German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account • Hacker News Board

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#221

Post by Amezarak » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 2:24 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #204

Amezarak wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the full context of her comments. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/world/europe/germany-twit... > In a tweet on Sunday, the lawmaker, Beatrix von Storch, questioned the decision by the police in the western city of Cologne to put out a message in Arabic, as part of a multilingual campaign to promote the theme of this year’s New Year’s Eve festivities: “Celebrate — with respect.” The message was also posted i…

the government is looking into charging her for this statement. Where did you see this? From what I can tell, the government (public prosecutors) only said they received a bunch of complaints. Nowhere did I see they were looking into charging her - nor would that be possible without lifting her immunity.

> Ulf Willuhn, a spokesman for state prosecutors, said on Tuesday that his office had been alerted to Ms. von Storch’s statement by the Cologne police and was also looking into a statement of support for her, made by a leader of the party, Alice Weidel. As news of the investigation spread, private citizens filed dozens more complaints.

> Prosecutors must now decide whether there is sufficient evidence of criminal action to open a formal investigation that could lead to charges, Mr. Willuhn said. But before that step can be taken, Germany’s Parliament would have to lift immunity.

From the article I linked above.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#222

Post by seertaak » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 2:28 PM UTC

germanier wrote: post #211

norikki wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to that wikipedia article, the German law translates Volksverhetzung into English as "incitement to hatred". So no, saying that Germany has banned 'hate speech' is not an oversimplification chosen by the media. You are intentionally conflating politically incorrect opinions about immigration (aka 'hate speech') with child porn and violent threats.

Volksverhetzung is very precisely defined by decades of legal precedent and much narrower than what an English speaker would think of when hearing "hate speech". Just because translations made for the convenience of non-German speakers chose a specific translation doesn't mean that it captures the meaning with all attached connotations well. Two examples (without saying anything about the validity of the claim): " Re…

If you remove the second sentence in your example of Volksverhetzung, do you think it would still qualify?

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#223

Post by BearGoesChirp » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 2:29 PM UTC

wernercd wrote: post #166

danschumann wrote: post #57

The problem with hate speech laws are, it means you can't insult everyone equally. If you call someone stupid, they could accuse you of a crime, but you're not calling them stupid because of their race. And I want people who actually are racist to talk, so I know who I don't want to be friends with. If they're all keeping their racist opinions to themselves, I might waste a bunch of time being their friends. And I ca…

> I want people who actually are racist to talk, so I know who I don't want to be friends with. It's more important and wide than "I don't want to be their friends"... How can you attack ideas if they aren't brought out into the open? How can you convince the racist? Or the people that have those thoughts but don't mention them? They corner stone of freedom is discussing ideas. I want the most vile pieces of shit to…

There is also issues with what is discriminatory/hateful language.

If I point out that the vast majority of criminals are men, that is simple fact. If I suggest it might be because of something related to being male, few would call that hate speech and few would bring up alternatives such as bias in the legal system. Only when I get to the point of saying all males should be treated as criminals will I get significant push back of people saying that I'm wrong.

Now, replace gender with some other demographic, and people become much more hostile to my points, and I am considered to be dancing much closer to the line of hate speech.

What about if I have legitimate criticism? There are many legitimate criticisms of some sects of different religions. If I happen to speak to broadly, say using Christian or Protestant when I'm really talking about Calvinist, should that really count as hate speech? Or should someone ask if I'm really generalizing the larger group and give me a chance to qualify which subsection I'm speaking about?

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#224

Post by Amezarak » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

Mithaldu wrote: post #192

Amezarak wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is strongly incentivized to err on the side of caution (for them) by deleting in unclear cases. If they wrongly believe a tweet is legal, they are punished. If they wrongly believe a tweet is illegal, nothing happens. To pretend a company in this situation is not being legally forced to delete "protected" satire is sophistry. The only rational thing to do in that situation is delete all tweets anyone could po…

You're incorrect. They have no reason to fear punishment from a wrong call. For one, the law doesn't require deletion. They just have to make it publically inaccessible pending outcome of inspection. And if they're unsure about the legality they can punt it to another org and won't suffer consequences. In fact, the law even stipulates that the data must be retained for 10 weeks to allow further action.

> They have no reason to fear punishment from a wrong call.

If they make the wrong call, they face fines. The supreme arbiter of what is lawful and unlawful is not Twitter; it is the German courts, but Twitter is the one responsible for removing unlawful tweets, and Twitter is the one who is fined if they do not remove unlawful tweets promptly. Twitter is not fined if they wrongly remove lawful tweets. Especially (but not only because of) given the volume of tweets and reports, the only rational course of action for Twitter is to delete/block if there's the slightest chance a court somewhere might declare it unlawful.

Here is the full text of the law: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/netzdg/BJNR335210017.html

> For one, the law doesn't require deletion. They just have to make it publically inaccessible pending outcome of inspection.

