General News Thread 2.0




I’m waiting for that shiny gold trophy, then :stuck_out_tongue:


After doing a recent clean up in The Regular’s area (aka The Lounge) it appears I need to point out here too, the different between civility and the illusion of civility.

No you specifically started by announcing that dogmatism is dangerous, which is essentially a means of thinking. You specified this in regards to the Left and have spent the rest of the thread trying to normalize authoritarian, fascist and biggoted dogmas.

Re-writing history is more difficult when there’s a record you can scroll up to see.

No, Quinn posted pretty early on in the peace how the problem with advocating harmful ideas is that they lead to harmful actions (which is, after all, the very point of the action of advocating for the harmful ideas).

You are now trying to reframe this as some sort of theoretical versus actual discussion, because from most philosophies easily understood by the layperson (utilitarianism, nihilism, kant, etc) the theoretical is a non-issue - only actions matter. This is a disingenuous approach since what we really judge these people for is the act of spreading harmful ideas, not the ideas themselves.

You know this of course.

But that didn’t stop you from trying to re-frame Richard Spencer as the opposite of who he acts like, claims to be and demands to be seen as did it?

In my experience the fuss a person makes over “I want this to be my last post…” the less intent they have on following through with it. You promised you’d silence yourself five days ago.

There is literally nothing radical about authoritarian thought, it is literally the demand for the suppression of radical thought through the dogmatic adherence to tradition and the status quo. In this case you advocate the suppression of newer concepts (which you refer to as “the left”) through the enabling of older routines (which you refer to as “the right”).

This is not a misuse of the interpretation in the slightest, it is anti-muslim propaganda which only makes sense if the reader assumes that all muslims are Arabs (the majority are Asian) who advocate for oppression regimes (skipping over the role that the USA and the UK played in the creation of Islamic Fundamentalist nations). It is a non-sequitor that was both amazingly lazy (The Nazi eagle remaining in the pic) and had to reach very far to try to make sense (the skinhead is replaced with an Islamic scholar)

It is not a correction of information about Popper - who rightfully believed that dangerous ideas were fine when in books and texts examining why they were dangerous and warning against them, but the spreading of misinformation for the purposes of undermining his message.

It’s only purpose is to promote hatred with an unworkable comparison. National Socialism is, at it’s core, a philosophy of exploitation and hatred - it cannot be separated from it because it is literally the key points they use to recruit with. Islam is a diverse religion with billions of followers and a wide variety of interpretations and values (mostly defined by region). To claim this comparison is valid is to advocate for bigotry.

Particularly since when quoting Amensty you left out the following sound bytes from the original source:

She stresses this does not prove that mass rape did not occur but there is no evidence to show that it did. Liesel Gerntholtz, head of women’s rights at Human Rights Watch, which also investigated the charge of mass rape, said: “We have not been able to find evidence.”

Given that this is accepted as a wide spread problem with rape investigations and that there were no authorities collecting evidence at the time - in fact doing quite the opposite:

Credible evidence of rape came when Eman al-Obeidy burst into a hotel in Tripoli on 26 March to tell journalists she had been gang-raped before being dragged away by the Libyan security services.

So, basically you’ve made it clear you do not care as to the quality or validity of the information, just how you can dissect it and manipulate it in order to attempt to manipulate others.

You literally couldn’t get through this post without misrepresenting yourself and spreading misinformation. You have no basis at all for throwing stones here about libel, name calling or suggesting violence.

This definitely counts against you since it makes it pretty obvious you’re not actually here for the discussion of Hitman games per se, particularly when your political rhetoric vastly outweighs your Easter Egg posts and your multiple (false) promises to just leave this topic alone.

If you had any respect for this concept at all, you would have stopped posting when you received the warn and not spammed my PMs with a giant wall of text (in response to a brief warning) run off to hope that Watson would change my mind.

After all, this is a forum for Hitman, not a promised free land for political conquest.

How’s that worked out for Poland historically? Particularly in 1939. Or the Miniconjou at Wounded Knee? It’s funny how these claims only work when you get to cherrypick the examples and reframe everything within a very specific, nonsensical “philosophy” (ie advocating that your side can’t do any wrong, because it’s “just ideas” while the otherside cannot do any right because they are anti-idea).

There is exactly zero reasoning in your posts above. Just the transparent veneer of them.

