'Anti-meme law' could see Mexicans jailed for posting insulting images

Post by PurpleBoxDragon » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 7:41 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #6

zaroth wrote: post #3

Is there a defining feature of this (or other) cyber bullying laws that make them antithetical to freedom of expression and the tools of oppressive regimes, rather than laws which promote more civil and effective discourse in the public sphere? I want to say trolling is somewhat like obscenity—in that you know it when you see it—but that is a deeply unsatisfying response when so much discourse online is so polarized.…

> in that you know it when you see it I would contend that one takeaway from companies like Facebook is that this phrase doesn't actually hold up all that well on a global Internet. Facebook originally classified breast-feeding as explicit. At the time there was actual controversy about whether or not it fit into that category (public perception now is mostly that it didn't). Facebook's shift from "no pornography" to…

Post by dvtrn » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 8:06 PM UTC

PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #21

danShumway wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in that you know it when you see it I would contend that one takeaway from companies like Facebook is that this phrase doesn't actually hold up all that well on a global Internet. Facebook originally classified breast-feeding as explicit. At the time there was actual controversy about whether or not it fit into that category (public perception now is mostly that it didn't). Facebook's shift from "no pornography" to…

There is an underlying assumption that a given image has a certain property. I don't think it does. I think the property is based on the user viewing it. That's why an innocent silly image proud parents may send to grandparents is at the same time an image that you don't want to be in the possession of someone with less innocent thoughts. It isn't that the image is right or wrong. It is that different people will see…

Post by dvtrn » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 8:22 PM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #24

dvtrn wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep saying 'property', do you mean 'propriety'or are you literally speaking of the ownership of images when uploaded to Facebook? Just asking if in the interest of other readers who come along because at first I couldn't grok the connection between how one feels about certain imagery and retaining ownership of one's uploads.

Your parent comment is using 'property' in the second sense of the word ([QUALITY]) given here: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/property > a quality in a substance or material, especially one that means that it can be used in a particular way It's also sense 1a given here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/property > a quality or trait belonging and especially peculiar to an individual or…

Post by KozmoNau7 » Fri, Oct 05, 2018, 5:55 AM UTC

tracker1 wrote: post #12

zaroth wrote: post #3

Is there a defining feature of this (or other) cyber bullying laws that make them antithetical to freedom of expression and the tools of oppressive regimes, rather than laws which promote more civil and effective discourse in the public sphere? I want to say trolling is somewhat like obscenity—in that you know it when you see it—but that is a deeply unsatisfying response when so much discourse online is so polarized.…

There's no right to "more civil and effective discourse in the public sphere" and while I'm not an apologist for assholes, the freedom to offend is essential in terms of those in power responding to the populace at large. Yes, some individual might be bullied, and if they want to constrain it to "those not serving in public office, management in a government position, or celebrity status" I might be willing to consid…

Post by KozmoNau7 » Fri, Oct 05, 2018, 7:58 AM UTC

SamReidHughes wrote: post #28

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom to offend, hell yes. But there is an issue when someone is directly inciting to hatred and violence against targeted groups or individuals. That sort of betavior needs to be acted against. The problem then is that the hatemongers actively try to skirt as close as they possibly can to the line without crossing it, with dogwhistle terms and other tricks. I don't have a perfect solution, and I don't think we'll…

You should directly incite hatred towards groups that deserve it.