Twitter to ban political advertising • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#781

Post by ajscanlan » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:13 AM UTC

intended wrote: post #744

cf498 wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You don't discredit anti-vaxxers with speech. Same with flat-earthers. Same with fascists. You know what works? De-platforming them. I would like a source on that. Dont take it personal, but I dont see how this is anything but tanky signaling to feel better about yourself. Here in Germany people were rather active in making sure the new far right party AFD wasnt given a platform. By now they are very close to being…

I can source it. I worked on modding a political forum from its laissez fairs days to its current operating philosophy. Bad speech regularly frowns out signal, and in times of crisis, will overwhelm the channel with emotion. It’s easier to make vague funny one liners which reach the top of the page, drowning out that 8 page report on the telecom industry. Bashing a political candidate? Channel crusher. Once the chann…

>It’s easier to make vague funny one liners which reach the top of the page, drowning out that 8 page report on the telecom industry.

>Bashing a political candidate? Channel crusher.

I see this all the time on Reddit in subs like /r/politics and /r/news, sarcastic quips get thousands of upvotes and dominate the discussion with no room for any dissenting opinions. Makes it real hard to find out who's being genuine in their approach and who's towing the party line for upvotes. Reddit isn't great for discussion though.

I suppose my question is, what stops your forum from becoming an echo chamber? Are "vague funny one liners" and "Bashing a political candidate" considered bad speech even if they're not leading to crazier philosophies? Would the hundreds of one liners about Trump in /r/politics be considered bad speech? Where can I find genuine discourse?

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#782

Post by ClumsyPilot » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:14 AM UTC

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #760

Spare_account wrote: post #754

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you're pushing back on the GP to ask for evidence, it is intellectually dishonest to go ahead and make your own un-founded statements. Can _you_ link to some of these stories to reinforce your point?

Yeah, fine. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leah_Remini#Scientology - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-be-opposed... - https://www.self.com/story/from-anti-to-pro-vaccine As far as challenges of the put your money where your mouth is kind, this one was pretty easy. So easy in fact, that you should take a moment to reflect on why you were so quick to get on a moral high-horse of burden of proof.

You just provided anecdotes, so stop attacking the other person and consider that he is right.

You would have to prove effectiveness. i.e. out of 100 anti-vaxers, 90% stopped believing in bullshit. If it works on 1 person out of a million, that's pretty useless.

But it is well known fact that piling on more information does not change entrenched belief, it has been subject of peer-reviewed research for decades. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont...

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#783

Post by endymi0n » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:15 AM UTC

rasz wrote: post #730

endymi0n wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly enough, in Germany you are forced to use the same page and layout, leading to sometimes very visible retractions... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/9/9c/Bild_Gegendar... If you ask me, that‘s a good thing. If the stakes of an ad campaign with fake news or hate speech would be having to run a disproval campaign of the same size, on the same audience (if you are proven wrong) — I‘d be fine with…

Or you know, keep the lie because "publicly apologize for using the inaccurate “Polish Death Camps” phrase does not apply in Germany as it would curb freedom of speech." https://polandin.com/38606816/apology-for-polish-death-camps...

Hey, count me in for solving this one gracefully!

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https...

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#784

Post by yoavm » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:17 AM UTC

ralusek wrote: post #685

moksly wrote: post #666

In Denmark we have laws in place that hold news paper editors responsible for printing truth. They don’t always succeed, but they try to, and when they do fail they admit it and apologise. This is what has kept our society well informed and critical thinking for a hundred years. It’s also allowed for different sides of things, because you can interpret things like socioeconomic statistics and facts differently and wr…

The lowest level of truth telling is stating facts, but even stating facts can be extremely manipulative. If I were to say: "2x as many white Americans were killed by police as black Americans in 2018." This a true fact. If I take note of the fact that black Americans only constitute 13% of the population, then I can say "A black American is 2.3x as likely as a white American to be killed by police." This is also a t…

But these really aren't the type of lies that people consider fake news. Yeah, all the things you've written are facts, and their interpretations are what we call opinions. I agree with you that all of these statements, since they're true, should be allowed without a question. People still need to think and be critical.

I just took a look at a long list of lies by your current President. It has nothing to do with facts like the ones you've stated above. These are simply lies. You can't argue that it's some interpretation, or just half of the picture or anything like that. It's simply a bunch of words phrased as a fact but they never happened.

I can't see anything good coming out of this for any country. It ruins the ability to have a real debate in a society, and I think it harmed America (not only of course) greatly.

