Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news • Hacker News Board

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#51

Post by fzeroracer » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

rhacker wrote: post #13

coldcode wrote: post #3

Unless there is some precise definition of fake news, this is just censorship in sheep's clothing.

Exactly. About 2 years ago Etsy started banning everyone that was selling crystals and also included "promotes good health or luck" And while that's probably fine to do from a trades perspective, I don't like the notion that we had to start leaning this way. If we keep leaning over at what point are we going to make it illegal to believe in UFOs (as in aliens) and ghosts. There's no scientific evidence to make those…

If you're familiar with US history, we've had a long and storied history with snake oil salesmen selling incredibly dangerous or downright fake goods to people.

I don't think it's unfair for a site to not want to be associated with scam artists.

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#52

Post by laughinghan » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

ralusek wrote: post #50

laughinghan wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it your belief that there has never been any good public policy other than laws criminalizing violence that have ever had any positive effects on how much violence occurs?

I think that there are all sorts of measures you could take to minimize or maximize a single variable. If you want to minimize violence, you could install cameras in every room. Unverifiable rape claims would virtually disappear. Unresolved murders, too. GPS trackers on everyone? Same thing, and we already basically do that one. If your imagination can't provide you with dangerous scenarios arising from the state con…

Ah yes, bad, awful, terrible policies to reduce violence abound.

But do you believe there have never been any good public policies balancing public safety against other rights, that you agree with? For example, there are legal restrictions on how much people who work on our nuclear weapons can say about them. This is clearly a restriction of their fundamental human right to freedom of speech. Is it worth it?

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#53

Post by monksy » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #25

ralusek wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Language has also been used to coordinate mob violence. So have arms and legs. Public roads have helped in the coordination of violence and human trafficking, and it's time to take roads seriously. Violence is illegal, not the potential pathways.

I think what you are saying is true for the US, but if you travel, don't make the mistake of thinking our laws follow you everywhere. Whenever I am in different nations, especially the nations I know have strict laws, such as Cuba, I always leave the idea of the Constitution at the customs desk. You're under their laws. What is legal or illegal, is whatever they say is legal or illegal. So don't travel the world thin…

> So don't travel the world thinking that what you just stated is true. Potential pathways to violence may, indeed, be illegal in the nation to which you are traveling. And punishments can be harsh. They can, will, and have sentenced people to death for being caught with drugs for instance. No murder. No guns. No violence. No nothing. Just caught with drugs -> death.

>I always strongly urge people, especially young people, to be aware of the legal environment in any nation to which they are traveling.

Absolutely. Being caught in the Dubai airport while connecting with drugs. You'll be faced with the consequences of the drug laws of the UAE without being techincally in the country. (Also you can be detained there for violating the laws of the UAE while connecting as well)

Also in Thailand, never step on the currency because it's a disrespect to the king (who is on their money).

Other countries act very differently. It's amazing when people go elsewhere and think "well it's legal back at home" (also the opposite is dumbfounding.. South Korea tries to punish people who smoke weed in canada if the people come back after smoking)

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#54

Post by laughinghan » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:57 PM UTC

dexen wrote: post #48

laughinghan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, I strongly support free speech rights for many reasons, one of which is that I agree with you that they make democracy and society stronger. But you're being reductive. Countries around the world suppress speech to varying degrees without collapsing or becoming autocracies in a single election cycle. Many European countries have notably less freedom of speech in specific areas than the US but are even st…

>still widely considered liberal democracies The Yellow Vests in France may disagree - for several weeks they were protesting in large numbers, every weekend, and yet their wants and needs haven't really registered in popular awareness. Why is that? My point hinges on ability to raise awareness of issues, to break into public consciousness with grievances. That's different from espousing a particular political ideolo…

I'm really not sure what point you're making. Are you saying:

• it was inaccurate of me to characterize the UK, Germany, and France as being liberal democracies according to the consensus definition of the term?

• the consensus definition of the term is wrong or bad, and the term should have a different definition that France, or Germany, or the UK wouldn't satisfy?

• something else entirely?

P.S. I also am not sure what it means for the Yellow Vests' wants and needs to have not "really registered". Didn't Macron rapidly rescind the gas tax that initially sparked their anger, and then make a bunch more policy concessions besides?

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#55

Post by laughinghan » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 7:04 PM UTC

partiallypro wrote: post #39

laughinghan wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Democracy is a system of government where the citizens exercise power by voting." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy If the citizens or elected representatives in a democracy voted to start censoring speech, but continued to empower citizens to vote, it would still be a democratic state in spite of the censorship. An illiberal one, but still democratic.

But in order to be a democracy, do you not need the ability for everyone to freely express their political positions as to win over more political allies? If one party controlled all speech then voted that the opposition no longer had any free speech...they would control the entire national conversation. Hardly democratic. North Korea labels itself a "democracy" and holds elections, but no sane person actually believ…

To be clear, I strongly support free speech rights for many reasons, one of which is that I agree with you that they make for a better democracy and better society.

