MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars • Hacker News Board

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#371

Post by takeda » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:44 PM UTC

soraminazuki wrote: post #221

While it's emotionally pleasing to see racists being kicked out of online platforms, another side of me feels wary of these tactics. For starters, being deplatformed from major online players today would have serious consequences. Although it's true that these platforms are "private property," the entire society has become too reliant on them to be seen that way. I think it's dangerous when platforms function like a…

I understand removing confederate flags and movements from public areas, but I don't think it is necessary to ban people for using it in games like Forza. I mean Microsoft can do whatever they want, but it is overreacting. Most people who would use it wouldn't have any bad meaning behind it and most likely would be used more as a joke. When playing Forza I remember I liked skin that made my car look like a beater car, and it was so fun winning races in car that looked like it would fall apart at any moment.

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#372

Post by octocop » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:44 PM UTC

arcticfox wrote: post #321

sukilot wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an argument for banning swastikas, not banning anyone who displays a swastika. And before you say "come on, swastikas are pretty extreme", remember the moral panic we just went through when 4chan trolls convinced people that the OK hand sign was a "one-sided version ofna White Power" sign and got people fired from their jobs for making the sign.

> That's an argument for banning swastikas, not banning anyone who displays a swastika. This seems semantic. For example, cheating is banned in many games, and if you cheat, you get banned. Banning cheating and cheaters is effectively the same thing.

Choice is still present, is a person who is paralyzed and unable to speak by default non-racist?

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#373

Post by ricktdotorg » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:45 PM UTC

jfarmer wrote: post #306

ricktdotorg wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the ethnic minorities that _do_ live there live in segregated apartment complexes, etc. to prevent "mixing with the natives". source for this? my experience: my wife is Japanese, i have visited JP many times, we know a ton of non-Japanese immigrants living in Japan and they all live wherever the heck they want to live. i've never heard of non-native minorities being segregated either officially (government) or…

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2017/07/02/issues/no-... https://resources.realestate.co.jp/living/housing-discrimina... https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/04/17/national/social... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-discrimination-fore...

wow! this is indeed quite eye-opening! while i was aware of non-native discrimination in Japan in terms of employment, i had not heard of housing-specific discrimination! i asked for receipts and boy, you delivered!!!

thank you for opening my eyes. will read and discuss w/our family :)

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#374

Post by acdha » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

haram_masala wrote: post #228

UncleMeat wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, that'd be a good outcome for the confederate flag. It is a hate symbol and exists almost exclusively to project hatred towards black people.

I don't think this is accurate. There are, or perhaps until recently were, a large number of people in the South who flew that flag out of a sense of regional pride and cohesion, and who had absolutely no problem with black people. Of course, that's not enough to forgive flying it - as a Jew I wouldn't be happy about a German person flying a Swastika, even if the only meaning it had for them was a benign pride in Ger…

The problem is that this history is rooted in racism: the Confederacy was founded to preserve the institution of slavery (people who claim otherwise need to read the states’ own declarations) and the Army of Northern Virginia battle flag most commonly displayed has a long history from the Jim Crow era of being used to intimidate free Black people.

Just as someone proud of being German has a wide variety of symbols they can use other than a swastika, someone proud of their Southern ancestry could pick almost anything else to express that. Choosing a symbol which racists have proudly used to intimidate others for a century in a half immediately calls motives into question and even if someone somehow managed to avoid learning the history until now the only polite response is “I had no idea. I’ll use something else!”

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#375

Post by klmadfejno » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

beaner wrote: post #268

klmadfejno wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW the founding fathers did not want to be idolized and probably would not like the idea of Rushmore. I'm not sure I see why its outrageous to think that people want to remove statues honoring pieces of history they think ought not be honored. On the face of it, nothing is owed to the past and society does evolve. I don't feel particularly strong on preserving or removing imagery of George Washington from public ar…

History is important because it lets us see ourselves in the arc of time and be more cognizant of how and why we arrived at the present moment. When we idolize figures who we believe did good things, we project a guide line from the past into the future for ourselves to follow. When we erase history, we lose this guidance and direction. It's no mistake that the mob is responsible for the destruction, because a lack o…

That's great. And the growing shift of culture suggests that slave owners are not emblematic of people who did good things, so we should remove them from the public display. The intent is not to erase history, it is to signal changing values.

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#376

Post by pfraze » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

jstanley wrote: post #294

softwaredoug wrote: post #281

I don’t see how you can make a good faith argument the confederate flag is any different from a swastika. Both represent institutions built solely for racist motives and the subjugation of another race.

