What’s everyone doing to celebrate January 6?
- Thread starter Kaladin
- Start date
Welcome to tPB!
Welcome to The Platinum Board. We are a Nebraska Husker news source and fan community.
-
Welcome to The Platinum Board! We are a Nebraska Cornhuskers news source and community. Please click "Log In" or "Register" above to gain access to the forums.
- Messages
- 4,419
- Likes
- 13,253
You mean change her ostomy bag?
- Messages
- 20,291
- Likes
- 81,477
Liar in a Crowded Theater | Hopkins Press
- Messages
- 4,419
- Likes
- 13,253
Sounds good. Is it goodLiar in a Crowded Theater | Hopkins Press
www.press.jhu.edu
- Messages
- 15,943
- Likes
- 41,680
- Messages
- 20,291
- Likes
- 81,477
Haven't started it, but his books on Section 230 and anonymous speech were fucking bangers so I imagine it's fantastic
- Messages
- 860
- Likes
- 2,456
Fire up Saltburn on prime if Ben hut doesn’t do it for you
- Messages
- 6,172
- Likes
- 18,713
you sumbitch
- Messages
- 4,746
- Likes
- 16,603
l started reading it. It's mildly interesting but the author approaches everything with a clearly lefty worldview. He also rarely justifies why A is a lie and B is the truth. You just have to take his word for it.
He also drops this: "Women, racial minorities, and others may have a harder time competing in the marketplace of ideas." He supports his position on racial minorities by saying they tend to be poorer and so don't have the resources to disseminate their messages (pretty questionable in the internet age, and would apply to an even greater extent to rural whites, living in internet dead zones). And his position on women is literally completely unsupported. He just says it lmao
- Messages
- 7,571
- Likes
- 23,016
A poor, black kid living in the hood in Baltimore has infinitely less resources (and power) to spread the message than say a more privileged white kid living in Omaha. Internet be damned - social media isn’t the “great equalizer” here.l started reading it. It's mildly interesting but the author approaches everything with a clearly lefty worldview. He also rarely justifies why A is a lie and B is the truth. You just have to take his word for it.
He also drops this: "Women, racial minorities, and others may have a harder time competing in the marketplace of ideas." He supports his position on racial minorities by saying they tend to be poorer and so don't have the resources to disseminate their messages (pretty questionable in the internet age, and would apply to an even greater extent to rural whites, living in internet dead zones). And his position on women is literally completely unsupported. He just says it lmao
So there’s a lot of truth in that assumption.
- Messages
- 4,746
- Likes
- 16,603
I'm not even disputing that. That's why my primary critique was contrasting to rural whites in internet dead zones. This is an obvious fact but is left out of the book because it doesn't fit his narrative.
And again, the entirely unsupported claim about women. Source is "trust me bro"
Last edited:
- Messages
- 20,291
- Likes
- 81,477
I'll have to read it. His previous two books were like 95+% explorations of topics in free speech, Section 230 and anonymous speech (he got a little soap box-y at the end of one or both), but both were pretty interesting. Maybe this one gets too soap boxy idk yet.l started reading it. It's mildly interesting but the author approaches everything with a clearly lefty worldview. He also rarely justifies why A is a lie and B is the truth. You just have to take his word for it.
He also drops this: "Women, racial minorities, and others may have a harder time competing in the marketplace of ideas." He supports his position on racial minorities by saying they tend to be poorer and so don't have the resources to disseminate their messages (pretty questionable in the internet age, and would apply to an even greater extent to rural whites, living in internet dead zones). And his position on women is literally completely unsupported. He just says it lmao
At some point re: truth/lie you just have to pick examples and the examples are less important than the logical structure around how legislating "misinformation" would work. A book about whether Pizzagate is real or trump actually getting pissed on by Russian hookers is a different book.
- Messages
- 4,746
- Likes
- 16,603
I only read like the first 30 pages or so. I'm also probably more sensitive than most to ideological bias from the left.
There's plenty of good in it I'm sure. One part that was interesting was he gave the history of the stolen valor act and the resulting 1A lawsuits. I honestly had no idea that as late as like 2012 the federal government was arguing that objective lies (e.g. stolen valor) are not Constitutionally protected speech and can be prosecuted.
Similar threads
