In at least a few cases most of terrorism's damage to a society is from the auto immune response.
Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
261–270 of 398 posts
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Racism? Ok nobody's really going to bat an eye at that disappearing. Violence and hatred though? You've got this all backwards. We should be most concerned about censorship of political beliefs, however wrongheaded they are.
How can you call racism a political belief?
I don't know. Racism certainly helped Zionists build the state of Israel. Perhaps more people should be racist so they can found and enjoy their own private Zion.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#263This is how extremism spreads: 1. A Reasonable Position is expressed, in this case - 'Nazi's are very bad'. The Reasonable Position often involves an Enemy that must be stopped. Most reasonable people will agree with the Reasonable Position. 2. The Reasonable Position becomes the overriding factor in any situation that involves it. All other factors and considerations are dwarfed by it and forgotten. 3. Because the R…
Some examples would help here. Reading this did not bring any real world situations to mind for me.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reddit is particularly bad. I'm glad there's a place like Hacker News where people who disagree can still speak to one another civilly.
Here's my comment from the Cloudflare thread, sitting at -4. > But what's the end game? Do service providers have to morally support those who they provide service to? Because that's how things are looking. And what do you know. That's exactly what's happening.
I don’t think that service providers have to suppport them. Just not find them morally entirely repugnant. There's quite a lot of ground between those two points.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#265Please don't flag this submission, fellow users, there's already been one direct from the EFF even when it was at number one and one hour.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reddit is particularly bad. I'm glad there's a place like Hacker News where people who disagree can still speak to one another civilly.
Here's my comment from the Cloudflare thread, sitting at -4. > But what's the end game? Do service providers have to morally support those who they provide service to? Because that's how things are looking. And what do you know. That's exactly what's happening.
Someone in that thread, unironically, said that Google etc. had to allow Nazi's to use their services. And then immediately said "Whatever happened to "Don't be evil"?".
Apparently the concept that providing your services to Nazi's could be thought of as evil totally escaped their thoughts.
It seems like quite a lot of people have deeply internalized the opinion that "Free Speech" is an unalloyed good, and are confused by anyone who sees this as a matter of shades of gray.
I'd argue, the people looking at things in black and white are the ones' being ridiculous here. Is child porn free speech? Is a direct threat free speech? Is copyright infringment? etc. No matter how hardcore a free speech advocate you find, there's going to be a line for them. But apparently anyone who draws their line one step to the side of that is evil and/or stupid because that is the point where the slippery slope starts, conveniently just to the side of their own line, which is on firm and solid ground.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
So true. I had to create a separate Reddit account to have these discussions about internet freedom and refusing service because people assume I'm a white supremacist / Nazi. I'm not, I just think it opens up some interesting discussion as to what we can or can't discriminate against.
> "I'm not, I just..." There it is again. Wow, this is a really interesting social phenomenon we're seeing.
It’s not really that interesting, it’s a normal human conversational technique.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
So true. I had to create a separate Reddit account to have these discussions about internet freedom and refusing service because people assume I'm a white supremacist / Nazi. I'm not, I just think it opens up some interesting discussion as to what we can or can't discriminate against.
> "I'm not, I just..." There it is again. Wow, this is a really interesting social phenomenon we're seeing.
It’s not really that interesting, it’s a normal human conversational technique.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reddit is particularly bad. I'm glad there's a place like Hacker News where people who disagree can still speak to one another civilly.
On occasion I have the impression that all my recent comments have been downvoted by 1 in a short span of time. Not that HN karma matters, but it's very well possible that that is already going on.
Yep. There are a lot of HNers who abuse the voting system and leave no traces (no arguments, no reasons). It's quite a childish behavior.
The only civic discussion forum I know of is the extropy chat email list.
Re: Google's stance on neo-Nazis 'dangerous', says EFF
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, when we're at a place where asking where someone is from is considered an example of white supremacy, then it seems we need to couch everything we say with strained deference to social justice. Those are the times we're in, and I blame the left for its obsessive dismantling of our language.
See here's a great example of why I prefaced my message. Sorry but I'm lacking in either English language skills or politics but I haven't got a clue what you're saying. I'm ill-equipped to respond to this sort of reply. I'm not even sure what side of the fence you're debating for here. Now imagine if it was filled with accusations of being a racist, I'd probably just be curled up in a ball under my desk waiting for…
I couldn't even imagine how stressful it must be to enter into this kind of conversation when English isn't your first language. I feel for you.
What I meant was that the meaning of terms like "white supremacist" and "racist" has changed dramatically in recent years. To the point where it's very difficult to speak clearly about these types of things.