I think everyone understands that, on the scale of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc., that deletion entails precisely that: making content publicly inaccessible, even if the company can hypothetically restore it. Not even on that scale: it's pretty typical to have a "deleted" flag in your database for content for normal web applications.

More to the point, supporters of the law have claimed over and over that it won't affect legitimate content, but here is exactly an example that the opponents of the law were talking about that we're commenting on right now.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#225

Post by seertaak » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 2:53 PM UTC

Grollicus wrote: post #66

dilap wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no dilema. It's just an excuse for control. Letting Nazis speak will not actually convert modern society into Nazis.

Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value.

I think the issue -- as some people see it -- is that it is possible to, in effect, suppress a debate about certain contentious issues. There is a rhetorical device by which statements critical of, say, uncontrolled immigration, are linked to extremists and nazis, from which there's only a small hop to hate speech (so ban).

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#226

Post by Mithaldu » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 3:15 PM UTC

Amezarak wrote: post #224

Mithaldu wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're incorrect. They have no reason to fear punishment from a wrong call. For one, the law doesn't require deletion. They just have to make it publically inaccessible pending outcome of inspection. And if they're unsure about the legality they can punt it to another org and won't suffer consequences. In fact, the law even stipulates that the data must be retained for 10 weeks to allow further action.

> They have no reason to fear punishment from a wrong call. If they make the wrong call, they face fines. The supreme arbiter of what is lawful and unlawful is not Twitter; it is the German courts, but Twitter is the one responsible for removing unlawful tweets, and Twitter is the one who is fined if they do not remove unlawful tweets promptly. Twitter is not fined if they wrongly remove lawful tweets. Especially (bu…

> legitimate content

Having seen the tweet in question i'm not sure it is legitimate content.

As for the rest: Eh, can't be arsed to try and argue more.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#227

Post by Tactic » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 4:02 PM UTC

King-Aaron wrote: post #167

danschumann wrote: post #57

The problem with hate speech laws are, it means you can't insult everyone equally. If you call someone stupid, they could accuse you of a crime, but you're not calling them stupid because of their race. And I want people who actually are racist to talk, so I know who I don't want to be friends with. If they're all keeping their racist opinions to themselves, I might waste a bunch of time being their friends. And I ca…

> If they're all keeping their racist opinions to themselves, I might waste a bunch of time being their friends I have several friends who I know hold some less-than-sociable opinions, and they do tend to keep them to themselves. I don't quite know how to frame what I'm about to say, but I feel it's equally dickish to think that becoming someone's friend is a "waste of time" just because you don't agree with their op…

To be fair being racist is more than an opinion, it demonstrates your character. It reveals part of who you are and the framework with which you deal with the world. I agree that it is valuable knowledge in determining who you want to create lasting bonds with.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#228

Post by yoz-y » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 4:07 PM UTC

Wait but... isn't this journal considered "newsworthy" and thus able to publish whatever they want? There is at least one person out there publishing hate speech in a non-satirical way and getting away with it on an almost daily basis.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#229

Post by icebraining » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 4:09 PM UTC

Amezarak wrote: post #221

icebraining wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the government is looking into charging her for this statement. Where did you see this? From what I can tell, the government (public prosecutors) only said they received a bunch of complaints. Nowhere did I see they were looking into charging her - nor would that be possible without lifting her immunity.

> Ulf Willuhn, a spokesman for state prosecutors, said on Tuesday that his office had been alerted to Ms. von Storch’s statement by the Cologne police and was also looking into a statement of support for her, made by a leader of the party, Alice Weidel. As news of the investigation spread, private citizens filed dozens more complaints. > Prosecutors must now decide whether there is sufficient evidence of criminal act…

As that excerpt says, they are merely analyzing the statements, which they obviously must do after receiving the complaints. Nowhere does it say they are planning on doing anything beyond that analysis.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#230

Post by everdev » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 4:31 PM UTC

nailer wrote: post #196

everdev wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can hate whatever pizza you want

Wouldn't that be racist against stuffed crust pizza? Why one idea and not the other? Are we allowed to dislike Christianity? Scientology? Libertarianism? Socialism? Capitalism? Cutting off dogs tails? If so, what makes Islam non dislikeable? Are you aware of the many ex Muslims and the harassment they receive? The people who've criticised Islam and been killed for it? Do you think declaring Islam non dislikeable help…

When you focus on certain groups you're probably missing the point.

There are Christian parents who have banned their child from returning home when they renounced religion.

And there are many Muslims who accept people after they renounce Islam.

Instead, probably better to say: When people harass someone who doesn't agree with them, I feel afraid for that person's safety. That's not racist and still honors your fear.

To just focus on Muslims doing this shows a bias and lumps many innocent people into a stereotype.