Ignorant investors check a box to put their money towards 'ethical' investments, leading companies to create DEI marketing departments to exploit the new investment pipeline.
I'm surprised I don't come across this perspective more often. ESG funds reached 15% of the total global securities market in assets under management (although much of this was merely a reclassification of existing investments). It seems very reasonable to conclude that ESG funds/scorings became the primary market incentive driving the corporate DEI initiatives we've seen rolled out this past decade.
Publicly traded companies operate under a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders (maximizing long-term shareholder value). For consumer-facing companies one could easily argue these initiatives are part of a broader marketing/corporate branding strategy that benefits shareholders. But, for large publicly-traded companies that don't rely on retail consumer sentiment, I presume DEI initiatives were primarily a strategy to attract investment from ESG funds and help quell potential regulatory action/political controversies
I'm ultimately not sure how reasonable my take is (I have no insider experience or knowledge) but would love to hear from someone with relevant first-hand knowledge and get their perspective
I'm not sure I'd call it good reporting to investigate this case and not look into Doxbin.
There has been no evidence that Kiwifarms users have coordinated harassment towards keffals; however, the website that actually coordinated the harassment gets absolutely no mention.
When the reporter brings up the Uber hack, he's insinuating that this was done by Kiwifarms, but the receipts were actually posted on Doxbin. Doxbin also goes much much further than Kiwifarms, getting addresses,bank details, and employment history of anyone related to the target. They will work together to contact hotels and employers to get the information they want. Doxbin actually does act the way the media thinks that kiwifarms act.
I can understand Keffals not speaking about Doxbin as she legitimately fears them according to leaked messages to Destiny, but it's the media's responsibility to actually understand what's going on.
It's insane that people like Ben Collins constantly use Kiwifarms as a shield for Doxbin.
There seems to be a double standard with who can partake in intimidation campaigns.
Before any mention of keffals in Kiwifarms she was running a harassment campaign against Destiny, making false accusations that he was a rapist and rallying their followers to get him de-platformed on all platforms.
The worst situation is having one sided intimidation campaigns where trans activists can de-platform users like Destiny but they cannot defend themselves due to either losing remaining platforms or fear of losing their remaining platforms.
Making accusations against someone and trying to get them deplatformed is not the same as threatening someone with violence. I know very few details but the moral equivalence you’re drawing in this comment is false.
Is it? Attacking someone's livelihood is a very real and impactful form of aggression. Compared threats of violence there's more cases where it's warranted, yes, but I think I would personally rather be on the receiving end of threats of violence than of someone attempting to make me lose my job and become much harder to employ.
Of course actual violence is a different case altogether.
If that's your stance then that's fine. However, the correct approach would have been for Destiny to take legal action, instead of vigilantism.
In addition, the prior comments talk about things that may causally limit freedom of speech. Losing your job does not mean losing your voice.
When it comes to how FoS is constitutionally defined (across several countries), it is worth learning about "fighting words." Nearly every justice system agrees that any goes, except words that may (not merely will) cause imminent harm. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
>the correct approach would have been for Destiny to take legal action, instead of vigilantism.
So the correct response to percieved harrassment is indeed taking legal action, and not, say, mobilizing mobs to retaliate back ? Mmm, I wonder who needs to hear that.
As far as I understand, the people on kiwifarms _also_ try to get their targets fired by enailing their employees and claiming their targets are pedophiles or something like that.
Publicly calling someone a rapist can very well get someone injured or killed. Unless you’re a victim whose pleas are being completely ignored by the legal system, it’s not justifiable and not something that should be taken as anything but a threat to someone’s life.
I have no clue who these people are or what the situation is, but I’ve seen more than enough angry mobs appear out of nowhere after an accusation of a crime.
“I have no clue who these people are or what the situation is, but I’ve seen more than enough angry mobs appear out of nowhere after an accusation of a crime.”
What are some specific examples of this phenomenon you’re referring to?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."
Humans are inherently tribal. If enough of us get together in a group, we are capable of terrible things - and the justification of them.
If I'm not mistaken, the threat of violence came from someone USING the KF platform, not KF itself. If you want to make equivalences, deplatforming Destiny means removing him FROM a platform, and thus the person making threats should have been banned from KF to result an an equivalence. Yet the action taken was to actually remove the entire platform.
I'm unfamiliar with KF but if a platform can't or won't do a good enough job of moderating its content and users, then transitively the platform itself needs to be blocked.
And btw, kiwifarms had to get their own ip block because no one would host them any more that was like 5+ years ago or something. So cloudflare never really provided any service to the site as their IPs were public knowledge and could be ddos'd (hence why it is always going down)
A post deleted as soon as a mod saw it (~30 minutes) with an account ban, by an account with virtually no posting history before this drama started.... hmmm
Those people should also be banned from twitter. Just because some folks aren't banned when they should be doesn't mean we should stop banning everyone.
This isn't a left vs right thing. It's a "we shouldn't let people bring harm to other people online" thing. It seems you're the one making it left vs right.
This is a lie. What happened is Destiny had a tirade about how to him stealthing isn’t rape, and Keffals pointed it out. Then KF went wild, as seen above.
