711–720 of 1001 posts
At what point do such things change into a public discourse problem? Do we wait until it can be shown that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. influenced elections because they refused to serve information from a candidate they didn't like? If we aren't already there, it's not long before it is. What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infra…
I don't see what's so complicated about it. Facebook will set some standards and they will meter out moderation action as they feel is necessary. Will it be selectively applied in some cases? Yes. Will they get it wrong sometimes? Yes. So what? People who don't like Facebook's approach to moderation can quit, protest or otherwise boycott Facebook. This is the same problem of moderation that has always existed in onli…
as these networks have grown to global scale we need to assess them for what they are, not for abstractions that may be less relevant now that these systems represent unprecedented "public squares"
At what point do such things change into a public discourse problem? Do we wait until it can be shown that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. influenced elections because they refused to serve information from a candidate they didn't like? If we aren't already there, it's not long before it is. What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infra…
That's an interesting question. What if Google and Facebook would secretly demote and hide articles about one political party and promote articles about another party? Theoretically they are absolutely free to do so but how do you think, will it cause a Congress investigation or not? Those people made noise about much smaller things.
Also, what if Google would start demoting its competitors and everyone who deals with those "untouchable" companies? That would be interesting to see.
I think people don't realise what power these new media have. The monopoly of Facebook or Google is a serious issue and we should not believe that they will always stay neutral.
In regard to comments concerning why it only addresses white-nationalism, understand that these statements are made in the context of North America’s on-going flirtations with white nationalism going back 300 years. It’s not an easy pill to swallow and speaks little about individuals regardless of colour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that an open environment cannot work when there are bad faith interlocutors actively seeking to undermine that open environment. There's a famous Sartre quote that deals with the paradox of tolerance in regards to anti-semites.
And yet Jews have only been murdered in countries that did not have freedom of speech. Words are an antidote to sticks and stones which stop people from breaking others bones.
I fully support scrubbing hateful content from any place where it appears. I think people should take note though, that this is the exact point in time when the machinery for censoring and filtering the internet is being implemented. Although hateful speech is a great use case for this technology I can't help but wonder what it will get pointed at next. This isn't the kind of development that can sit back idly after…
To me, this sounds like you _don't_ fully support this development. And rightly so. It'll soon be technology in search of additional applications.
This is _literally_ racist
In principle, who could be opposed? In practice, how will this actually work out? True story. I have a friend who got a temporary ban from Facebook (I think 90 days?) for commenting on a story about a Texas billionaire paying to hunt endangered animals, "How much would it cost to hunt Texas billionaires?" That was considered a violation of their anti-bullying stance. Knowing her, it wasn't. It was sarcasm. Moving on…
> Knowing her, it wasn't. It was sarcasm. Did she know that the person she directed that comment to did not know her?
In principle, who could be opposed? In practice, how will this actually work out? True story. I have a friend who got a temporary ban from Facebook (I think 90 days?) for commenting on a story about a Texas billionaire paying to hunt endangered animals, "How much would it cost to hunt Texas billionaires?" That was considered a violation of their anti-bullying stance. Knowing her, it wasn't. It was sarcasm. Moving on…