But, it's just a picture. If you want to put a swastika on your car, the punishment should be that you made yourself look stupid, not that you get banned from the game!

People rally around symbols. That's why this is an issue right now; the US has a movement of white nationalists rallying around that picture.

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#377

Post by naasking » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

paulchap wrote: post #315

soraminazuki wrote: post #221

While it's emotionally pleasing to see racists being kicked out of online platforms, another side of me feels wary of these tactics. For starters, being deplatformed from major online players today would have serious consequences. Although it's true that these platforms are "private property," the entire society has become too reliant on them to be seen that way. I think it's dangerous when platforms function like a…

> I think it's dangerous when platforms function like a public utility and is yet allowed to do whatever it wants because it's _technically_ private property. It _is_ private property. The companies in question are just exerting their rights. The users agreed to the ToS while signing up, and it's perfectly reasonable for them to cut off your access to their service, as long as it's within the legal bounds of the ToS.…

> It _is_ private property. The companies in question are just exerting their rights. The users agreed to the ToS while signing up, and it's perfectly reasonable for them to cut off your access to their service, as long as it's within the legal bounds of the ToS.

So by parity of reasoning, companies that pollute within the bounds of the EPA's restrictions are also perfectly within their legal rights, and so shouldn't be chastised or further regulated, right?

Of course that's nonsense, because we're all interested in a better civilization, which occasionally means reviewing and accounting for the negative externalities of which we might have been previously unaware.

So please stop using this point against people raising concerns over how corporations are acting. There are legitimate concerns over the negative externalities of policing speech and banning people on private platforms with no recourse for appeal.

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#378

Post by rsynnott » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

notyourday wrote: post #365

rsynnott wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume Microsoft never allowed, say, swastikas. There's no reasonable expectation that you are able to spread racist propaganda in a car racing game (or for that matter in an actual car race; I think those tend to have very strict rules around decoration). I can see an _argument_ that Twitter, say, should be forced to pander to racists. I don't buy that argument, mind you, but I can at least see the thought process…

> I assume Microsoft never allowed, say, swastikas. Let's replace Microsoft with Amazon. Should Amazon be able to produce "The Man in The High Castle?" Should "The Man In The High Castle" be available to watch? How about merchandise from the show? Would it be OK to have it?

Sure. Amazon should be allowed do that (and of course, there's a lot of context there; if they started putting swastikas, or confederate flags, on the cars in Top Gear there might be more eyebrows raised). It probably shouldn't be _compelled_ to carry all material containing swastikas, though.

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#379

Post by kukx » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

chc wrote: post #269

kukx wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not know about the implicit rules. I do not use Parler yet. However the problem with trolls is a hard one to solve on any platform, especially on the platform that wants to promote free speech. If they turn out to be a right wing version of Twitter it would be a shame. We need a platform that could accommodate both left and right wing people so that they can exchange thoughts with each other.

Are trolls a problem to solve at all if your goal is to promote free speech? Trolling is one of the most commonly censored forms of speech. It seems like trolls are a core feature, not a bug, in that scenario. If you actually want to solve the problem of trolls, I think the first step would be to put away the "free speech" platitudes, sit down and figure out what kinds of speech you actually support and what kinds of…

Yes, trolls are a problem when one wants to promote free speech. It means you cannot censor them, but you should find a mechanism to discourage such destructive behaviour. Maybe a similar system that exists in real life and real personal relations. Maybe some form of hierachy. Unfortunately I do not know. However, I would look into establishing a meritocratic system or a representative system (much like the political system), where like-minded groups promote their representatives that have greater reach. And the anti social behaviour is punished at the social level and not by central purging.

Regarding your comment about ditching free speech and allowing only what I think is good. It would imply that I know what is good. I do not have such perfect knowledge and I do not believe anyone else has.

Re: MS will ban Forza players who add the confederate flag to their digital cars

#380

Post by filleduchaos » Thu, Jul 02, 2020, 7:47 PM UTC

Darmody wrote: post #212

kube-system wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow. It sounds like they know exactly what it is. In some places, you can be prevented from saying something that others do not want you to say.

If you are going to be punished in any way for what you say, you don't have freedom of speech. Freedom of speech doesn't mean that there's nobody physically preventing you from talking.

> If you are going to be punished in any way for what you say, you don't have freedom of speech.

So the punishment should instead fall on...other people? Because that's exactly what the sort of "free speech" you are advocating it - a restriction on other people's own freedom of speech and association.