For people who don't like to hide an essay's worth of scum behind a two-syllable word, "stealthing" is used above to describe putting on a condom to obtain consent and then discreetly removing the condom after consent is obtained.
I would suggest taking a deep breath. I didn't accuse anyone of anything, I pointed out that stealthing is rape. I did so because stealthing is in fact rape. I don't know how that simple fact is misinformation, let alone dangerous - please explain.
You left the part out where Keffals once again went out of their way to then get Destiny (and by Keffals own words, livelihood) de-platformed first and how Keffals is the one in fact who started the fight with KF. (who only looked further into the person's pretty unsavory history because of their freak out)
Yes and thank god they do. I watched it several times so I could better understand what happened in this scenario and what an evil person may do if I find myself unarmed with a pile of people in a confined space like this. I learned that hiding in the corner resulted in piles of people simply ending up getting shot, and that immediately exiting out through windows and other less expected exit points greatly aided survivors. This is counter to idiotic advice my teachers gave me, like hiding under chairs and desks, which the shooter in Uvalde took advantage of to massacre virtually all the children in their room.
After watching the videos I came up with a plan as to what to do if an evil person ever enters close quarters building and I have no way to fight back. Only by watching such a gruesome video with such explicit results did it really drive home what the stakes are. I truly believe Kiwifarms may save lives by keeping up this video.
It's amazing the degree to which people are fine treating their fellow humans as means towards an end. Even unarmed victims of a massacre. We should put a Netflix Original series out that is curated gore videos with commentary from former cops, military, mercenaries, etc. about surviving horrific situations unarmed. Who cares about the families of the victims or the survivors?
>It's amazing the degree to which people are fine treating their fellow humans as means towards an end.
I could make that exact statement about those wanting to restrict the video. They want the end result of the video being unshared, and they're willing to discard the freedom of speech rights of other humans in their efforts.
In the case of the Christchurch video, the harm has already been done. One could argue that sharing the video creates demand for more shooting videos (as is argued with CSAM), but the USA considers this to be protected for whatever reason (unlike CSAM or obscenity).
I question whether mere possession of CSAM without any personal proximity to abuse isn't the digital version of allowing police an easy way to plant weed. It (the planting of this evidence) seems like way too convenient of a way to prosecute any political enemies, other disfavored groups, etc. And there's no one to cross-examine, except the policeman who potentially planted it themselves. IMO until police corruption is sorted out, these kind of prosecutions should require accusations or confirmation from the abused that the person in question actually was involved in the abuse.
In fact, this may be one of the reason why the founders were free speech 'extremists.' If merely _owning_ some information that is easily plantable is illegal, it is trivial to frame someone.
I had no idea what Kiwifarms was until Christchurch. The mainstream platforms basically invite people to go to platforms concentrated in more extreme speech by deplatforming legal but controversial speech. IMO it is more beneficial to have mainstream platforms with all manners of free speech than to concentrate extreme speech in certain locations where it becomes normalized without the benefit of mixing in more mainstream opinions. I would not be surprised to find out censorship and moderation results in increased radicalization, etc by concentrating controversial ideas in these 'extreme' platforms rather than mixing them with more moderate ideas.
I very much doubt someone looking to get on with a normal life would gloat about supplying drugs to children without parental consent, lie about how officers treated them in jail on television, tweet they are hopeful a specific person gets swatted or parade around on social media when their harassment campaign gets users like Destiny banned from platforms.
I’d provide screenshots but documenting the escapades of public figures must be relegated to the memory hole these days.
If you want to learn about risk, modern XCOM is a bad choice. Modern XCOM lies to the player in order to make the player feel better
It gives a distorted view on how likely 60% really is since the percentage shown is not the same as the one used to calculate the hit or miss.
The game secretly changes the odds for sequential misses making hits more likely after misses. This teaches the player that the gambler's fallacy is not a fallacy at all.
With his "The push" show he either uses stooges or uses "mentalism" to turn people into murderers and risks giving the victims severe trauma and PTSD.
If the show is real the abuse carried out by Derren far surpasses the abuse of other cancelled shows like Jeremy Kyle. This is why I think its most likely the killers in this show are actors. If he's willing and able to use actors in this show its likely he has used them in others too.
I think you're underestimating how bad people are at keeping salacious secrets about celebrities.
Remember when Bear Grylls had to apologize for the "stranded on a desert island" show, after people on Reddit claimed to have worked on his production staff and revealed that he spent the night in a hotel and had help collecting the material for the shelter he built? If Derren has been using stooges throughout his career, it beggars belief that the same thing hasn't happened to him.
> If the show is real the abuse carried out by Derren far surpasses the abuse of other cancelled shows like Jeremy Kyle.
Yes, he has been roundly criticized for many of his hypnosis stunts, e.g. [0]. Are you now suggesting that those people are all stooges too? Do all stage hypnotist acts rely on actors?
Did you get many repeat customers?
I see the licence is limited to 3 machines instead of the user. Did this have the effect of getting customers to buy additional licences?
It would be interesting to know if people are willing to pay again so they can use software on multiple devices or if it is more likely to put people off buying the software.
Ignorant investors check a box to put their money towards 'ethical' investments, leading companies to create DEI marketing departments to exploit the new investment pipeline.
reply