Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I used to have a nazi symbol on my car just to rile people up. No healthy person does this "just to rile people up." This is profoundly fucked behavior, and in a sane society it does, and should, lead to ostracizing. Actions have consequences.
If you have a whole class of people who have every hour of the day to nanny and harass other people - to rile them up- with any means possible, seems like a good cause. Bonus Points if you put a Hammer and Sickle right next to them. Creepy Thought-controll-freaks of all nations united- in outrage. My man.
Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
71–80 of 229 posts
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
The NetzDG (which the article is about) exhaustively lists applicable statutes. Among them is Volksverhetzung, which is what is referred to here as hate speech, which is wildly inaccurate. Algolia says: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13039422#13043027 Here is the full text of the law in question: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/netzdg/BJNR335210017.html (and here is a legally non-binding English translation:…
> Who does one of the following in a way apt to disturb/destroy public peace/harmony agitate against national/racial/religious or ethnic group, or against parts of the public or against private persons due to their belonging to a recognized group / part of the public, in order to incite hate or violence. attacking the human dignity of or defames or libels. - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13039422#13043027 Read…
So the intention of the law is to protect the victims of the violence before the public incitation can reach a point where they become victims. Because that's what happened during the Third Reich in Germany on a large scale (and it's still happening everywhere on the world).
In other words, your personal freedom (of free spech) ends where it starts to violate the personal freedom of other people (bodily harm via a third party). That's different from the American view, which somehow has glorified free spech as an absolute virtue, and doesn't care about negative consequences.
So this law is not about violence at all (which is also punishable, by other, very different laws). This law is about public behaviour. And if a case comes before a court, the court won't have to define "hate", the court will have to decide "is this public behaviour which can serve as incitation to violence against others". And in a case like "seven people were beat to death in India after a false viral message on Faceback", it's probably pretty easy to decide. In other cases, it will be harder, but that's what courts are for.
And a big problem of course is that the internet is blurring the distinction between public and private: Before the internet, you'd need to print and distribute flyers, or manage to get an article in a newspaper, or book a slot on TV. That's costly and not open for everyone. Now, you can just write a message on Facebook at no cost at all, and millions can read it.
The law has to catch up with this problem somehow, to protect the victims. In what way the law needs to be modified to deal with it remains to be seen; but it should be obvious by now that the big actors like Facebook have no interest in dealing with this problem on their own, without prodding.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
You really shouldn't blame the victim just because you've been reading more news stories than him. It's the sort of thing I might have done when I was younger. I grew up trusting authorities and them always being reasonable and I would never have imagined Germany was such a bizarrely brutal place. People often joke with the workers they have to interact with. I've done that before. It's human nature. I used to have a…
> You really shouldn't blame the victim Point is, he's not a victim, he's a criminal and has received his well-deserved punishment. > you've been reading more news stories than him. When you go to another country, it is your responsibility to follow their laws. Ignorantia legis non excusat. >I grew up trusting authorities and them always being reasonable and I would never have imagined Germany was such a bizarrely br…
Are you actually in support of rule of law no matter what, or is it just this law you like? For example, are you OK with China executing Falun Gong members? Are you OK with ISIS killing gay people (it's the law of Islam!)? Are you OK with slavery as long as it's legal? Or are you just angry about Nazis especially out of all the other horrible groups in history for some reason? What about the Romans? They were pretty brutal - do you want to destroy the property of people who write roman numerals and write Latin phrases on things? Your extreme reaction doesn't make sense to me.
> lack the adequate character to safely operate a vehicle
It has nothing to do with safety. I grew up playing Wolfenstein 3D and watching the History channel. Nazi symbols were completely normal and everywhere. It was in no sense a crime or an indication that you're so mentally ill that you're going to crash your car.
> No. You had Nazi symbolism on your car because you are likely someone who agrees with the ideology. This also reflects in the kind of people you hang around with.
