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

Facebook to ban white nationalist content

newsroom.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#911

Post by sisu2019 »

sagichmal wrote: post #608
talmand wrote: post #194

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…

> What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party? They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry. Luckily, as moral agents, we humans are capable of differentiating "general political party" from "white nationalists…

you say that as if we didn't just have two years of progressives and media smearing people they disagree with as alt-right.

Doesn't matter what they believe or say: Sam Harris? Alt-right. Tim Poole? Alt-right. Jordan Peterson? Alt-right. David Rubin? Alt-right. And that's just the leftists!

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#912

Post by javajosh »

BurningFrog wrote: post #848
sagichmal wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party? They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry. Luckily, as moral agents, we humans are capable of differentiating "general political party" from "white nationalists…

> They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry Where would the outcry happen? There aren't that many public platforms with any reach, and they're all adopting similar policies. In [blocked] no one can hear you scream!

You have misused a slippery slope argument to turn the other position into a strawman. There are risks to this FB ban, but silencing outcry about the ban is not one of them.

In practice, the distinction between banning a subject and banning a conversation about a subject ban, is easy to make. For example, Germany bans racist speech, but does not ban speech about whether racist speech ban should continue (and this particular debate is definitely alive and well in Germany). Even in the US we've banned certain words from broadcast TV for many years, but this never limited people from discussing whether the ban should continue!

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#914

Post by walkthrow »

This whole idea of "racism" is a pile of garbage sold to gullible people by corporations and governments whose motivations for discouraging "racism" and "white nationalism" and so on are things like increasing profits and decreasing costs. They couldn't care about people from other countries for any other reason. Most of the people making the decisions at these companies and governments live in areas that are the whitest areas in the country.

All facebook is doing is using its power to try to silence people who get in the road of their own profit margins and political goals. This is really a war. The Christchurch killer specifically said he wanted this censorship to happen after he committed his killings and now they are happening. Sites like 4chan are now blocked in Australia and New Zealand. Silicon Valley is removing everything that they disagree with. 1984 has finally arrived. The problem is that the backlash will probably be extreme and violent, just as the Christchurch killer wanted.

Considering most countries around the world such as China and India are in actual practice ethnically nationalists, why aren't facebook banning them? You can look at the specific policies of China, Japan, etc, and see ethnic nationalism in actual practice. Are they banning all Chinese and Japanese government accounts from Facebook? Of course not.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#915

Post by qualipetv »

aabeshou wrote: post #408
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #131

>Our efforts to combat hate don’t stop here. As part of today’s announcement, we’ll also start connecting people who search for terms associated with white supremacy to resources focused on helping people leave behind hate groups. People searching for these terms will be directed to Life After Hate, an organization founded by former violent extremists that provides crisis intervention, education, support groups and o…

What exactly makes you uncomfortable with calling genocidal racism "Wrong(TM)", and helping people leave it? Are you also uncomfortable with them banning child porn, or is that an example of punishing wrongthink too? EDIT: I invite downvoters to tell me why they disagree?

I find it worrying that a) you’re being downvoted and b) there actually being sympathies for white nationalism and fascist thought on HN. We all who love freedom and love our friends whatever background they may have should be working to not let these kinds of people obtain more power.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#916

Post by laughinghan »

int_19h wrote: post #893
amalcon wrote: post #837

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the release: > Our own review of hate figures and organizations – as defined by our Dangerous Individuals & Organizations policy – further revealed the overlap between white nationalism and separatism and white supremacy. It doesn't appear that this content is being banned because Facebook surrogates find the politics in question abhorrent (though they likely do so find). It is being banned because it is acting…

> It is being banned because it is acting as part of a recruitment funnel for an ideology that openly advocates violence. That would be believable, if it was applied as such across the board - e.g. also removing Christian Dominionists, Stalinists, Salafi Muslims, NoI etc.

I don't know about Salafi Muslims specifically, but Facebook already does censor radical Islamist groups like ISIS. This move is trying to be more across-the-board by including white supremacy under more of its aliases.

As for the others--when's the last time a Stalinist drove a car into a crowd or committed a mass shooting?

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#917

Post by qualipetv »

im3w1l wrote: post #872
aabeshou wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly makes you uncomfortable with calling genocidal racism "Wrong(TM)", and helping people leave it? Are you also uncomfortable with them banning child porn, or is that an example of punishing wrongthink too? EDIT: I invite downvoters to tell me why they disagree?

I think you have a misunderstanding of the word "white nationalism". I'd recommend looking it up to understand what is happening here. But in short it means the belief that there is a white race and that it has a right to preserve itself and it's culture. Genocidal racism was never allowed on facebook. After this move they will censor a lot of legitimate things.

White nationalism is not a legitimate thing and I implore you to get in contact with networks that help individuals get out of hate groups.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#918

Post by speedplane »

qualipetv wrote: post #915
aabeshou wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly makes you uncomfortable with calling genocidal racism "Wrong(TM)", and helping people leave it? Are you also uncomfortable with them banning child porn, or is that an example of punishing wrongthink too? EDIT: I invite downvoters to tell me why they disagree?

I find it worrying that a) you’re being downvoted and b) there actually being sympathies for white nationalism and fascist thought on HN. We all who love freedom and love our friends whatever background they may have should be working to not let these kinds of people obtain more power.

> I find it worrying that a) you’re being downvoted and b) there actually being sympathies for white nationalism and fascist thought on HN.

Ugh... I knew this day would the come. The slashdot crowd has found out about HN.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#919

Post by freehunter »

zobzu wrote: post #659
sagichmal wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party? They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry. Luckily, as moral agents, we humans are capable of differentiating "general political party" from "white nationalists…

you think so? republican stuff is already regularly banned from various platforms, mainly because tech companies lean left. i dont consider myself republican, but the slippery slope seems all too real in this case.

You know, those world renowned leftists that run Twitter and Reddit...

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#920

Post by antpls »

btilly wrote: post #663

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…

Seriously tho, how much would it cost to hunt Texas billionaires? And world billionaires?
Post reply on HN