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

Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

thedailybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 153 posts

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#141

Post by hbosch »

P_I_Staker wrote: post #89
hbosch wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's OK to be inconsistent, because tech companies aren't governments and their rules aren't laws. They are allowed to control their platform however they want. Everyone is welcome to create their own "free-er" Twitter, Facebook, or Reddit.

I simply cannot agree with this logic. I'd compare this to saying, if you don't like TV censorship create your own channel. Don't like censorship in Hollywood? Simply open a major studio. I've been extremely critical of industry censorship elsewhere, so at least there's consistency. I don't like the MPAA telling me that female pleasure and homosexuality is worse than brutal gore and murder. I'm glad to see Alex John'…

Alex Jones, every day, talks about how he wants to personally kill and mutilate the elite global cabal of Jewish child-raping Democrat subhumans. Alex Jones is a violent, abhorrent, slanderous racist and peddler of distorted, hurtful propaganda.

Censorship, in small doses, can be good for society. You act like banning Alex Jones from Twitter is going to bring in Fahrenheit 451.

Like I said above: Alex Jones is bad for Twitters business. Bottom line. If you owned a business, and man routinely came into that business, every day, and shouted through his megaphone that he has video evidence that Michelle Obama is a transvestite hooker, would you not ban him from your property as well?

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#142

Post by GW150914 »

bachbach wrote: post #138
GW150914 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about persecution complexes is that those who have them will find persecution in anything, so it's kind of a waste of energy to worry about what might trigger those prone to thinking in such a way. Interestingly enough, that’s probably why Twitter feels comfortable ignoring the screams of outrage from the “this is censorship, and the internet is now dooooomed” crowd. When the only thing a group has to stand…

So as seems likely - suppose a schism opens up that pushes 'those people' off some platforms. The next step is to prevent DNS resolution working. I assume that like myself you would see that as a step too far. The problem is that the average millennial will not see a meaningful distinction between being blocked on plaform X and being prevented from using a protocol. There is a good chance of that happening I think -…

When the only thing a group has to stand on is a slippery slope of their own invention, ignoring them is a safe option.

Then you open with a slippery slope, “Suppose a schism opens... the next step...”

If that next step ever begins to materialize that would be the time to worry. Paralysis of decency and standards out of fear of a possible slippery slope is the miserable status quo, and not desirable. If this... then maybe that... and possibly later... isn’t an argument, it’s a fallacy.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#143

Post by bachbach »

GW150914 wrote: post #142
bachbach wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So as seems likely - suppose a schism opens up that pushes 'those people' off some platforms. The next step is to prevent DNS resolution working. I assume that like myself you would see that as a step too far. The problem is that the average millennial will not see a meaningful distinction between being blocked on plaform X and being prevented from using a protocol. There is a good chance of that happening I think -…

When the only thing a group has to stand on is a slippery slope of their own invention, ignoring them is a safe option. Then you open with a slippery slope, “Suppose a schism opens... the next step...” If that next step ever begins to materialize that would be the time to worry. Paralysis of decency and standards out of fear of a possible slippery slope is the miserable status quo, and not desirable. If this... then…

I reiterate: the average millennial does not make a distinction between a website service and a protocol.

If you make ban lists (the Silicon Valley companies are operating in near sync with each other) - then the public expectation won't just be that level of moderation/censorship within the walled garden - but also outside of it.

We're already at the point of materialization, Stormfront and a socialist organization I can't recall (World Socialist something) are prevented from using domain names and other services like turning up in Google Search, Cloudfront or GoDaddy - effectively banning them from the web. They have then migrated to more censorship resistant networks. Legitimacy to the political persecution (by liberals) narrative has solidified in far right and far left circles - even the ones who aren't affiliated with the two organizations - it is now taken for granted in parts of mainstream web, parts of Reddit that organizations like DW are outright lying.

The trend is consistent, and I don't believe either of those two organizations were accused of being law breakers - and next to go down it will be Alex Jones - a watershed moment and advertising for censorship resistant networks because Jones is more famous than either. In the case of Jones his brand will be bolstered by this. China and Russia will say he is a ideological refugee, a political dissident and they will be able to make a great argument for that.

This is how censorship looks like from the inside perspective - it's just that you're on the inside. The Chinese feel the same way when being told off by the West on the subject of reeducation camps. You'll scoff at that I expect - but at least the Chinese are able to say these people needed handling because of real terrorism and illegal activity - where you've nothing to stand on.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#144

Post by candiodari »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #105
candiodari wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He should've been kicked off long ago, but I fear that having this particular example be the "final straw" is only going to strengthen the alt-right's persecution complex. He is quite correct in the assessment that he's being persecuted on ideological grounds, unless he says "by the government". Why would you deny that ? And let's face facts here. If you held an alt-right viewpoint in San Francisco ... would you te…

"Neither Damore nor Eich deserved what happened to them, and it's disgraceful (and, of course, discriminatory/racist) that such things happened." I find it incredible how many people are more upset that those two got called out for their crappy views, and don't care at all what the actions of those two meant to the groups they targeted. Suppose you were a gay person working at Mozilla. How would you feel if you found…

I would like to reply that both your assumptions are wrong.

