SvennoJ said:
Chrkeller said:
Apologies if I come off too harsh, but posts like this annoy me. What is protected by the constitution has little bearing on forum rules. I can get banned for making fun of someone for living with their mommy. Is that a constitutional protection? Nope, but still a forum rule, so that is completely irrelevant. Secondly, you are underselling what is being said. The comment wasn't "wishing" for data centers to blow up, but "wanting" to blow up data centers. The entire point of terrorism is to incite fear... blowing up data centers would incite fear, it is flatly terrorism. It is a call for terrorism. I do not understand how calling for terrorism (and murder) is ok. I just don't. and appear intended to intimidate a civilian population or influence government policy. per your verbiage/post. Blowing up data centres would intimidate a civilian population and would influence government policy.... the comment is 100% a call for domestic terrorism, flatly. |
I understand the sentiment as expressing frustration, not an actual intent. In that context, wishing for and wanting to are the same thing. There's is no real intent nor capability.
The fear is actually on the side of the poster. AI taking away jobs, further destroying the environment, driving up electronics and electricity prices, progressing the surveillance state. So in your definition the building of (more) data centers is the actual terrorism.
It's not a call for domestic terrorism, looking at some of the context of such posts it's a call for regulation, destruction as a last resort. |
Yeah the statements in question are an (understandable) expression of frustration, not an actual call for violence.
There's a difference between declaring "I am going to burn down a data centre" and just thinking it would be a good thing if one did get burned down.
My point in making this thread was that political/controversial speech should be less restricted, not more.
Currently Online 
