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

Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

support.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#551

Post by dleslie »

awild wrote: post #470
dleslie wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conflict isn't necessarily a bad thing. Conflict can resolve tension and raise long-hidden concerns to the forefront. Conflict is a natural part of human interaction.

But the conflict was and still is directed at minority groups for their being a minority. There is nothing to resolve there, a Trans person will not stop being trans, a gay person stop being gay or a woman stop being a woman. These people genuinely need protection and safe spaces. (I'm also aware that these are not easy issues to tackle but they haven't been met with a lot of care in the last few years)

A bigot can stop being a bigot, but first they must express their bigotry in order to confront it.

Allowing conflict does not obviate a need to allow safe spaces, either.

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#552

Post by mattcrox »

coronadisaster wrote: post #540
giancarlostoro wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly about a year ago I decided to switch to an iPhone once the "contract" is up. I have used iOS and I didnt find it anymore special, but it isn't really that much different to me to be bothered by using either one. I will also take that moment to ungooglify my life including email and such.

Apple is only better because it is smaller but it does a lot of the same things and often lies about it... A pure and open Linux phone is the only way that it could get better.

"but it does a lot of the same things and often lies about it"

Can you provide evidence of this? Not that I don't believe you (nor do I have any financial interest in Apple), but I'm not a fan of seeing baseless accusations on HN.

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#553

Post by [deleted] »

jayd16 wrote: post #371
manigandham wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to realize "hate speech" is mostly subjective and revert back to the clear rules that we had last decade before the current political climate of gratuitous outrage.

What were those clear rules we apparently abandoned for no reason?

[deleted]

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#554

Post by dx87 »

scep12 wrote: post #327
ddevault wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have much less mobility as a US citizen to move to another country than I have as a software engineer. Almost any Google employee could have an offer somewhere else within 3 weeks of starting their search.

You couldn't move to Canada easily?

It's suprisingly hard to move there if you're from the USA. I looked into moving there after I got out of the military, and had no chance because I don't have a degree. The fact that I have over a decade of work experience in cybersecurity and have been through intense courses acredited at the graduate level doesn't factor in. Their immigration process reminds me of the shitty HR at big corporations that aren't willing to budge from their checklist of "requirements".

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#555

Post by wolco »

Flantastical wrote: post #499
manigandham wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to realize "hate speech" is mostly subjective and revert back to the clear rules that we had last decade before the current political climate of gratuitous outrage.

I think part of the issue is the power of comments like yours that pretends there's a simple solution. In some conversations bad actors can gain more power in a debate using misleading information than a good actor can by using the truth. Most conversations, such as this one about free speech, are so complex that it's tough for a 'good actor' to offer solutions. They may discuss the pros / cons of each side, talk abo…

To prevent bad actors we must become just as bad or worse.

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#556

Post by pgeorgi »

reaperducer wrote: post #468
che_shirecat wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we playing "what censorship is OK censorship" now? Who determines that "pretty clear difference?" Isn't the point of being against censorship is that nothing is above the interests of public scrutiny? Partial censorship seems fundamentally contradictory in terms of the underlying moral justification.

Are we playing "what censorship is OK censorship" now? No. It's a game that was played out long ago by responsible organizations. It's just that the tech industry is stumbling upon it these days. For example, responsible media outlets don't publish information about rape victims or suicides unless there is a compelling public interest.

And it even varies by culture. US media reporting on crimes in Germany tend to get confused (to the point that at least once they suspected some public cover up attempt) that they won't get the names of arrested suspects - that's part of our approach to privacy here, while apparently having the names out is considered a mechanism against misconduct by the police in the US (at least that's how it was explained to me when I asked why the names are always public).

I can follow both arguments but there's only room for implementing one in any given society. Societies overlapping like they do now (thanks to globalization and, to no small part, the internet) doesn't make that easier.

