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

Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 170 posts

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#111

Post by jdoliner »

j2kun wrote: post #109
MollyR wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying we are in a civil war ? I dont want to believe it, but . . Republicans were shot at by an alt-left radical. Scalise was in the ICU. Another alt-left radical Clayton Carter murdered a GOP committee member in front of his wife. Mainstream Media is completely politicized An alt-right radical murdered Heather Heyer a protester. Today a missouri state senator Nadal called for the assasination of a sitting u…

"Alt-left" is a fabricated term that does not refer to a movement. It creates a false equivalency between white supremacists and people who protest them.

So would you describe the person who shot Scalise as mainstream left then?

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#113

Post by acdha »

jdoliner wrote: post #111
j2kun wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Alt-left" is a fabricated term that does not refer to a movement. It creates a false equivalency between white supremacists and people who protest them.

So would you describe the person who shot Scalise as mainstream left then?

There have always been deranged lunatics. The question is whether he was part of or influenced by a larger movement, which doesn't seem to be the case. Similarly, do you have anyone defending his actions the way some of the neo-Nazi groups have?

As a comparison, Timothy McVeigh was quickly condemned by just about everyone and is often used as an example of a lone wolf. This guy will be remembered as a [thankfully less successful] left-wing counterpart.

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#114

Post by acdha »

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #92

What's amazing is the same people who blog or tweet saying that it is right that these companies ban these organizations based on content are the same people who seem to believe they believe in net neutrality. These people also spend tons of time online tweeting about how some group is acting to get rid of net neutrality. So are you for or against net neutrality? Make up your own mind if you're going to be criticizin…

This seems backwards: network neutrality ensures that anyone is free to setup a host with whatever rules they want. If you treat the network as a neutral layer, there's less risk if a particular service chooses not to support something — whereas in a world of paid prioritization you'd have to worry about, say, paid prioritization or outright blocking as well as the other costs.

(This is one of the reasons I'm not a fan of Facebook's subsidized internet — the intentions can be pure but it's still unsettling to see the barriers to entry for a competitor)

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#116

Post by will_brown »

joelrunyon wrote: post #73
will_brown wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protected speech has nothing to do with private entities allowing you to use their platform to promote your message, it only curbs the government from prohibiting/punishing your speech. So for example you have every right to wear a jean jacket in court that says "fuck the draft" and the government can't prohibit or punish you for it (famous 1st amendment case) but a church can have you removed for wearing an article…

Here's where I addressed those concerns > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15042314

Unless I am mistaken that is the comment I replied to and it does not address the public vs private concern. Moreover, you are calling a private website a moral center for determining acceptable speech for exercising their right to censor their own website.

To extend the idea, I noticed you have a personal website linked in your bio, are you under moral obligation to allow other people to post hate speech to your website or allow anyone to post anything to your website? Do you feel you have complete control over the content posted to your website or does that make you some sort of moral censor and dictator of acceptable speech?

Edit: Your giving site may provide a better example, because presumably you feel you can pick a choose what charitable group(s) can join and receive funds through your platform, effectively limiting the speech of all the other programs you haven't allowed to join.

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#117

Post by nl »

leereeves wrote: post #30
joelrunyon wrote: post #10

Meanwhile twitter is being used to threaten assassinations - https://twitter.com/search?q=assassinate%20trump&src=tyah I get there's ugly stuff on the internet, but when did all the platforms decide to start being the moral center of determining what's acceptable speech. Hate speech is still protected speech (in the US anyways)[1] no matter how horrible it is. > A law that can be directed against speech found offensi…

They aren't the moral center. They're firmly on the left and banning their political opponents. Hate speech exists on all platforms and comes from both sides; it's only an excuse here.

This isn't really left vs right.

There's plenty on the right who are more than happy to condemn Nazis.

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#118

Post by nl »

axaxs wrote: post #62

Sorry to comment twice on a thread...but after thinking more, I really feel this is a dangerous precedent. The internet has been largely dominated by a few companies. I'd go as far as to call them nearly ubiquitous. When these companies start pushing political views, and start banning or otherwise blocking dissent, it becomes dangerous. What if, in retaliation, farmers of the Midwest banned shipments to California? S…

This is a sensible comment.

In March 2017 Foreign Policy magazine (which is known for boring political analysis) polled a set of national security experts, and the consensus likelihood of civil war was 30% within the next 15 years.

It's got worse since then. Civil leadership of the armed forces is weakening, states are repudiating federal laws, the Republican party no longer exists as a unified block.

[1] http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/28/what-are-the-chances-of-...

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#119

Post by cocktailpeanuts »

j2kun wrote: post #104
cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #92

What's amazing is the same people who blog or tweet saying that it is right that these companies ban these organizations based on content are the same people who seem to believe they believe in net neutrality. These people also spend tons of time online tweeting about how some group is acting to get rid of net neutrality. So are you for or against net neutrality? Make up your own mind if you're going to be criticizin…

How are they contradictory? The goal of net neutrality is to have physical internet lines be regulated in the same way that phone lines are: as a part of the communication infrastructure of the country. Is Google Play a fundamental part of the infrastructure of the country? I wouldn't even call Google search fundamental (or infrastructure at all, for that matter)!

"Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet must treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

And yes, google play IS a fundamental part of the infrastructure of not just america but the entire world, most Android users (excluding those who use samsung modified os) download apps through google play store. Google.com is different because people have the freedom to choose another search engine. If you're an android user you don't have an alternative.

Re: Alt-social network Gab booted from Google Play Store for hate speech

#120

Post by aoeusnth1 »

joelrunyon wrote: post #84
aoeusnth1 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These snotty replies are so insufferable. No, you did not address his reply in your original comment.

Hey man, I'm not trying to be snotty. I'm trying to explain what the "free speech" side of the argument is. I'm not saying his is invalid, or that he didn't bring up point, but I'm stating why there is concern from those concerned with free speech and "de-platforming." I don't think asking for a debate is "snotty" or "insufferable", but if I am, please let me know where I'm wrong :)

Linking to your own comment without adding anything implies the you don't need to dignify their comment with a response. That's not asking for debate, it's actively avoiding a debate while implying their commment has no substance, and they have limited reading comprehension.

That comes across as snotty and insufferable.

Post reply on HN