Please don't make personal judgments. I explained my reason.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
You really shouldn't blame the victim just because you've been reading more news stories than him. It's the sort of thing I might have done when I was younger. I grew up trusting authorities and them always being reasonable and I would never have imagined Germany was such a bizarrely brutal place. People often joke with the workers they have to interact with. I've done that before. It's human nature. I used to have a…
> I used to have a nazi symbol on my car just to rile people up. No healthy person does this "just to rile people up." This is profoundly fucked behavior, and in a sane society it does, and should, lead to ostracizing. Actions have consequences.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depending on the type of hate speech in Germany, you can get thrown in prison for up to 5 years.
Thats true. One of my ex classmates went first time abroad, and upon leaving zoll (german border) he told officer “heil hitler” out of pure excitement and probably too many historical movies watched (is there anything else to watch that is german made?). No amount of explanations was sufficient. He got 3 months behind bars and 10 years ban to visit germany. That was in 2007. I assume now its even worse.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish the United States had that law, instant impeachable offense for our president. Especially the insulting part, he seems to need to insult others in order to breathe.
[flagged]
This is of course not how hate speech laws actually work, they're not a criticism shield.
> 800 pound fine for training a dog wrong
No, the fine was for posting a video which contained the phrase "gas the jews" used repeatedly in a deliberately offensive manner. http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meecha...
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#77Germany acts to clamp down on free speach, learning from its own history of clamping down on free speech under both the communists and the nazis. They are even hiring former stasi people to do it. http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/17/german-govt-hires...
In practice he's right because eventually it will be used to silence valid criticism against the state.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You really shouldn't blame the victim Point is, he's not a victim, he's a criminal and has received his well-deserved punishment. > you've been reading more news stories than him. When you go to another country, it is your responsibility to follow their laws. Ignorantia legis non excusat. >I grew up trusting authorities and them always being reasonable and I would never have imagined Germany was such a bizarrely br…
You obviously know that it's a crime in Germany. The parent's friend obviously didn't. Are you actually in support of rule of law no matter what, or is it just this law you like? For example, are you OK with China executing Falun Gong members? Are you OK with ISIS killing gay people (it's the law of Islam!)? Are you OK with slavery as long as it's legal? Or are you just angry about Nazis especially out of all the oth…
That doesn't mean the law is okay but the country is fully free to punish you as they see fit.
> Nazi symbols were completely normal and everywhere.
Not here. Outside of certain exceptions, don't go waving around Nazi symbols in the country that to this day regrets this part of history.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish the United States had that law, instant impeachable offense for our president. Especially the insulting part, he seems to need to insult others in order to breathe.
a) why must US politics be interjected into everything? b) I would rather the US have free speech instead of punishing thought crimes.
Re: Germany Acts to Tame Facebook, Learning from Its Own History of Hate
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no new "hate speech law". There's only new law that punishes sites for failing to remove content that was already illegal. For this they have up to 24 hours, or a week if it is a more complex matter. That article generally misrepresents German laws, making them seem more draconian than they actually are. For instance displaying a Swastika is perfectly legal if you don't "objectively" use it to "promote (the)…
> displaying a Swastika is perfectly legal if you don't "objectively" use it to "promote (the) national socialism". It seems that only applies if your work falls clearly within a few categories of exceptions. For example, Wolfenstein, a game about a Jewish commando fighting against the Nazis, was censored in Germany to comply with the law. > "In Germany, we've removed all Nazi symbols and references. Unlike films and…
Art, sciences and education are obviously exempt from these rules and while many pretty much assumed games to be art a recent court confirmed that games would be ruled as art.
The reason why Wolfenstein was censored is because of the USK, the board behind age ratings in germany, which has in the past been rather strict with nazi symbolism, regardless of context. They've softened up a lot and would wave through games with nazi symbolism like the newer Wolfenstein titles, however publishers don't want to take the chances of having to reapply for rating and simply already submit a censored version before it even hits their desks.