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

Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 565 posts

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#101

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

Nadya wrote: post #81
BryantD wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That common argument rests on norms established by millennia of relatively difficult communication. Best not to assume that the same people would come to the same conclusions today. For example, QAnon believers have not had their speech restricted. That conspiracy theory is as open as anything you could name. People have challenged it. It's still going. If you believe that challenging terrible ideas makes those who h…

>I am refuting the misconception that shedding light on bad ideas makes them go away. It doesn't make them go away. It allows them to be refuted - which hopefully stems at least some of the indoctrination that would otherwise occur only in private. If everyone I've ever known tells me vaccines are evil and I never am told or shown otherwise - I'll grow up continuing to think vaccines are evil. If you refuse to let me…

> If everyone I've ever known tells me vaccines are evil and I never am told or shown otherwise - I'll grow up continuing to think vaccines are evil

Understand that forcing vile ideas into obscurity and forcing people to only ever see vile ideas are not even close to being the same thing. You could even say that they're almost opposites.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#102

Post by dragonwriter »

lylecubed wrote: post #55
mrguyorama wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A number of other silly ideas that still hold traction and do actual damage despite being out in the open and actively refuted: Moon landing conspiracy Anti-vaccers/Vaccines cause autism Fad diets and "detox"s Anti-intellectualism Alex Jones (to the tune of millions of subscribers on his recently killed youtube) Global Warming etc

And who decides what is and isn't a silly idea? For 40 years, Americans were told by the government to believe that low fat high carb diets were the key to a healthy life. Not only is that not true, but it's never been true. There was never any evidence to support that stance. And yet, that was the official government policy and subsequently the commonly held belief for 40 years. "It ain’t what you don’t know that ge…

> And who decides what is and isn't a silly idea?

Any private, non-common-carrier party that is asked to relay it.

That is what freedom of speech/press means: people are free to evaluate content and decide for themselves whether to participate in spreading it.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#103

Post by tpush »

t3soro wrote: post #77
mrguyorama wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your understanding, did millions of jews die in the holocaust as part of a German plan to eradicate a race?

[flagged]

You missed this parts of the article:

> "Rosenberg does occasionally raise the issue of Jews. On March 28, 1941, he referred to the opening conference of his brainchild, the Institute for Research into the Jewish Question.

I regard the conference as a success,” Rosenberg wrote. “It is, after all, for the first time in European history, that ten European nations [were] represented at an anti-Jewish conference with a clear program to remove this race from Europe.

“And now this perception of a historic necessity is backed up by force.”

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#104

Post by will_dev_4_food »

anigbrowl wrote: post #73
lylecubed wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who decides what is and isn't a silly idea? For 40 years, Americans were told by the government to believe that low fat high carb diets were the key to a healthy life. Not only is that not true, but it's never been true. There was never any evidence to support that stance. And yet, that was the official government policy and subsequently the commonly held belief for 40 years. "It ain’t what you don’t know that ge…

And who decides what is and isn't a silly idea? This is a bad faith argument. I say so because the purported mechanism for such decision-making is actually spelled out upthread, and because this rhetorical question is then followed by a glaring fallacy of composition that seeks to draw a general conclusion from a single and highly over-simplified example.

It’s not a silly example but rather a common one. Many years ago it was only the fat that were attractive because they were the financially secure. Many believed that royalty were th only form of legitimate government, and colonial activity among “savages” was doing them all a favor.

Science, academics, and even personal experience vary with time. Not all variance that follows is truthful...some is exaggerated purposefully or accidentally, though most is considered good information at the time.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#105

Post by zokier »

smt88 wrote: post #10
makomk wrote: post #5

The posts in question are frankly pretty awful, but this does kind of put the lie to the idea that if you don't like FaceGoogleBook's censorship you can just set up your own website.

There are literally thousands of hosts other than Azure. Worst-case scenario, they could run their own servers or use a colocation service.

"Worst-case scenario" for them would be datacenters and colo providers refusing them service. They have ToS too, as does their network providers.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#106

Post by gammateam »

'alt-right' Twitter just sounds like a subculture on Twitter, not a separate network called Gab.

take note journalists... or take note devs that happen to work in open office plans next to the writers. lets not refer to things off of twitter as analogous to subcultures of twitter.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#107

Post by zokier »

ilove_banh_mi wrote: post #88
mcguire wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, there's no principle that requires an entity like Microsoft to support services it or its customers find repugnant.

What do you think of a bakery refusing to make a wedding cake for people they disapprove of?

Sounds perfectly fine by me. Of course they can be named&shamed, but legally I think you should be able to pick your customers (except in monopoly and some other special cases).

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#108

Post by coldtea »

will_dev_4_food wrote: post #89
braythwayt wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That argument works well in relatively small social groups where people generally can be relied upon to act in good faith, and where there are social disincentives to clinging to bad ideas after they have been refuted. When you have a small group with social bonds, you don't have to worry about a bad actor constantly repeating their already-refuted arguments to people who haven't heard the refutation. But when you ha…

When you say it’s like this one way but not the other, you have conceded to relativism. You have basically said there is a time and place for stealing someone’s wallet, and that acting as a moral agent in society can be suspended under the right conditions.

Is that a valid argument though? Of course things should be judged on a case by case basis, and not on dogmatic one size fits all rules.

Even courts take context into account for the same action (e.g. whether a murder was in cold blood or premeditated, whether someone stole because they were hungry or just greedy, etc).

And, yes, "there is a time and place for stealing someone’s wallet", as well.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#109

Post by dragonwriter »

CM30 wrote: post #86

This sort of thing illustrates the biggest issue with web hosting, domain registrars and the internet's infrastructure in general; everything is privately owned by companies who get unlimited rights to decide who and what they want to host. The solution is to require all hosting and domain companies to act as utilities, and require neutrality in regards to any content that's legal. They're not private forums or homes…

> Why do/did ISPs have to deal with net neutrality while large hosting companies and registrars get free reign?

Because ISPs are, because of infrastructure (access to and across property, or access to scarce spectrum) requirements, naturally sharply limited, but anyone who connects to an ISP can host content.

Post reply on HN