[gooseus]

My impressions is that everyone whinging about privacy with regards to giving seditionists and terrorists a space to coordinate and share misinformation after the biggest attack on the US since 9/11 are just being contrarian or are absolutist to a fault in their libertarian ideals (which I mostly share).

People minimizing this attack and not treating it like a legitimate 9/11 scale crisis for the US are not considering the propaganda win this is for extremist groups domestically and autocratic regimes internationally. Could this be a slippery slope? Sure, but it's not as slippery as the other side of the slope which goes right off a cliff.

There is still plenty of time/space to have debates about how to move forward from here with moderation and privacy on social networks, but for now we are in the middle of an insurrection that needs to be put down.

Also, should another attack take place couldn't platforms knowingly providing services to the capitol attackers find themselves liable for providing material support for terrorists? If I were managing risk at AWS that definitely be a major concern.

My POV, if we wouldn't have a problem doing it to ISIS after an attack on our Capitol, then we shouldn't have problem doing the same to QAnon and these "patriots".

[throwaway0a5e]

>People minimizing this attack and not treating it like a legitimate 9/11 scale crisis

We're still getting groped by the TSA and wrapping up a war from the last time we had a 9/11 scale crisis. We were tricked into spending trillions of dollars and thousands of lives invading a nation that had nothing to do with it and we gave some of the less savory government agencies a lot of power which they still have not returned.

I think the public is right to be hesitant to play the knee-jerk reaction game this time around considering how well it turned out last time.

[gooseus]

I think there is a big difference between invading two countries and passing the PATRIOT act and the reaction we're seeing here.

All this "hold on and let's make sure we're not being too unfair to far-right extremists" while they actively recruit and plan more attacks sounds like an under-reaction from a fear of over-reacting.

[whimsicalism]

> All this "hold on and let's make sure we're not being too unfair to far-right extremists" while they actively recruit and plan more attacks sounds like an under-reaction from a fear of over-reacting.

I think it is right to be worried about the ascendant tech industry being able to quash certain ideas before they have a chance to influence voters at the ballot box.

Just this past 3 months, we've seen true stories about Joe Biden's son banned from posting on social media, anti-Biden news outlets banned from posting, and now the president banned.

I vote straight democrat pretty much every time, so that is where my leanings lie, but I'm not going to shut my eyes as wealth inequality goes over the moon in the past 20 years and consolidated platforms owned by the hyper-wealthy increasingly control what news people even see.

To me, it is entirely inappropriate to be blasé about this point.

[chmod600]

Where you are going wrong is that none of what you say demands a hack or a data dump.

Get warrants, subpoenas, etc., and go after those inciting riots/sedition.

[jaywalk]

> the biggest attack on the US since 9/11

This is an absolutely disgusting and disgraceful thing to say.

[gooseus]

So you can name a bigger attack on the US that has happened in the last 20 years?

Far fewer lives were lost, but the impact and implications of this are on par.

[whimsicalism]

They're just not even remotely the same thing.

Nothing like 9/11 or the OKC bombing has happened in the last 19 years; full stop.

I have lived in DC my whole life, I hate to see this happening in my city, but we can be honest with ourselves.

[macintux]

This could have led to the public execution of the Vice President and speaker of the house. This came close to being a dramatically worse event.

[whimsicalism]

> This could have led to the public execution of the Vice President and speaker of the house. This came close to being a dramatically worse event.

I remain unconvinced about how close that actually was, nor have I seen a compelling case that it was that close actually made.

Further, before it becomes close to "executing the Vice President", you can bet shots are going to actually be fired. Crowds of rioters behave very differently when gunshots start ringing out.

[jaywalk]

A single, fatal shot was fired for precisely that reason. And even then, I don't think it was anywhere near "executing the VP" but more like getting too close to the area where the politicians were being kept safe.

[seppin]

And until such a thing occurs, most Trump adjacent HN members with continue to play "no true scotsman" with the extremists amongst them.

[whimsicalism]

I am hardly Trump adjacent except, unfortunately, geographically.

[jacquesm]

No, it is factually correct. They said 'since', not larger than. In the meantime, since 9/11 there have as far as I know it not been any larger attacks within the US on the United States itself. If you know of any then please correct me.

[whimsicalism]

> on the United States itself.

What does "on the United States itself" mean and why does 9/11 meet that standard but not, say, the Pulse nightclub shooting?

[jacquesm]

The Pulse nightclub is not typically associated with being a seat of government, though I don't doubt that people in government have been seated there.

On 9/11 there was a plan set in motion to crash a plane in to the Capitol, which only failed because of the bravery of the passengers in that plane. Incidentally, the very same Capitol self described 'patriots' broke into and vandalized last week.

[whimsicalism]

> a legitimate 9/11 scale crisis

So what made 9/11 have large scale was the (thwarted) plot to crash into the Capitol and the successful attack on the Pentagon? Not the 2600 killed in the WTC?

This seems like a very twisted reading to compare two not-actually-that-similar events.

[mike00632]

Around 4,000 people in the United States died prematurely yesterday due to COVID. 9/11 was a big deal because it attacked America's symbols. It altered the skyline of New York City, took down a side of the Pentagon and almost was able to crash into DC. The attack on January 6th acted in the same way. Yes, they killed fewer people but they attacked heart of America and the symbols of America.

[jacquesm]

I think you have a reading comprehension problem, but I don't think I'm capable of fixing it. Hint: it revolves around the word 'since'. Best of luck.

[daveevad]

Perhaps the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting where 24 members were attacked and one nearly died?

[jacquesm]

Yes, that was definitely bad.

[TomSwirly]

If the statement is false, it should be easy to come up with a counter-example...?