A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming • Hacker News Board

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#261

Post by 8note » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 8:55 AM UTC

jesssse wrote: post #159

archagon wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totalitarianism is gaining power right now through bad actors operating under the cloak of free speech. The bigger their communities get, the more they infect the communities around them with their hatred and lies. This should be blindingly obvious if you’ve been online for more than a couple of years. Your mechanism against totalitarianism will lead you straight into a dictatorship.

> Totalitarianism is gaining power right now through bad actors operating under the cloak of free speech. I do not understand this assertion. The way I see it, Free Speech is an antidote against totalitarianism, in contrast to Censorship, which is a tool of totalitarianism.

ah, so that's how Hitler was beaten? everyone just started talking and the NAZIs just dissapeared?

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#262

Post by 8note » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:00 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #212

ubernostrum wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of Free Speech is to enable all sides of any issue to have their say And that freedom includes the freedom to say "I don't want to be associated with you". Any "anti-deplatforming" is, of necessity, forced unwilling speech. Which is sort of the opposite of what "free speech" people should be standing up for. If someone doesn't want to lend you their soapbox, the solution is not to put a gun to their h…

Any "anti-deplatforming" is, of necessity, forced unwilling speech. Which is sort of the opposite of what "free speech" people should be standing up for. No, the "relaying" or "transmission" argument is just a dishonest gambit in 2018. Only idiots believe YouTube thinks everything some YouTuber might say on their own channel. Should AT&T have had the right to cut off phone calls containing speech they didn't like? Th…

YouTube is a publisher, and acts with editorial control.

Right now, they're emphasizing Indian content. it's they're freedom to downplay Western content to get broader appeal to an Indian audience

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#263

Post by jstanley » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:03 AM UTC

> Does this mean that if Zerohedge, or Black Lives Matter, two of our clients from opposite ends of the political spectrum, post something, or even if one of their users posts something, that is beyond the pale, then we have to worry about having our finances cut off?

> I know as “the DNS guys” we have a near pathological aversion to single-points-of-failure, but it’s not a stretch to come to the conclusion for any business that it’s not an acceptable risk to have that possibility just looming there and to do nothing about it.

> That means we will now be looking for backup payment processors.

FWIW, this is exactly what Bitcoin does well: uncensorable payments with no single points of failure. And, by way of anecdata, I currently pay for domain names in Bitcoin already (from gandi).

People buying domain names are probably one of the best demographics to have if you want to take Bitcoin as they are likely to be technically savvy.

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#264

Post by 8note » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:04 AM UTC

dvtrn wrote: post #101

mlillie wrote: post #2

This reeks of both-sides-ism and enablement. "Where does it stop?" is the same slippery slope garbage peddled by #HimToo and #BlueLivesMatter acolytes. But even engaging with the question at face value, the answer is very simple, and the author of this piece didn't try very hard if he couldn't find someone who is able to answer it. In fact, the best answer was given by Karl Popper in 1945. > In order to maintain a to…

This reeks of both-sides-ism and enablement It's funny you take this view, as fatigued as I imagine you probably feel about, as you're calling it "both-sides-ism"-I like to imagine there are probably other people out there just as fatigued with watching "both sides" act like neither has some kind of fringe-manifested baggage or serious, fundamental issues that need to be brought to the table and reconciled. Hate to b…

I for one, only see one side shooting up synagogues, and locking children in cages

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#265

Post by 8note » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:14 AM UTC

prepend wrote: post #206

evrydayhustling wrote: post #152

Reading this article is like watching someone beat the ocean with a stick. What would it look like for an "anti-deplatforming" initiative to succeed? All ideas have equal access to all platforms? Just the big ones? The objective is so poorly formed, it's not even wrong. A platform's identity and ability to attract an audience are determined by the activities they accept / cultivate, not vice versa. Infowars wanted to…

“A platform's identity and ability to attract an audience are determined by the activities they accept / cultivate, not vice versa.” I think this is a really good point, but it’s precisely why platforms that are content neutral are optimal for creative and productive exchange of ideas. Reality is a platform. The universe allows all us atoms to zip around. If it consciously tried to optimize based on shifting morals t…

The basic infrastructure is there regardless.of whether you can access the internet. People will still have eyes and ears and can walk to each other, just like they always do.

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#266

Post by wisty » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:16 AM UTC

While Americans seem obsessed with defining "free speech" as being exactly the same thing as the 1st Amendment, it might help to ask exactly why the 1st Amendment is a good idea.

JS Mill argued that censorship is wrong on a rights basis, that it leads to bad ideas being unchallenged, and it leads to people not being able to understand the reason why ideas are rejected. If censorship by a government is harmful, how is deplatforming by a near-monopoly different? I suspect some left-wingers argue this in a hypocritical way, because they think it will "trigger the conservatives" to force them to attack the actions of private companies, but this is hardly a good argument.

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#267

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:18 AM UTC

kmooney wrote: post #3

> We run the risk that the act of deplatforming can become as extreme as the hate speech it seeks to banish. Let us cross that bridge when we get to it.

[deleted]

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#268

Post by 8note » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:19 AM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #52

mlillie wrote: post #2

This reeks of both-sides-ism and enablement. "Where does it stop?" is the same slippery slope garbage peddled by #HimToo and #BlueLivesMatter acolytes. But even engaging with the question at face value, the answer is very simple, and the author of this piece didn't try very hard if he couldn't find someone who is able to answer it. In fact, the best answer was given by Karl Popper in 1945. > In order to maintain a to…

> #HimToo I haven't heard of this specifically, but the #MeToo movement bothers me greatly, because it implies that we suddenly learned you needed consent for sex; like it was some new revelation. If you look at CDC numbers, just as many men are assaulted sexually as women, but yet the #MeToo movement felt very one directional and didn't talk about assault inclusively of all people. The #BelieveWomen campaign actuall…

> I haven't heard of this specifically, but the #MeToo movement bothers me greatly, because it implies that we suddenly learned you needed consent for sex; like it was some new revelation

it's true though; it's largely in response to somebody bragging about not getting consent being elected to the highest office of the US.

Without it, Hollywood would still be thinking sexual assault is just the norm, and women have to accept it if they want to move their carear forward

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#269

Post by thinkingemote » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:19 AM UTC

StuntPope wrote: post #88

throwawaysea wrote: post #80

Why is this article being flagged? From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it. This story is not spam, and it is not off-topic since it clearly relates to current news in technology.

Even your question to ask why this is flagged is downvoted. I've been noticing this for awhile on Hackernews: no dissent from the narrative is permitted. What a joke.

It's a guideline on this site to not complain or ask about downvoting

Re: A Heretic's Guide to Deplatforming

#270

Post by mycelium » Sat, Nov 03, 2018, 9:33 AM UTC

Latteland wrote: post #231

colordrops wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gab would like to use Stripe or Paypal because they are trusted payment providers, but those networks felt they'd stop being trusted payment providers if they let Gab stay on. What does that even mean "stop being trusted payment providers"? If their API works and payments go through, that seems trustworthy to me.

I assume it means the mass of people might stop using those services (like paypal) because they don't want to support sites that talk about racist things like happens with gab. gab is different than say reddit to me because while reddit might have some people posting racist things or threatning to kill someone or rape them, but reddit will ban them or the group - but allowing for that kind of speech ends up appearing…

Wells Fargo has laundered billions of dollars for drug cartels, yet people have not stopped using them: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/al-capone-meet-wells...

If people can't get off their asses to stop working with a company that has worked with organizations responsible for thousands of deaths, I don't think support of Gab is going to drive anyone's payment platform decisions.