this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
72 points (91.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
5810 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
72
The Feds Are Coming for “Extremist” Gamers (theintercept.com)
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 47 points 8 months ago (3 children)

An internal FBI threat advisory obtained by The Intercept defines Anarchist Violent Extremists as individuals “who consider capitalism and centralized government to be unnecessary and oppressive,” and “oppose economic globalization; political, economic, and social hierarchies based on class, religion, race, gender, or private ownership of capital; and external forms of authority represented by centralized government, the military, and law enforcement.”

Guess I’m on another list because I agree with all of that.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Are they honestly okay with putting "Social hierarchies based on [...] race or gender" in writing?

[–] BossDj@lemm.ee 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The result of none of that is the same as anarchy, violence, nor extremism

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Anarchy has stood for those things since its inception.

Who taught you that it means violence and lawlessness? Maybe they have an agenda?

[–] BossDj@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't know what you're trying to say.

I said the FBI definition of "violent anarchist extremists" doesn't properly define violent, anarchist, or extremists.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And Semi-Hemi-Demigod is trying to explain to you that, while you're of course right that none of those things are symptoms of violent extremism, a lot of them are aspects of peaceful anti-authoritarian political beliefs such as those of anarchism.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Thanks for the assist

[–] BossDj@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

But I never said it was about violence and lawlessness

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

No worries 🙂

[–] alilbee@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I would read this as "Of the types of violent extremists, the 'Anarchist' type are those who... ". As a really dumb metaphor, if I have a pokedex, I don't need to restate that they're all Pokémon in there each time.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure that your interpretation gels with the FBI's historical behavior. The organization literally tried to get MLK Jr. to kill himself.

[–] alilbee@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Not arguing that the FBI hasn't suppressed completely valid movements in the past, because that's well-documented for anyone to see. I just think that if I was a professional writing a handbook in this situation, I wouldn't go to the trouble of redefining the context each time either. Because of that, I'm not sure that this is demonstrative of their stance.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

Surely this will be an article about the FBI finally cutting down on Nazis and right-wing extremists in The Gaming Community right? Right? Oh..

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Roblox? Are there that many radicalized 8 year olds?

[–] TragicNotCute@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Have you met many 8 year olds? They are all fucking radicals. I’d say at least half are terrorists.

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Letting them out from the mines was a mistake

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

Can't even fit their plump little bodies down chimneys anymore.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

That’s a preexisting condition though, 8 year olds have always been menaces to the rest of us

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Gotta catch them early if you want to have nice obedient corporate drones.

[–] Plague_Doctor@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Robocop?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Huh, I wonder how much they'll focus on the right wing aspect of that. Or are they both-sidesing the animal activists, giving that equal weight to alt-right fascists?

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Huh, I wonder how much they’ll focus on the right wing aspect of that.

Just enough to say they did and no more.

[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

No

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm afraid that's not a very strong legal defense.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Its not a legal defense, its a warning. We all like our fingers, be a shame is some of us lost em.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Warning of what? Gamergate-types not supporting Biden?

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

Not necessarily gamer gate types, I dont trust the FBI to keep it to just them. Wouldnt put it past em to go after anarchists for example. But if they can keep it to gamer gate types they can keep their fingers.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Gaming companies are coordinating with the FBI and Department of Homeland Security to root out so-called domestic violent extremist content, according to a new government report.

“The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have mechanisms to share and receive domestic violent extremism threat-related information with social media and gaming companies,” the GAO says.

“All I can think of is the awful track record of the FBI when it comes to identifying extremism,” Hasan Piker, a popular Twitch streamer who often streams while playing video games under the handle HasanAbi, says of the mechanisms.

The GAO’s investigation, which covers September 2022 to January 2024, was undertaken at the request of the House Homeland Security Committee, which asked the government auditor to examine domestic violent extremists’ use of gaming platforms and social media.

A 2019 internal intelligence assessment jointly produced by the FBI, DHS, the Joint Special Operations Command, and the National Counterterrorism Center and obtained by The Intercept warns that “violent extremists could exploit functionality of popular online gaming platforms and applications.” The assessment lists half a dozen U.S.-owned gaming platforms that it identifies as popular, including Blizzard Entertainment’s Battle.net, Fortnite, Playstation Xbox Live, Steam, and Roblox.

In 2019, ADL’s then-senior vice president of international affairs, Sharon Nazarian, was asked by Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., if gaming platforms “are monitored” and if there’s “a way AI can be employed to identify those sorts of conversations.”

The original article contains 1,138 words, the summary contains 239 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

a way AI can be employed to identify those sorts of conversations.

i'm sure that'd be done fairly

[–] SoupBrick@yiffit.net 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

My bet: They're probably going to initially go after some actual problem accounts, then once they got the PR out, immediately start using it for bad faith surveillance.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 6 points 8 months ago

Let me raise that: they have already been doing this for years if not decades, and it's just a convenient PR stunt that they are doing now so they can do it more openly