Is reddit over
Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
551–560 of 996 posts
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#552Earlier quoted context omitted.
This site listes Parler and Voat which have rampant, unchecked antisemitism and racism. I would love to see a non-censorious site that takes hate speech seriously but they don't seem to exist for some reason...
The thing is, any service that offers a "censorship-free" alternative will instantly attract mostly by those whose content is garbage for everyone else: usually it's pedophiles until the operators get a couple not-so-nice letters or a police raid and then at least introduce modest moderation, and then come Nazis, antisemites and conspiracy myth peddlers. And said hate peddlers then complain that they don't have the r…
> usually it's pedophiles until the operators get a couple not-so-nice letters or a police raid and then at least introduce modest moderation
You're describing illegal content. Nobody is objecting to taking that down. Everyone else is talking about censoring legal content.
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#553Reddit, Twitter, should I keep going
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#554The is the first I (as well as others here, apparently) had ever heard of the "fediverse". Wikipedia [1] helps me out with what it is technically... but can anyone who knows describe what its content is actually like?
In terms of hate speech or illegal content... does that make up the vast majority of fediverse content, in the way that pirated media makes up the vast majority of torrents? (Even though torrents can also still be used for 100% legitimate and legal purposes.)
Or is it like the dark web, which from what I understand is mostly legal content, but still hosts a sizeable proportion of content for illegal services and content?
Or is it more like what Reddit used to be, where it's 99% all for good and fun, but with a tiny minority of super-hateful communities? (These days all those super-hateful communities have been banned for a while, which is why I mean the "old Reddit".)
Just trying to get a basic context here. Not looking for speculation, but the impressions from people who actually use it...
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#555Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kindly take this as a devils advocate post before you reflexively downvote. It looks like letting people say anything they want on major social media platforms is only having one major positive effect: a few advertising companies are becoming very rich. The negative effects include: - incited violence (gang-oriented gun crime in Chicago is often fanned by social media posts for example) - bad medical decisions (vacci…
I think it's obvious that if less people speak their mind, we could have a smarter, happier humanity. But I also think it's obvious that I shouldn't trust you to make the decision of who needs to shut up. And definitely not the government.
> But I also think it's obvious that I shouldn't trust you to make the decision of who needs to shut up. And definitely not the government.
Well right now social media companies seem to have that power. How is that better?
I hear this point all the time. Is there a better response than this?
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#556Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, I've been thinking along these lines for a while too; thank you for phrasing it so clearly. My current thinking led me to conclude that we don't have sufficiently good tools[0] for modelling O(n) problems with n > 2. Particularly when (what your simplification doesn't capture) there are feedback loops involved. Take this O(2) problem: x causes more y, y causes more z, z causes less y but much more x. Or in a…
Your ascii art is much better than mine and I'm not going to attempt it, but I agree with everything that you've said except for > I argue that we lack both mental and technological tools to cope with this. I do think we have the tools to solve these issues. I do not think the mental tools are in the hands of the average person (likely not even in most of your above average people because the barrier to entry is exce…
> Your ascii art is much better
A skill honed in deep procrastination :).
> I think 3 other things should be discussed as well.
Strongly agreed with all three.
> Dynamic problems (people often reduce things to static and try to turn positive sum games into zero sum.
That's what I implicitly meant by talking (again and again) about feedback loops; problems with such loops are a subset of dynamic problems, and one very frequently seen in the world. But you've rightfully pointed out the superset. I think most people, like you say, try to turn everything into a static problem as soon as possible, so they can have a conclusive and time-invariant opinion on it. But it's not the proper way to think about the world[0]!
(I only disagree with the "try to turn positive sum games into zero sum"; zero-sum games also require perceiving the feedback loops involved. And then there are negative-sum games.)
> probabilistic problems
Yup. Basic probability is taught to schoolchildren, but as a toy (or just another math oddity) rather than a tool for perceiving the world.
(Thank you for the kind words :).)
--
[0] - Unless your problem has a fixed point that you can point out.
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#557Is it hard for Google to blacklist these questionable domains and block them at the Android level instead? .. if the claimed issue is really a concern. That way browsers will also benefit from it.
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#558Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because the airwaves are public, so the FCC could regulate / require equal time in the public interest. A TV or radio station isn't operating entirely on its own dime - it's using a public resource, so it should be done in the public interest. There was no fairness doctrine applied to, say, newspapers.
The internet is a public resource.
Not in the same way the airwaves are. You can run your own network cable but everyone has to share the same limited airwaves.
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#559> Like hate speech is bad and it’s not censorship if it’s not mandated by the government. To be fully accurate, this is absolutely censorship , but it's not a violation of anyone's First Amendment rights. People often conflate the two. We can argue about whether or not Google should ban certain opinions on their platform, or where the line should be drawn, but it is arguable that hey have the legal right to do so. An…
Censorship is allowed under the first amendment on obscenity or national security grounds. Private organizations just have more freedom in this area. EX: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_v._Pacifica_Foundation
The first amendment, like less encompassing provisions in other liberal countries, was arguably intended to forbid prior censorship, whereby opinions had to be vetted by some authority before publication. It was expanded in its interpretation to other kinds of censorship, through the idea that a chilling effect on speech was comparable to a priori censorship.
Re: Google is apparently taking down all/most Fediverse apps from the Play Store
#560Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gab bans people openly and credulously discussing marxism. I have experimented with and experienced this directly. So, it fails my litmus test for "an uncensored platform." And it's a bit comical, because Gab as a community experience is much smaller (in my perspective) from even weird sites like minds or funky social blockchain plays. Why they felt the need to ban discusions of marxism or a general strike is beyond…
> Why they felt the need to ban discusions of marxism or a general strike is beyond me. Because it was built to be a fascist recruitment channel, and the talk of 'free speech' is just a smoke screen that they don't care about at all.
Sure, but anyone who talks about that there is a punching bag. It's all awful people. They don't need to do that work, the users do it for them.