLE MOTIVES). That is the nature of crimes of words.
-->
@3RU7AL
Thought crime is at an all time high.
-->
@3RU7AL
The details of the video, however, would be, as that is how they analyze video. that doesn't change the fact though, even if it WAS untrue, that does not change the fact that the person, in this case me, did not intend to lower their reputation, in fact, even having good intents here. Now, it could be argued that the consequent of such an action matters more than the intent... and that would usually be a good argument... except you are assuming several things, in order for that to be the case.
-->
@3RU7AL
one is only a documented and verified occurrence, the other being a slippery slope.
-->
@3RU7AL
Yeah, I'm sorry if you continue to be dishonest and simply looking to repeat my words at me without any further justification or explanation this conversation is over and you will be blocked. I've already played this song and dance I do not plan to do it again.
-->
@3RU7AL
Your public reputation is your most valuable asset.So there should be laws that keep people from saying mean things about each other in public.Especially famous people.Nobody should be able to use a photograph of you or talk about you ("use your name or your corporation's name as click-bait") WITHOUT YOUR EXPRESS CONSENT.Celebrities and other public figures are constantly being accused of "not caring" about things like "the environment" and or "justice" and the like.These kinds of claims are LIBELOUS SLANDER AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.Caring about the "right" or "wrong" things is not a crime yet.And since it is an indisputable fact that people don't know the inner thoughts (actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea) of the people they hate, they should not be allowed to speak publicly on the matter without facing steep fines and penalties.
And if they refuse to pay?
-->
@Athias
And if they refuse to pay?
Convince them compliance is in their own personal best interests.
-->
@Theweakeredge
This interaction is purely voluntary.
And I am not being dishonest.
Please try to keep your ad hominem attacks to a minimum.
-->
@3RU7AL
Convince them compliance is in their own personal best interests.
And how would non-compliance render a result that is against their best-interests?
-->
@Athias
And how would non-compliance render a result that is against their best-interests?
It would necessarily be custom tailored to each individual based on the complicated specifics of the peculiarities of their unique situation.
-->
@3RU7AL
It would necessarily be custom tailored to each individual based on the complicated specifics of the peculiarities of their unique situation.
And would any of these custom-tailored responses include reprisals and violence?
-->
@3RU7AL
Ad hominems? I'm guessing you don't care whether those criticisms are true? Mm, interesting way to improve yourself there. Furthermore, I've seen enough of my points ignored and don't care enough about this to continue an all day back and forth.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Ad hominems? I'm guessing you don't care whether those criticisms are true?
Specifically your claim that I am somehow vaguely "dishonest".
-->
@Athias
And would any of these custom-tailored responses include reprisals and violence?
Of course not, what, do you think the police are just like mobsters or something?
-->
@3RU7AL
Your public reputation is your most valuable asset. [...] there should be laws that keep people from saying mean things about each other in public. [...] they should not be allowed to speak publicly on the matter without facing steep fines and penalties.
There's already laws for this stuff. (e.g. https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/map-states-criminal-laws-against-defamation ) I don't think any of the laws prohibit speaking publicly about people one hates. That goes too far because people who are hated for good reasons would be able to use a law like that to muzzle their haters.
-->
@Death23
That goes too far because people who are hated for good reasons
How will we protect the millions of people who are hated for bad reasons?
-->
@Death23
That goes too far because people who are hated for good reasons
Is there ever a good reason to hate?
-->
@3RU7AL
Is there ever a good reason to hate?
I think so. I hate lots of people.
-->
@Death23
Is there ever a good reason to hate?I think so. I hate lots of people.
Are you able to explain why?
-->
@3RU7AL
Of course not, what, do you think the police are just like mobsters or something?
In a manner of speaking, yes.
-->
@3RU7AL
Are you able to explain why?
It isn't relevant.
-->
@3RU7AL
How will we protect the millions of people who are hated for bad reasons?
I don’t know. My reputation isn’t really that important to me. I think my credit reports are important. I don’t really monetize my reputation.
Controlling defamation has to be balanced with free-speech interest. The best way I think it’s probably to foster a culture of truth seeking, fact-checking, incredulity and skepticism to prevent rumors from spreading through the population like viruses.
-->
@Death23
The best way I think it’s probably to foster a culture of truth seeking, fact-checking, incredulity and skepticism to prevent rumors from spreading through the population like viruses.
I agree.
And we don't need any speech laws to implement this.
-->
@Death23
Are you able to explain why?It isn't relevant.
Perhaps you could speculate generally about good reasons to hate?