Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

turkeyblocks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 476 posts

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#421

Post by pm90 »

cookiecaper wrote: post #402
Angostura wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm interested in why you are commenting in here, rather than (say) Youtube or 4Chan. Might it be because the active moderation here allows for a certain type of discourse?

Yes. I don't intend to say that no one should be able to organize their forums or exclude some speech; doing so is a critical part of maintaining something functional and workable. We don't have to fling to one extreme or the other. There is a moderate position here. And remember, this is about the importance of free speech as a social principle . If we don't cherish our rights, they'll vanish. I'm not necessarily ad…

I think you are overestimating the importance of facebook in the lives of its users. Sure, there are people that depend on it pretty heavily, but I don't imagine that would be all of their users. Moreover, the younger generation is abandoning facebook in favor of other platforms like Snapchat. But I don't have the raw data to know which way the pendulum swings...

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#422

Post by baxtr »

So, the question is: What can we do as a community? Come on guys. We have probably many of the smartest people on this planet reading this shit here right now.

What can we do? What could be a cool tool, solution, initiative? Ideas anybody?!

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#423

Post by skybrian »

cookiecaper wrote: post #402
Angostura wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm interested in why you are commenting in here, rather than (say) Youtube or 4Chan. Might it be because the active moderation here allows for a certain type of discourse?

Yes. I don't intend to say that no one should be able to organize their forums or exclude some speech; doing so is a critical part of maintaining something functional and workable. We don't have to fling to one extreme or the other. There is a moderate position here. And remember, this is about the importance of free speech as a social principle . If we don't cherish our rights, they'll vanish. I'm not necessarily ad…

Sheer size can certainly be scary, but consider that Google and Facebook got where they are by excluding stuff people don't want.

Google has used page rank from the very beginning to show popular pages. Since then, there have been a zillion other teaks to search ranking. (Not to mention that Gmail's spam filtering was an attractive early feature.)

Facebook started out excluding people who didn't go to a particular college, and later, the friend graph helped people avoid communication with strangers.

More recently, Snapchat showed that auto-deletion of photos is something people really like, even if it's technically "impossible" to do perfectly securely.

So it's not just about big companies being in control. Filtering is a really popular feature. Companies that did it well attracted users and became big.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#424

Post by jstanley »

vixen99 wrote: post #148
jstanley wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All borders should be abolished. No human being has the right to tell any other human being where he can or can't go (with the exception of trespassing on private property, of course).

So you want to abolish the freedom for a group of people to decide how many and what kind of people should be able to take up permanent residence within their community? Good luck with that one. Is there a country anywhere that does that? I wonder that you stop at the family level! I suppose you do. If so, why?

I live in Bristol. The people of Manchester have no right to tell me I can't come and live in Manchester.

I live in England. Why can "the people" (although it is surely not the people: it is the government) of Australia decide that I can't come and live there?

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#425

Post by icebraining »

taway_1212 wrote: post #307
icebraining wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I understood why there isn't a move to reinstate border checks in the Schengen area. But there is a move. In fact, multiple countries have done so, although temporarily: https://euobserver.com/migration/130260 Thing is, border control isn't free; it may not be visible for many of us, but there are a lot of people reliant on the openness of our borders for their daily lives. Imagine having to pass a border chec…

> What if those migrants just came by boat anyway? What are we going to do, let'em drown? What's wrong with rescuing them and then shipping them back to the coast they sailed off from? If they're on international waters, there are no legal obligations to treat them as asylum seekers.

Is it practical? As far as I know, unless they're citizens, the countries of such coasts aren't obligated to accept them. And it's often not clear where they're actually from. Plus, what if they're from a war zone?

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#427

Post by vacri »

cookiecaper wrote: post #418
vacri wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ironically, rather than unifying mankind and increasing sympathy and understanding, we are using network technology to maximize comfort by crafting artificial "safe spaces" where patrons never even have to be exposed to thoughts they dislike. That's bad. This is a bad characterisation; it was much easier to ignore stuff you didn't like before the internet. The internet is also not to blame for politics - while it h…

They weren't able to dismiss people who resisted by doing the equivalent of "unfriend"ing them. If you are in the same physical space with someone, the only way you can enforce silence (rather than just pleading for it) is to leave or compel the property owner to exert force against the other guest. In the public square, no one can exert this force over complaints as petty as "I don't like what he's saying". Some typ…

You have a bizarre picture of the past if you think that people were forced to fraternise. Similarly, the advent of the internet doesn't mean that people no longer interact physically.

You say it's easier to remain close-minded, yet we are in a prosperous time with greater freedom across the board for all. Try being a minority fifty years ago, and see if you still think that people were more open-minded back then.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#428

Post by bjcy »

Stranger43 wrote: post #397
sanderjd wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the whole dodge that the first amendment only applies to the government is dangerous As a supporter of that "dodge", allow me to defend it (though I don't really disagree with your comment in general). Freedom of speech as a principle has a fundamental tension. One person's freedom to speak must be balanced with another person's freedom to exclude that speech from their private life. Private folks having the abilit…

The problem is that the your entire argument rest on the assumption that every individual have equal power, which is objectively not true if you allow for property to accumulate in the hands of a small elite. The central flaw of libertarianism is that it depend on property rights to essentially be worthless to work in the real world, as any scarcity allows for a libertarian dictatorship based solely on the idea that…

> The central flaw of libertarianism is that it depend on property rights to essentially be worthless to work in the real world, as any scarcity allows for a libertarian dictatorship based solely on the idea that property rights are sacred, and need to be protected by the state.

Could you reiterate this statement for me? I wasn't able to fully grok the meaning.

Edit: Spelling.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#429

Post by goodplay »

epmaybe wrote: post #242
goodplay wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed with your statement in general. I once added a [citation needed] to a non-controversial technical statement that was false by definition only to have the edit reverted. When I asked for an explanation, the editor replied that the tag "has no place on a highly visible page". I never participated after that point. People who have a lot of time or have been incentivised to edit wikipedia will always have the fina…

Couldn't you have gone above the editor? Like a moderator, or an administrator, regarding the edit? Not saying that what happened to you is fine, but if it does happen then you have to go further.

That's the problem, I wad through enough bureaucracy when dealing with government institutions in my day job. I just don't have the time, patience, nor desire to read through pages-worth of rules and policies and correspond with a string of people who may or may not be willing to help, just to have my edit persist. I gain nothing either way.
Post reply on HN