This is a commonplace thing amongst right-wing advocates who - despite claiming they are interested in equality and ideas, actively want to make all spaces fit their ideals while pretending to respect property rights. The other fact is that as well as being the side of politics that is the furthest from “radical” it is also the side that tends to engage in creating false accounts to avoid consequences, inflate numbers, etc. All while pretending to be the “good guy” for example:

No, you don’t respect me at all - or you would have stopped posting period. Instead what you did was announce you wanted to stay silent, but that you didn’t know why I’d be so bothered by what you posted… and you planned to post more - including a giant wall of text you apparently wanted me to vet and give you official approval to post after being told to stop it.

You then went to Watson and tried to reframe things there, while continuing to post, waited until Watson advised you basically that your account is suspicious and if you really need to argue that badly - take it to PM, then you posted knowing that you’d broken the forum guidelines but trying to reframe this as the fault of others. Specifically this other:

So very respectful, I just… feel the respect radiating off this.


This charming guy who was played by Depp in black mass was killed in jail


Once again the police find themselves under attack for doing their jobs. Shamefully, and maybe unsurprisingly the higher ups and the politicians threw the officer under the bus. I think we all understand that sometimes a little tough talk with suspects from rougher cultures, that maybe didn’t have a father, may be called for from time to time. Statements like:

"If anybody wants to fight or run, I’m a little trigger happy, guys. I’m not gonna lie, and I get paid a ton of money in overtime, if I had to shoot somebody. Don’t do anything stupid,"

are common in the music that young men of that lifestyle emulate-the cop was just trying to make sure they understood not to resist. The cop even says so later on.

Barone tried to explain his comments to the men, saying he would lose thousands of dollars if he shot someone. He also told them that he would say “anything” if "it prevents things from escalating."

I think we can all appreciate police that deescalate especially with so much hate filled anti cop rhetoric popular among certain cultures. I hope the union continues to stand by the officer and finds him another job soon.

in other unrelated news

A white Kentucky man who is accused of killing two African-Americans in a shooting at a Louisville-area grocery store was indicted Wednesday in their deaths.

Sadly another White Identity extremist has committed a terror attack. This attack took place last weekend and was part of one of the scariest weekends in American political history as middle aged white identity terrorist shot up a synagogue, sent pipe bombs to prominent democrats, and in this case shot only black people in a grocery store.

According to a police report, Bush walked into the store, pulled a gun from his waist and shot a man in the back of the head. The report says Bush then shot the man "multiple times “as he was down on the floor.” The report says Bush then reholstered his gun, walked outside and killed a woman in the parking lot.

Witness Ed Harrell told the Courier-Journal that he was waiting for his wife in the lot when he heard gunshots and grabbed his revolver. As he crouched down, Harrell said he saw the gunman walk “nonchalantly” by with a gun by his side. Harrell said he called out to ask what was going on, and the gunman replied: "Don’t shoot me. I won’t shoot you. Whites don’t shoot whites."

The police of course capture him alive, and naturally the white identity terrorist, coddled by a white supremacists system that protects him, has a violent criminal record that should have kept him behind bars and in the least without access to a firearm.

Bush’s criminal record shows he threatened his ex-wife and punched a deputy sheriff during a family court hearing years ago.

An arrest record from May 2009 says Bush became “irate” and shouted obscenities and threats at his ex-wife. When deputies tried to subdue him, he fought off attempts to handcuff him and he punched a deputy twice. He was charged with several counts, including assault, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct. Bush also was marked as a “suicide risk” on the arrest sheet, which noted that his ex-wife had a protective order against him.

In a 2003 incident, Bush was charged with menacing for following a 15-year-old into a movie theater bathroom and putting his hands around her waist. Bush told the girl he “thought we were family” and the girl pushed him away, according to the arrest record.

As the President likes to say “What about what about what…about.” I invite you to ask yourself what would happen if it were young black men shooting up white churches, or going into grocery stores shooting white women and yelling “Blacks don’t kill blacks!” I wonder if we would talk about mental health or about the fathers.

So much for good guys with guns. The armed citizen in the grocery store was useless because…whites don’t kill whites. And the only reason more people didn’t die that day is not because of a armed citizen it was because a church was closed.

Police also have said that Bush attempted to enter a predominantly black church, the First Baptist Church of Jeffersontown, about 10 to 15 minutes before the shooting at the grocery store but was “unsuccessful.” The church’s doors were locked.