But you're being reductive. Of course the act of voting itself is meaningless if state doesn't vest power in it, but countries around the world suppress speech to varying degrees yet are stable, not in any immediate danger of turning into North Korea, and vest enough legitimacy in their elections as to be widely considered democracies, if illiberal ones. Many European countries have notably less freedom of speech in specific areas than the US but are even still widely considered liberal democracies (praising Nazism is illegal in Germany; UK defamation laws impose some of the highest burden of proof on the defendant in the Western world).

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#56

Post by CharlesColeman » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 7:10 PM UTC

colordrops wrote: post #33

katbyte wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a line needs to be drawn. Those are sort of wacko ideas hard to disprove, but saying "hillary clinton is guilty of ____" or blatantly misrepresenting facts or lieing? that needs to stop.

Why does saying that Hillary Clinton is guilty of something need to stop?

>> but saying "hillary clinton is guilty of ____" or blatantly misrepresenting facts or lieing? that needs to stop.

> Why does saying that Hillary Clinton is guilty of something need to stop?

That's a too-literal reading of the comment. The implication was clearly that what needs to stop is lies that claim Hillary Clinton is guilty of something she's not.

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#57

Post by jeffdavis » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 7:27 PM UTC

CharlesColeman wrote: post #43

jeffdavis wrote: post #10

One thing has been increasingly clear over the last few years: a lot of people are basically OK giving large governments more power and relinquishing what I think of as basic rights. Not just overseas, but here in the US a lot of people just don't care about rights and think the government is the solution to everything if you just give them enough power. Not sure how to keep rights, honestly. The Constitution and the…

> Not just overseas, but here in the US a lot of people just don't care about rights and think the government is the solution to everything if you just give them enough power. I think claiming that people "don't care about rights" is being at least a little uncharitable. Things like fake news and disinformation are real problems, but citizens have ceded so much power to ever larger corporations; and those corporation…

It's not wise to give up permanent rights to solve a current (and perhaps temporary) problem.

Governments can solve problems, but we should limit their tools such that our rights are respected.

If you ask me, a lot of our problems trace back to a lack of identity and culture. When you don't know who you are, you signal that you're part of a group by upvoting lies. When you don't know what our country is about (freedom), you just try to get whatever comforts a politician is promising you. When you don't have philosphical grounding for life, you are easily manipulated.

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#58

Post by CharlesColeman » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

jeffdavis wrote: post #57

CharlesColeman wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not just overseas, but here in the US a lot of people just don't care about rights and think the government is the solution to everything if you just give them enough power. I think claiming that people "don't care about rights" is being at least a little uncharitable. Things like fake news and disinformation are real problems, but citizens have ceded so much power to ever larger corporations; and those corporation…

It's not wise to give up permanent rights to solve a current (and perhaps temporary) problem. Governments can solve problems, but we should limit their tools such that our rights are respected. If you ask me, a lot of our problems trace back to a lack of identity and culture. When you don't know who you are, you signal that you're part of a group by upvoting lies. When you don't know what our country is about (freedo…

> It's not wise to give up permanent rights to solve a current (and perhaps temporary) problem.

It's also not wise to let a problem fester because you're too unwilling to take any action against it (or all the actions you're willing to take are ineffective half-measures).

In this case, I think the best solutions are quite a bit more radical than many powerful people (and their followers) are willing to contemplate, so you get bad ideas like this one because they are the solutions that group least opposes. But I don't think that means the advocates of the idea "just don't care about rights."

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#59

Post by cannonedhamster » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 8:12 PM UTC

atypicaluser wrote: post #22

katbyte wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a line needs to be drawn. Those are sort of wacko ideas hard to disprove, but saying "hillary clinton is guilty of ____" or blatantly misrepresenting facts or lieing? that needs to stop.

Who draws the line?

That would be the courts. Since libel/slander/defamation is already against the law. It's rather different from being misinformed and retracting the content and doubling down on lying because it's politically expedient. At least it was before this Presidency in the United States. I'm not sure how a purveyor of conspiracy theories being the ultimate enforcer of the law changes that, if at all.

Re: Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news

#60

Post by jeffdavis » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 8:16 PM UTC

CharlesColeman wrote: post #58

jeffdavis wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not wise to give up permanent rights to solve a current (and perhaps temporary) problem. Governments can solve problems, but we should limit their tools such that our rights are respected. If you ask me, a lot of our problems trace back to a lack of identity and culture. When you don't know who you are, you signal that you're part of a group by upvoting lies. When you don't know what our country is about (freedo…

> It's not wise to give up permanent rights to solve a current (and perhaps temporary) problem. It's also not wise to let a problem fester because you're too unwilling to take any action against it (or all the actions you're willing to take are ineffective half-measures). In this case, I think the best solutions are quite a bit more radical than many powerful people (and their followers) are willing to contemplate, s…

You are saying that lying online is a problem so severe that it requires solutions too radical to contemplate?