And one last thing - yes, it probably shouldn't be one person from one political side that decides what's completely false and shouldn't be published (or perhaps better, be corrected), but I don't think it should be so impossibly complicated to create a system in which representatives from all sides can do this together. America already has structures like this implemented.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#785

Post by bernardlunn » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:18 AM UTC

This is huge and amazing move. I am a big fan of Twitter and @jack and love their backing of Bitcoin. I love it when the right thing to do is also the financially smart thing to do.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#786

Post by ClumsyPilot » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:22 AM UTC

sacrificedcapon wrote: post #684

moksly wrote: post #666

In Denmark we have laws in place that hold news paper editors responsible for printing truth. They don’t always succeed, but they try to, and when they do fail they admit it and apologise. This is what has kept our society well informed and critical thinking for a hundred years. It’s also allowed for different sides of things, because you can interpret things like socioeconomic statistics and facts differently and wr…

You do realize that saudi arabia, china, russia, etc all have laws in place to hold newspaper editors responsible for printing "truth" right? > This is what has kept our society well informed and critical thinking for a hundred years. What makes you think you are a well-informed and critical thinking society? Don't most danes think alike just like most saudis, chinese, russians, etc. Don't most danes think and believ…

> You do realize that saudi arabia, china, russia, etc all have laws in place to hold newspaper editors responsible for printing "truth" right?

We don't have any laws on the books in Russia that forbid newspapers from telling lies I am willing to bet neither does China or Saudi, because that's not needed for authoritarian censorship.

Boris Nemtsov got shot in broad daylight in the centre of Moscow. They don't need laws

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#787

Post by codegrappler » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:22 AM UTC

silvester23 wrote: post #775

ralusek wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is obviously an upside and a downside. The platitude that "freedom isn't free" is something that seems to be lost on critics of the effects of liberty. I don't think the free speech absolutism present in the US was ever meant to suggest that there isn't such thing as undesirable speech, but rather that the potential for tyranny under regulated speech is a danger well worth avoiding at any cost. In addition to t…

> To frame the right to free speech in regards to whether or not it is "working out" is not a particularly American frame of reference. The principle that individuals should express themselves as they see fit, and that this is the foundation for a free and open society, is essentially square one. When I said "working out", I wasn't talking so much about which effects free speech is having (although that is a question…

You aren’t being thrown in prison or “disappearing” for saying something counter to the president’s point of view. Even with free speech rights there are still limits though. I can’t go around making violent threats to people without some repercussions.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#788

Post by krageon » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:23 AM UTC

ralusek wrote: post #685

moksly wrote: post #666

In Denmark we have laws in place that hold news paper editors responsible for printing truth. They don’t always succeed, but they try to, and when they do fail they admit it and apologise. This is what has kept our society well informed and critical thinking for a hundred years. It’s also allowed for different sides of things, because you can interpret things like socioeconomic statistics and facts differently and wr…

The lowest level of truth telling is stating facts, but even stating facts can be extremely manipulative. If I were to say: "2x as many white Americans were killed by police as black Americans in 2018." This a true fact. If I take note of the fact that black Americans only constitute 13% of the population, then I can say "A black American is 2.3x as likely as a white American to be killed by police." This is also a t…

> In America, we understand

American understanding birthed a society that openly fosters fascism. It should only be used as an ironic example, not as some sort of highroad ethical argument.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#789

Post by krageon » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:26 AM UTC

Matty1992 wrote: post #762

ralusek wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is obviously an upside and a downside. The platitude that "freedom isn't free" is something that seems to be lost on critics of the effects of liberty. I don't think the free speech absolutism present in the US was ever meant to suggest that there isn't such thing as undesirable speech, but rather that the potential for tyranny under regulated speech is a danger well worth avoiding at any cost. In addition to t…

>In addition to that, America is a country that works forwards from principles much more often than European nations, which very often work backwards from objectives. Have any examples to back this up? I dont even necessarily disagree with your original argument, but can we get away from the Europe vs America debate that always pops up on this board as if they can be compared in a reasonable way? Europe is made up of…

The "America vs Europe debate" only ever pops up when an American comes into a thread telling everyone how wrong they are. As you say it is ironic because the position that there is one "Europe" to compare the US to is one that can only be formed in an environment of ignorance. Asking why was at some point useful, but given the pernicious nature of these discussions and the vehemence with which they are repeated we have to assume they are not going to go away (unless perhaps we ignore them).

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#790

Post by ClumsyPilot » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 10:27 AM UTC

archgoon wrote: post #698

sacrificedcapon wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize that saudi arabia, china, russia, etc all have laws in place to hold newspaper editors responsible for printing "truth" right? > This is what has kept our society well informed and critical thinking for a hundred years. What makes you think you are a well-informed and critical thinking society? Don't most danes think alike just like most saudis, chinese, russians, etc. Don't most danes think and believ…

> You do realize that saudi arabia, china, russia, etc all have laws in place to hold newspaper editors responsible for printing "truth" right? Yes, and Denmark too. Also, the United States has laws about lying in print as well, see for example libel laws.

But we don't. The Russian government does not need such laws to cause trouble.

Boris Nemtsov got shot in broad daylight in the centre of Moscow.