We would of had two places of worship shot up by white identity terrorist. I think it is time to ask ourselves as a nation, what is making our old white men so violent and what can we do about it. Is it the music, the culture, where are the fathers?


It seems to be so common people think what happens in smaller amount in statistics than other events, it will never happen in their life. It is a tough lesson to learn that when a white dude points a gun at you, you are probably soon in this unsignificant amount of White-kill-white-victims number.



Oh yeah I heard out the New Caledonia referendum. Would be nice to have new neighbours I guess but there is still a whole heap of trouble that come with being independent, hope they are ready for the responsibility.


As a Scot, I can only sympathise when a nation goes through a process like this. I know what it is like to have that feeling of hope and of that promise of being able to forge your own destiny.


Sometime in the future, the AI asks “Are you really coming from a country where a war is going on?” - “Yes.” - “Oh sorry but you lie, go away.”
refugee dies back in his home because of war, officials of a generally anti-migration government be like “Too bad, the AI was not working perfectly. Who can you blame? ¯\(ツ)/¯”


Is than any different than the “AI”, I’m sorry I mean people working border defence in the EU today? I mean the EU still shifts blame for turning away refugees just like my country. At least the EU lock their refugees up in some “nicer” cells


It should be a combination. A technical tool that is helping but not deciding and a person that hopefully adds human perception to the individual case or atleast is to blame if it goes wrong.


Well it is only a prototype that is being field tested if it does not work independently of human control they will scupper the plan. Not surprising this plan was spearheaded by Hungary, with the backing of Italy and Greece. Victor Orban is not the most tolerant man, if you wanna know more @SeanBernowicz will talk your ear off about that odious prick.


My point is exactly this.
When doing tests, you have a sensitivity (how likely is a true-positive, in this case how likely is a detection of a lie when the person is actually lying) and a specifity (how likely is a true-negative, in this case how likely is no detection of a lie when the person is also not lying).
If you are against migration, you set up this black box at your borders and demand from the manufactor to have a high sensitivity but don’t care for the specifity to make sure to have the least migration possible. Nobody would find out this is the case because there are usually no laws to make the contract conditions public, let alone the source code of the machine.

Even if the contract and AI is legit, do machine-learning with italians only and then you can be sure the machine fails at people of other skin color.

There are so many ways to intentionally fuck this up. And I saw too many mass surveilance projects that were obviously going down that road. In Berlin there were recently face-recognition tests going on. And while the officials are happy with the results, these results are actually garbage.


If they do fiddle with programming then the EU is not filled completely with utter morons they can still launch an investigation into low migration numbers.(Assuming the tech works) They can also test in nations like France, Germany and Sweden where they are more tolerant of migrants if they feel the results are skewered.

I am not saying the machine is not going to fail. Of course it will, the tech is new, hence why it is being TESTED. It can’t be any worse than a traditional polygraph machine, notorious for being inaccurate. It is highly likely the project will fail and the EU can go back to pushing around refugees the normal way.


Without transparency I don’t trust any method. And I don’t say that because I am an open source fetishist but because it is not constitutional to include a routine of decision-finding that is not accessible for doubt. Which is the case with such systems.

It is simple. People vote the government, the government is legitimized to put laws for a problem in place, the judical power decides which cases are handled how, and the executive is enforcing it.

Here, you replace the judical power with a computer. This alone is a big red light.

As I said earlier, I can only see it work this way: A preselection can work with an AI. But the decision still has to be done by a human. And this decision should be reasonable regardless the machine’s help.

If this is the way this research is going to, good! But I have high doubts the promises will be kept.


No promise a government makes is kept.

Besides the facial recognition software is just a false flag most likely, soft power in sociological terms. A means of influencing people without them knowing it, like CCTV or speeding cameras. Not many people know how bad FR software does. In China alone it had a 95% fail rate. This is mean to scare way drug smugglers or other nefarious people, in my experience refugees don’t waltz right up to the front gate and ask to be let in, then again my country floats on water.


I don’t have hard numbers but I fear your 95% failure rate in China is outdated. I remember reading something two years ago that asian recognition systems are the best ones on the market (as long you use it on asians).


First of all are you racist for saying that or am I racist for thinking it? (All Asians look the same)

You might be right. China has really upped their FR game but I don’t believe much of what China says anyway. If I don’t believe the Uighur people are being treated humanely I won’t believe their FR prowess. Really the CCG are just as filled with liars as the EU, the only difference is Communist leaders lie to themselves as well as others.