I know it is flagged but I want to thank the mods for not truly killing it. It was mostly civil. The mods were pretty decent, and deserve our thanks.
For the most part, the comments were pretty good too. I read them all. ;-)
Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
191–200 of 276 posts
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#192Twitter has banned over 350,000 ISIS accounts in the last year or two, and that's happened without Hacker News noticing, as far as I can tell. There's not any stories about it that come up in HN search with as many points as this has now. How is this situation different?
I'll tell you why. Nobody who isn't an ISIS member has ever been called an ISIS member. However the favorite tactic of American left lately has been calling anyone who they disagree with a Nazi. For example most people are probably politically to the right to the likes of Anthony Fantano or Laci Green. And yet both of them have been unironically branded Nazis, as a quick Twitter search will confirm.
So yeah, if you haven't been already, somebody's probably going to brand you a Nazi at some point and call for your banning from every social platform, no matter how "woke" you think you are. It's just a fact of life.
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are your morals the ones that deserve free speech?
Because wanting to own other humans, killing people because of their race, gender or sexual orientation are not morals.
> wanting to own other humans, killing people because of their race, gender or sexual orientation are not morals.
So what's your stance on Islam?
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take a hard, deep and pondered look at what you wrote.
I love that there are people that think of Nazis as an academic expression group, instead of as a militant organization. These people have NO idea...
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments? You're flamebaiting to the point of trolling. (No, the mods are not Nazis.)
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#195Twitter has banned over 350,000 ISIS accounts in the last year or two, and that's happened without Hacker News noticing, as far as I can tell. There's not any stories about it that come up in HN search with as many points as this has now. How is this situation different?
I'll tell you why. Nobody who isn't an ISIS member has ever been called an ISIS member. However the favorite tactic of American left lately has been calling anyone who they disagree with a Nazi. For example most people are probably politically to the right to the likes of Anthony Fantano or Laci Green. And yet both of them have been unironically branded Nazis, as a quick Twitter search will confirm. So yeah, if you h…
> I'll tell you why. Nobody who isn't an ISIS member has ever been called an ISIS member.
I do seem to recall a certain presidential candidate calling Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama founders of ISIS...
Painting all Muslim or even brown people as ISIS or terrorists is a pretty common rhetorical tactic of the right.
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But, they still deserve to express themselves freely. Um, why. What makes you think this. If someone's opinions are stupid and abhorrent, why should they not experience an immediate and firm response, in ban-hammer form. Why do you want to give ignorant idiots a platform to spread their ignorant idiocy to other ignorant idiots (and e.g. provoke easily influenced mentally ill idiots who might want to drive cars into…
Because we as a society have decided even the least among us deserve a base amount of human rights and freedoms and those aren't taken away without due process in a just society. I don't expect to change your mind. It's okay. I'm just really, really pro human rights. I've seen places with massive deprivations of rights. That's not okay.
> Because we as a society have decided even the least among us deserve a base amount of human rights and freedoms and those aren't taken away without due process in a just society.
Basically, we're pandering to the mediocre. I don't think we should be doing this.
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But, they still deserve to express themselves freely. Um, why. What makes you think this. If someone's opinions are stupid and abhorrent, why should they not experience an immediate and firm response, in ban-hammer form. Why do you want to give ignorant idiots a platform to spread their ignorant idiocy to other ignorant idiots (and e.g. provoke easily influenced mentally ill idiots who might want to drive cars into…
Because we as a society have decided even the least among us deserve a base amount of human rights and freedoms and those aren't taken away without due process in a just society. I don't expect to change your mind. It's okay. I'm just really, really pro human rights. I've seen places with massive deprivations of rights. That's not okay.
> Because we as a society have decided even the least among us deserve a base amount of human rights and freedoms
And people who advocate against that (like Nazis, racists, homophobes, misogynists, transphobic, etc.) don't deserve a voice.
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question is, access to what? Access to encyclopedic knowledge? Sure. Access to academic literature? Would definitely be a net positive. Access to the ramblings of every human in existence? Not sure why this would be so necessary. Quick edit to add: anything that requires instantiation to justify said "right" doesn't seem like it vibes well with the definition of the word "right." For instance, how could the right…
So, we have a starting point. Now, would you then agree that the primary purpose of a networked group of computers is the exchange of information? If you will agree to that, will you also agree that communication is information? If you will agree to that, and to the general concept of the freedom of expression, as an ideal to aspire to and not just a government restriction, would you then agree that even the shitties…
So if you agree that the providers of service on the internet are under no obligation to provide a soapbox for everyone who signs up, what do you recommend that that look like should one be established?
A pretty common sentiment is that you neuter trolls when you remove any chance for anonymity, i.e., you put their reputation on the line. I would be happy to belong to a "free speech-oriented zone" on the internet that required real-life verification. Then people wouldn't be so quick to spread virulent, violent ideologies in such a space. IMO this provides a secondary effect, namely that people would stop taking so seriously those areas where anonymity is provided. Perhaps the interactions can be strongly weighted toward local ones, to provide more accountability. Such a platform would need to be free from any sort of money transactions, especially Facebook's current business model.
Furthermore, empathy has nothing to do with advocacy. The ingredient missing when comparing refugees with white nationalists is that of the fundamental power imbalance. One is certainly free to express empathy for both, but tuning the narrative to equivocate people who are being exterminated with their exterminators is pretty dishonest. Your moral obligation (imo) when presented with people who are being systematically denied requirements for life is to spread and advocate for their survival. Notice that white nationalists are only being challenged on the lines of "liberty" whereas refugees are being challenged on the lines of "life." The DoI says it best, and puts them in a specific order not haphazardly, but deliberately: life comes first (and thus the removal of threats to it), then liberty, then the pursuit of happiness.
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#199Twitter has banned over 350,000 ISIS accounts in the last year or two, and that's happened without Hacker News noticing, as far as I can tell. There's not any stories about it that come up in HN search with as many points as this has now. How is this situation different?
I'll tell you why. Nobody who isn't an ISIS member has ever been called an ISIS member. However the favorite tactic of American left lately has been calling anyone who they disagree with a Nazi. For example most people are probably politically to the right to the likes of Anthony Fantano or Laci Green. And yet both of them have been unironically branded Nazis, as a quick Twitter search will confirm. So yeah, if you h…
> Nobody who isn't an ISIS member has ever been called an ISIS member.
Pause for a moment to consider how dumb such an easily falsifiable statement is before posting it to HN.
Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content
#200Clearly the solution is to corralle all fascists onto one big fenced-in echo chamber. What could go wrong?