Live data from Hacker News

Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

bbc.com

131–140 of 258 posts

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#131

I am glad that Brazil's court still remains independent. Looks like Bolsonaro, should borrow couple of tips from his friend Narendra Modi. Modi, dismantled the institutions in India systematically to guarantee his long lasting power. e.g. The only official from the election commission who didn't give a clean-chit to Modi for his election campaign violations during last election was greeted with Income Tax raids on hi…

Brazilian here. Unfortunately I wouldn't call them independent. They simply represent the other side. Brazil is not as united behind Bolsonaro as the media makes out to be.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you support this even if Facebook suppressed some ideas you believe in, or are you working under the assumption that Facebook will always agree with you about what's true?

I...don't know how to respond to that. Truth is truth. Yes, there is right wing fascist parties that are trying to nullify the meaning of the word, and introduce subjectivity where there should not be any, sowing doubt on the very idea of Reality. But this is not the new normal for society or humanity. I refuse to believe that, or we're truly doomed. This is a temporary hurdle made by desperate people trying to hold…

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. Do you recognize the possibility of good-faith disagreements on matters of fact, or do you expect that every reasonable person should agree in all cases about what's true and false? In the latter case I agree I don't see a productive discussion to be had here.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#133

I am glad that Brazil's court still remains independent. Looks like Bolsonaro, should borrow couple of tips from his friend Narendra Modi. Modi, dismantled the institutions in India systematically to guarantee his long lasting power. e.g. The only official from the election commission who didn't give a clean-chit to Modi for his election campaign violations during last election was greeted with Income Tax raids on hi…

Last time I visited Brazil some 5 years ago, the courts would ban Whatsapp every couple months. They were in bed with telecom companies that hated that Whatsapp made many of their services free.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#134

I am glad that Brazil's court still remains independent. Looks like Bolsonaro, should borrow couple of tips from his friend Narendra Modi. Modi, dismantled the institutions in India systematically to guarantee his long lasting power. e.g. The only official from the election commission who didn't give a clean-chit to Modi for his election campaign violations during last election was greeted with Income Tax raids on hi…

Brazilian here. Unfortunately I wouldn't call them independent. They simply represent the other side. Brazil is not as united behind Bolsonaro as the media makes out to be.

I'm originally from Turkey, and that's also the case with Erdoğan. I mean, they wouldn't be dictators if everyone agreed with them, no?

The big problem arising from the stark polarization is that there's no uncontaminated news sources anymore. Many argue that news should be political anyway but I really miss reading stuff that doesn't fit 100 percent to a single agenda.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#135
post #124
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slander is a reason to have slander suits, not a ban on a class of people imposed on a social network. I'm all for the free market (i.e. users) pressuring social networks to ban certain groups, like pedophiles or neo-Nazis. I'm deeply against a government telling a social network that any broad class of people should be banned, especially if they're mainstream enough that their leader is in office.

This is the outcome of the slander lawsuits: Facebook has been ordered to stop publishing slander.

I meant individual slander suits.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#136
post #116
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slander is a reason to have slander suits, not a ban on a class of people imposed on a social network. I'm all for the free market (i.e. users) pressuring social networks to ban certain groups, like pedophiles or neo-Nazis. I'm deeply against a government telling a social network that any broad class of people should be banned, especially if they're mainstream enough that their leader is in office.

> I'm deeply against a government telling a social network that any broad class of people should be banned, especially if they're mainstream enough that their leader is in office. Even if those people are calling for a coup d'etat to change the democracy into a dictatorship and place this leader at the top?

> Even if those people are calling for a coup d'etat to change the democracy into a dictatorship and place this leader at the top?

If they are calling for violence, I support govt censorship only of the violent speech and only if each case is considered individually.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#137

I am glad that Brazil's court still remains independent. Looks like Bolsonaro, should borrow couple of tips from his friend Narendra Modi. Modi, dismantled the institutions in India systematically to guarantee his long lasting power. e.g. The only official from the election commission who didn't give a clean-chit to Modi for his election campaign violations during last election was greeted with Income Tax raids on hi…

Brazilian here. Unfortunately I wouldn't call them independent. They simply represent the other side. Brazil is not as united behind Bolsonaro as the media makes out to be.

[deleted]

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#138
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much of the strife we're seeing in the world right now stems from information now, maybe for the first time ever, being truly free. All the gatekeepers of information are no longer relevant. This means that the truly delusional can spread their conspiracy theories and get people to believe them. But it also means that people caught within exploitative power structures can spread their stories - see MeToo as an exa…

Some of the truly delusional have always had plenty of power and ability to spread their theories - religious people. Free information will hopefully reduce that rather than enhance it. Modern small-time delusions like anti-vax or white supremacy are nowhere near the scale and badness of, say Islam. But since Islam is well established, people turn a blind eye.

Religions aren’t homogeneous wholes.

The overwhelming majority of adherents to all(?) religions are peaceable people.

We just don’t hear much from them.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#139
post #2

Censorship is so repugnant, yet so complicated. What should be prohibited to be said, if anything? Who draws the line?

People seem to forget (for some strange reason) that there are actually laws against things that you can say. For example, defamation laws are in place to punish the distribution of much of what is today qualified as "fake news". If you spread false news on purpose, or if you threat someone of violence, if you make racist comments (in countries like Brazil), these are situations where you can suffer consequences for…

In most common law jurisdictions there are two branches of law, very approximately the differences are: Criminal law, crimes like murder, rape, theft in breach of rules enforced by the state against all citizens, judgements result in punishments up to death, prison etc; Civil law, unlawful acts like breach of contract, libel, negligence etc, rules are enforced by the courts at the request of one citizen against another, judgements result in nothing worse than financial recompense.

Typically jurisdictions treat defamation and libel as a civil matter not a criminal matter. In civil law, in the UK at least, you need to prove damages against a 'legal person' i.e. a person or a company to be able to win a court judgement against the defendant. Hence most fake news cannot be fought in the courts as it is too hard to prove that it has directly caused damages to any one person. This is why you often see tabloid news stories about vaguely defined groups and hardly ever about a specific person or manufacturer. Stories about a specific person are much more expensive to produce because you have to be sure you have solid enough evidence to win a libel case, whereas if you make stuff up about a poorly defined group, e.g. 'migrants' there is no come back so it's a much cheaper way to wind up your readers and get more emotional engagement.

Re: Brazil Bolsonaro: Facebook told to block accounts of president’s supporters

#140
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. You may not agree with Zuckerberg's position of not censoring content (beyond the obscene), but it's probably the smartest position for the business. As soon as you start saying "well, we'll censor stuff that isn't accurate", you've opened a Pandora's box of every single interest group hammering you on every single decision and in the end everyone thinks you're screwing them over.

> beyond the obscene I mean, that's pretty arbitrary too, e.g. FB censors female breasts, which is not considered obscene in many places. It's a difficult line to walk.

No obscene, inappropriate.

But it can very quickly descend into the obscene, and if they didn't filter you'd get nasty dick picks all over the place.

Every social place has rules, not exception. It's just a matter of how they are impressed.

Post reply on HN