1) a state has the right to deny marriage on any grounds other than religion, race or nationality. So a state has the right to impose conditions on marriage that have to do with gender. Hell, the treaty almost says that a state has to impose some limits (without specifying what those limits are)

Article 16 UDHR (paragraph 3)

2) You DO NOT have the right to treat either adult different because of their political opinion EVEN IF IT DID VIOLATE HUMAN RIGHTS.

Article 1 and 2 UDHR

So not only did both of these individuals not violate human rights, you did.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#145

Post by [deleted] »

rhcom2 wrote: post #75
ArchTypical wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some insults are simply worse depending on who they are targeting. That's just an ideological step that is unwise to adopt. Taking that as a philosophy, anything you say is an intolerable statement because of who might get offended by it. This is antithetical to free speech as prior restraint. I don't know why anyone would subscribe to such a viewpoint. Every philosophy has boons and banes, but that doesn't mean th…

> anything you say is an intolerable statement because of who might get offended by it. That isn't what OP said though. I believe they were commenting that all words are not the same to every group of people and cultural and historical context matters.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#146

Post by astrodust »

have_faith wrote: post #135
astrodust wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A magazine would be great, as that's going to be the quickest way to bankruptcy. Will not shed a tear when Q makes Alex Jones look like a lame mainstream reporter and his audience, seeking the "truth", moves on from him to the latest, greatest purveyor of utter nonsense.

Q?

Yeah, go and punch that into Google and see what you get.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#147

Post by sheepmullet »

acdha wrote: post #139
MBCook wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already know certain people get special treatment. They were explicitly said it for the president. Jones certainly got it. I’m not sure who you’re talking about or what they did but I’ve always gotten the feeling that Twitter is very careful about messing with people who have any amount of power/fame. My position? Apply the rules to everyone who violates them no matter what. Twitter has shown that won’t do that. B…

They’re talking about Sarah Jeong, who’s been the subject of one of the more recent made-up controversies various right-wingers are using as an chance to bond over their shared identity as self-perceived victims: https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/8/8/17661368/sarah-jeong... The usual differences apply: she was making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric (e.g. joking about how white people can’t handle…

> made-up controversies

So making dozens of anti-white comments over a sustained period of time is just a joke?

Yet Alex Jones calling a specific person a rat without any generalization when that person has been targeting him for harassment and deplatforming is anti-Semitic?

This is why the right and center have a growing distrust for the left.

> making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric

Except right wing people don’t talk like that.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#148

Post by astrodust »

BayesStreet wrote: post #119
astrodust wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you the government? No, you can't. Are you a private individual or corporation? Yes, you can, that ability to moderate is protected free speech .

I would agree, but something to think about is Twitter and facebook govern the behaviour of the people around me more than my country's government, probably.

Twitter and Facebook are private companies and they're free to govern their platforms however they see fit provided they don't run afoul of discrimination laws.

Being a racist jackass is not a protected class of individual.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#149

Post by acdha »

sheepmullet wrote: post #147
acdha wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re talking about Sarah Jeong, who’s been the subject of one of the more recent made-up controversies various right-wingers are using as an chance to bond over their shared identity as self-perceived victims: https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/8/8/17661368/sarah-jeong... The usual differences apply: she was making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric (e.g. joking about how white people can’t handle…

> made-up controversies So making dozens of anti-white comments over a sustained period of time is just a joke? Yet Alex Jones calling a specific person a rat without any generalization when that person has been targeting him for harassment and deplatforming is anti-Semitic? This is why the right and center have a growing distrust for the left. > making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric Except right w…

> Alex Jones calling a specific person a rat without any generalization when that person has been targeting him for harassment and deplatforming is anti-Semitic?

Please don’t waste time assuming you’re talking to people who are completely unaware of his history and unable to check Wikipedia. If you want to defend Alex Jones, justify pizzagate, harassing the parents of massacre victims, or calling for armed uprising — i.e. the things which actually got him banned.

I know why you aren’t, of course, because it would make the false equivalence of trying to compare him to Jeong a complete farce, not to mention raising some uncomfortable questions about your shared values. You clearly like to present yourself as speaking for some relatively mainstream group but that’s incompatible with defending extremists like Jones.

> Except right wing people don’t talk like that.

You seriously expect everyone to have forgotten the blood and soil guys? The birthers and other racists — like the figurehead of your party?

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#150

Post by sheepmullet »

acdha wrote: post #149
sheepmullet wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> made-up controversies So making dozens of anti-white comments over a sustained period of time is just a joke? Yet Alex Jones calling a specific person a rat without any generalization when that person has been targeting him for harassment and deplatforming is anti-Semitic? This is why the right and center have a growing distrust for the left. > making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric Except right w…

> Alex Jones calling a specific person a rat without any generalization when that person has been targeting him for harassment and deplatforming is anti-Semitic? Please don’t waste time assuming you’re talking to people who are completely unaware of his history and unable to check Wikipedia. If you want to defend Alex Jones, justify pizzagate, harassing the parents of massacre victims, or calling for armed uprising —…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN