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

Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 413 posts

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#331

Post by aetherson »

tonyarkles wrote: post #329
aetherson wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is less racist now than it was in the past. What mechanism do you posit for this?

I can't reply to the sibling comment that suggests education, but a corollary to education is that many of the people who had deeply-engrained racist beliefs are dying/dead from old age. I agree that the world is less racist now than it was in, say, the 1950s, but my personal experiences with the elderly suggests that the people who were racist in the 50s and are still alive are just as racist now as ever.

That just begs the question. Young people today are not less racist because each generation magically improves. If they're less racist, then there had to be a mechanism for it.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#332

Post by heavenlyblue »

spamizbad wrote: post #58
DeusExMachina wrote: post #29

It "worked" only if the definition is "it removed it from Reddit". As the article mentions, these people did not just disappear or change their mind. They just moved to more obscure places, where they can continue and be evem more motivated, because now they have been censored. And you might still consider this to be a satisfiable definition for "it worked". Out of sight, out of mind. Except that, these people are no…

> I also got reminded of the fact that, before Hitler got to power, Germany had hate speech laws that explecitly forbid nazi propaganda. That's actually the law today in Germany. The Weimar Republic itself focused its censorship on limiting the distribution on what today we'd consider middlebrow pop-fiction and pornography, but generally excluded matters of politics and religion. It did have laws against anti-semitic…

Is the parent actually being highly incorrect?

Anti-semitism was highly popular at those times (e.g. Poland, Russian Empire, US).

Nazi party were also popular in Britain (at that time) and other countries.

Why would Weimar Republic specifically outlaw their nazi propaganda?

Am I missing something, or is that specific paragraph related to only a short period of time?

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#333

Post by amiga-workbench »

olefoo wrote: post #281
lazyjones wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it turns out that yes, voat and gab.ai are both filled with the utter dregs of society What does this say about the validity of the questionable study linked here that applauds "deplatforming" and only examines a few short-time consequences? Great success, sending more people from reddit to their own hate platform that will grow and exploit synergies among groups of particularly toxic people.

That we can identify potential school shooters, identity terrorists and other bad actors from their network traffic. If Joe Bloke suddenly starts tunneling a lot of crap to 8chan... might be time for the constable to drop by for tea and persuasion.

You're going to end up with a shit signal to noise ratio for the people who visit the site for the automotive, origami and cooking boards.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#334

Post by 8note »

pmarreck wrote: post #94
sagichmal wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It "worked" only if the definition is "it removed it from Reddit". As the article mentions, these people did not just disappear or change their mind. They just moved to more obscure places, where they can continue and be evem more motivated, because now they have been censored. What about all of the new people who would have more easily stumbled into those cesspools, but now have to take quite a bit more effort, an…

I would like to see evidence that “deplatforming” actually reduces hate globally instead of simply moving it elsewhere, because I haven’t seen any, and until then this is simply an unfounded belief (i.e., “bullshit”)

I'd imagine America's forced reeducation camps in Germany after WW2 would count as deplatforming nazis

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#335

Post by fullshark »

tfolbrecht wrote: post #320

It was never a question if top down rules on speech work, it's if it was a desired. Reddit is the beige wall of community. My experience is choosing between echo chambers, marketing, or ghost towns. "Thousands of communities, endless conversation, authentic human connection." Would that mission statement be more true for Reddit, Tumblr, Image boards, IRC channels, random internet forums? and the conversation is borin…

> It was never a question if top down rules on speech work, it's if it was a desired.

I don't agree, a lot of people seemed to think the Streisand effect proved that you can't control speech / content on the internet once upon a time.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#336

Post by 8note »

berrynice wrote: post #196
lordlimecat wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bullshit is saying "We stand for free speech" and then later saying "the best way to deal with toxic and hateful viewpoints is to censor and hide them." Belief in free speech as a principle assumes that good and right arguments will win out every day in an open public forum.

>Belief in free speech as a principle assumes that good and right arguments will win out every day in an open public forum. This is demonstrably not the case. Just look at the chans.

which is demonstrably not true? that belief in free speech assumes the right arguments winning, or that the right arguments win?

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#337

Post by 8note »

DeusExMachina wrote: post #29

It "worked" only if the definition is "it removed it from Reddit". As the article mentions, these people did not just disappear or change their mind. They just moved to more obscure places, where they can continue and be evem more motivated, because now they have been censored. And you might still consider this to be a satisfiable definition for "it worked". Out of sight, out of mind. Except that, these people are no…

"It worked" likely refers to them being more profitable without having the undesirable communities on their platform

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#338

Post by 8note »

klez wrote: post #147
untog wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn't where radicalised people go. It's how people get radicalised in the first place. Both Reddit and YouTube are general purpose sites. Very, very few people go on there to discuss the e.g. racist beliefs they already have. But the algorithms on these sites ends up exposing people to extreme views - there are many, many examples out there of people watching an innocuous video on YouTube only to immediatel…

> Germany has outlawed Nazis since the end of WW2 and guess what... they haven't taken over again Counter to that, Italy has a provision in its Constitution that forbids the reconstitution of the fascist party and now we have at least two that declare themselves as such (and have a few seats in the parliament), and one that, despite not being explicitly fascist, has more or less similar ideals and methods, has the re…

so, when you claim to deplatform something, then let let them on anyways, you're not doing well?

is that a counter point, or just an example of Italy's government being impotent? if it were china, the members of those parties would all be dead already

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#339

Post by altcognito »

pmarreck wrote: post #94
sagichmal wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It "worked" only if the definition is "it removed it from Reddit". As the article mentions, these people did not just disappear or change their mind. They just moved to more obscure places, where they can continue and be evem more motivated, because now they have been censored. What about all of the new people who would have more easily stumbled into those cesspools, but now have to take quite a bit more effort, an…

I would like to see evidence that “deplatforming” actually reduces hate globally instead of simply moving it elsewhere, because I haven’t seen any, and until then this is simply an unfounded belief (i.e., “bullshit”)

Content moderation is pretty standard practice and reducing the amount of exposure highly toxic trolls and extremists are able to get isn't super controversial as to it's effectiveness.
Post reply on HN