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#557

Post by Flantastical »

manigandham wrote: post #511
Flantastical wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think part of the issue is the power of comments like yours that pretends there's a simple solution. In some conversations bad actors can gain more power in a debate using misleading information than a good actor can by using the truth. Most conversations, such as this one about free speech, are so complex that it's tough for a 'good actor' to offer solutions. They may discuss the pros / cons of each side, talk abo…

Why is the simple solution just "pretending"? What evidence is there that a complex solution exists or works? What is the basis of the assumption that good actors are not as effective as bad actors? Why has society not devolved into chaos if that's the case? How did this work before social media and online anonymity?

I would say it's pretending because it's not 100% certain to be the solution. As mentioned, the situation is incredibly complex and can't be properly argued in a one-liner. There is no evidence that a complex solution exists, but I would say it's better if you know you don't have the solution to imply uncertainty.

Good actors are almost certainly more effective than bad actors. That's likely why the world hasn't devolved into chaos. But societies DO devolve into chaos, such as revolutions and wars. These also obviously take place at times when society is most fearful / angry. But it's possible that many societal wars and revolutions would be unnecessary if good actors used rational discourse to reach solutions.

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#558

Post by manigandham »

derefr wrote: post #381
manigandham wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by not "actually working"? What is a "conflict-free environment"? What does hate speech have to do with minority populations? Do people within those populations never say hateful things, even to each other? How do you know they never participated in any forums? This sounds like an awful lot of assumptions.

> How do you know they never participated in any forums? Large amounts of anecdata of people reporting (e.g. with the first post on a new blog) that they have finally found places where they can freely engage in Internet discourse; and explaining that they hadn’t been engaging in Internet discourse up until then, because any attempt previously was met with people reacting to the cultural “outgroup” signifiers in thei…

The discussion is about speech, and speech is not action. Harmful action is already a crime, and any crime can be upgraded to "hate crime" based on the motivation.

Group membership doesn't have anything to do with minorities though. You can define groups however you want, so a "minority" is entirely dependent on the context of the situation and just as subjective as the hate speech. So who are you considering minorities and what is this anecdotal data that claims they did not participate in forums? Must every forum be welcoming to everyone? Did no other forum exist? Could they not have created their own forum? If they talked to each other, does that mean a forum exists? And if so, doesn't that mean they are free to engage in their own discourse after all?

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#559

Post by Barrin92 »

che_shirecat wrote: post #399
Swenrekcah wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, but there is a pretty clear difference between censorship to protect an individual and censorship of critisising a government.

Are we playing "what censorship is OK censorship" now? Who determines that "pretty clear difference?" Isn't the point of being against censorship is that nothing is above the interests of public scrutiny? Partial censorship seems fundamentally contradictory in terms of the underlying moral justification.

>Are we playing "what censorship is OK censorship" now?

Yes, obviously. Nobody is forced to have an absolutist position on censorship just like it's mostly silly to have an absolutist position on anything else.

>Who determines that "pretty clear difference?"

In this case Google, which is a private business. In other cases the government, or the courts. Depends on the issue at hand.

There's nothing contradictory about partial censorship in the same way there's nothing contradictory about having a speed limit.

Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

#560

Post by subsubzero »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #527
subsubzero wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some numbers to keep you up at night, they are very scary: Google controls 91.89% of the search market [1] G controls 68% of the browser market [2] G's android is on 84% of phones operating systems [3] G has 73% of the search advertising market [4] [1] https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/544400/market-share-of-i... [3] https://beta.trimread.com/articl…

Honestly about a year ago I decided to switch to an iPhone once the "contract" is up. I have used iOS and I didnt find it anymore special, but it isn't really that much different to me to be bothered by using either one. I will also take that moment to ungooglify my life including email and such.

I did the same a few years back, use duck duck go for search, iphone for phone, apple maps for directions, firefox|safari|brave for browser, it is really easy to get google out of your life, only thing I am still looking to replace is mail, if anyone has found something that is free(or relatively cheap) and is reliable I'd love to know.
Post reply on HN