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

Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 433 posts

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#231

Post by Simon_says »

azernik wrote: post #229
dna_polymerase wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "getting it right" in free speech. Either you allow free speech or you don't, if you are keeping one controversial thing but kick out the other you gave up on free speech. You can't kick someone out because you think its right and claim allowing free spech.

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to violence, hate speech, and/or invasion of privacy. The absolutist conception of free speech in the US is an outlier.

If those activities are crimes in a country, then prosecute the crime. It shouldn't be up to a random middle-man like Patreon to be judge and jury and make those (sometimes very difficult) decisions. It's akin to my grocery deciding to not sell me an apple because I'm a suspected murderer. There are better and more formalized methods to deal with violations of social norms.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#232

Post by adventured »

quxbar wrote: post #154
dna_polymerase wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "getting it right" in free speech. Either you allow free speech or you don't, if you are keeping one controversial thing but kick out the other you gave up on free speech. You can't kick someone out because you think its right and claim allowing free spech.

"People have indeed falsely shouted "Fire!" in crowded public venues and caused panics on numerous occasions, such as at the Royal Surrey Gardens Music Hall of London in 1856, a theater in New York's Harlem neighborhood in 1884,[1] and in the Italian Hall disaster of 1913, which left 73 dead. In the Shiloh Baptist Church disaster of 1902, over 100 people died when "fight" was misheard as "fire" in a crowded church ca…

The classic example of shouting "Fire!" is in fact not a matter of free speech at all. It's an intentional attempt at physical harm, which falls entirely outside the realm of free of speech.

It's identical conceptually to walking up to someone and blasting an airhorn in their ear. That too is an act of physical violence, not free speech, and you're responsible for the consequences (such as hearing damage) just as with the act of shouting "Fire!".

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#233

Post by s73ver »

biggerbistro wrote: post #102
eropple wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably true. So we fight them. It stinks and it sucks, but it's on all of us to do so to the best of our ability and those of us who were dealt a more fortunate set of life's lottery balls (and I say this as an affluent, straight, white, cis American) have a duty to use our good fortune to help others.

Isn't considering yourself lucky for being white a somewhat racist viewpoint? Perhaps you have more in common than you thought.

The "if you acknowledge racism exists, then you're the real racist!" argument has never held water before.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#234

Post by azernik »

vetinari wrote: post #179
chrisoverzero wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sorry, but "we don't need evidence, our imagination is enough" is not anywhere near "very reasonable". The video literally shows clips of behavior. The common theme of the video is “manifest observable behavior”. The video explains how actions, not speech, are what broke the terms of service. I really recommend you watch it. (Odd use of quotation marks – you directly quoted me, but completely made up what Patreon s…

> The video literally shows clips of behavior. I see you are new to the game of presenting video clips out of context and manipulating the audience. > The common theme of the video is “manifest observable behavior”. The video explains how actions, not speech, are what broke the terms of service. I really recommend you watch it. (Odd use of quotation marks – you directly quoted me, but completely made up what Patreon…

I watched that response video. Basically, what he's saying is "these actions that endanger people in the immediate sense are justified". That standard is asking Patreon to make a political judgment. The creators in question were seen endangering others in their work. Period.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#235

Post by fweespeech »

nostrebored wrote: post #205
dragonwriter wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Her reason for banning, according to the company's letter was fundraising. That is certainly a type of speech. Fundraising to support a non-speech activity is not purely speech. e.g., if the activity is criminal, fundraising to support it is also criminal in virtually every jurisdiction on the planet, including those with the strongest free speech protections.

This is not necessarily true. I believe in the US, fundraising would make you an accessory, just as encouraging someone's criminal action where they have clear intent to commit a crime would be. Fundraising for legal actions is certainly speech, and the effort Southern was supporting was in accordance with international law.

> This is not necessarily true. I believe in the US, fundraising would make you an accessory, just as encouraging someone's criminal action where they have clear intent to commit a crime would be.

And now you understand why they booted Lauren Southern. Money is fungible and she fund raised for an activity that was legally dubious.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#236

Post by burkaman »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #218
sqeaky wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we need to live in the body of dog to understand "benevolence to dogs"?

Yes. Luckily we live in bodies that are almost exactly the same as dogs. The reason why you empathize with a dog more than an octopus is precisely because our bodies are similar. Do you have another theory as to why we empathize with dogs more than, say, a forest, or a hive of ants?

People also empathize with a dog more than an adult human: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10....

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#237

Post by nilved »

ARCarr wrote: post #121
nilved wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do, but I don't like supporting services that opt you in to spam automatically.

I don't see how getting an email about the person you're supporting is spam.

I'm not talking about those. I would view a Patreon creator's page and then get emails saying "are you sure you don't want to support xyz?"

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#238

Post by fvdessen »

scottLobster wrote: post #213
syshum wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Patreon is not a government body. Ok, and. Do you believe only governments are a threat to free speech? Free Speech is a concept that every person, every company, every government should work to up hold. While governments can and have been the source of censorship, that is not the only source. Today free speech is under massive assault not by Government but by Society at large, society it seems have lost all respec…

No it isn't, it's an exercise in property rights and a reminder that most of the "internet" as we know it, including this very board, is private property. Barring a legally binding contract or criminal activity, no one is under any obligation to protect the civil rights of those on their property. If I wanted to hold a "whites only" house party and turn away minorities at the door, I can do that. If I refuse to allow…

Can an American business serve "whites only" ? Are you advocating that American businesses should have the right to restrict service based on skin color ?

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#239

Post by _delirium »

azernik wrote: post #229
dna_polymerase wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "getting it right" in free speech. Either you allow free speech or you don't, if you are keeping one controversial thing but kick out the other you gave up on free speech. You can't kick someone out because you think its right and claim allowing free spech.

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to violence, hate speech, and/or invasion of privacy. The absolutist conception of free speech in the US is an outlier.

Even in the U.S. most corporate-run platforms are fairly restrictive, many more restrictive than Patreon. Speech on commercial platforms has a completely different set of norms in the U.S. than speech in government-controlled or public spaces. This has actually caused Patreon trouble in the past, because on some axes they're less restrictive than U.S. corporate norms, which has caused friction with other companies they deal with who want them to restrict their userbase more. For example they've had trouble with Paypal over allowing not-porn-but-still-NSFW Patreons on the platform, which violates Paypal's no adult content policy. I believe they worked around that by allowing those users to stay on Patreon but restricting them to take only CC payments and not Paypal payments.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#240

Post by azernik »

fvdessen wrote: post #111
paulgb wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which case are you referring to? Lauren Southern was literally attempting to block ships (thereby endangering life) so that goes beyond "speech" in my book.

Where did they say they wanted to block ships ? All I've seen is that they wanted to film & document the ONG's activities, to see if they are not engaging in human trafficking.

See https://youtu.be/YmcK6GvgVPs?t=3m27s, Patreon's presentation of evidence that they were blocking ships, and that Southern was actively involved. Note that this evidence is video that Southern herself published before she realized that these actions would endanger her own income stream, rather than just people in the ocean.
Post reply on HN