951–960 of 996 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Appeasement isn't a good option here either when the ban is irrational at face value to begin with.
> Appeasement isn't a good option here either when the ban is irrational at face value to begin with. These apps might not have any good options.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that is true then that suggests that the efforts of the establishment to rein the big social media companies will prove largely ineffective with the result that Facebook, Google, etc, will probably join the New York Times, Harvard, etc, as part of the governing structure of the US. That's exactly what "reining in" looks like. Instead of being an alternative to, e.g. the New York Times and opposing the next Iraq wa…
Manufacturing consent online is dependent on the rules of the game. Russian-bot-syndrome is a fraud issue, in this case a state actor manipulating the 1-person-1-voice assumption of the game. If we're making a marketplace metaphor, then this market is being tilted toward actors with the resources to pay for bots, workers, or influencers. It's not like it's limited to Russia; Bloomberg was somewhat showy during the pr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even so, OP still has a point. Reddit is pretty lenient as far as content is concerned.
This is a tricky problem even to define, because there's "Reddit" which is the owners and paid moderators, then there is "reddit" which is the universe of its subreddits and its unpaid, unaccountable moderators. For example, it's been well known for awhile that if you subscribe to any of the men's rights subs, you are auto-banned from several of the feminism ones (including TwoXChromosomes). That kind of thing certai…
It does not matter what the content of the comment was, of course. What matters is the fact you left the bubble and interacted with a different one, you traitorous scum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get what you're saying, but I don't think this is because Google cares about hate speech. Google is simply using hate speech as an excuse to get rid of apps that it doesn't like. Deciding which apps you like and which you don't isn't that hard of a line to draw.
Google is politically very very left. I'm guessing that someone at Google may have browsed these apps, decided they didn't like what they saw, and pressured to have the apps banned. Obviously they can't do that to large players like Facebook, but small apps, they can easily crush, and nobody's going to do anything about it. Image if Google decided to just block certain websites on Chrome, or if big tech got domain re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Moderation or editorial discretion that censors a certain piece of information or opinion is still censoring.
Historically, the position of the censor has always been as the governmental authority. Censorship is a threat from a governmental perspective. The assertion that moderation of hate speech on private platforms is censorship is a form of moral panic. As the owner of private property if someone were to graffiti my walls without permission it would be absolutely absurd to suggest that the person who vandalized my goods…
This is just plain false. The dictionary definition [1] disagress with you, Wikipedia explicitly mentions private private organisations [2]. Religion institutions have censored a lot of things in the past [3]. If what you said were true, government censorship would not be a phrase people used as it would be a pleonasm.
> As the owner of private property if someone were to graffiti my walls without permission
This is a false equivalence. You're not allowing anyone to paint on your walls, so it's not a place where expression is allowed. Censorships is selectively suppressing expression.
If you would open your walls for public painting, and then remove a few of them you don't like, you're indeed censoring those artists. That doesn't mean it wrong/illegal, it's just the definition of censorship.
[1] "censor - a person who supervises conduct and morals" from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censoring
[2] "Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and other controlling bodies" from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship
[3] https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-fig-leaf-story...
When I see the amount of people registering with Gmail accounts on the Fediverse when it is supposed to be a tech giants escape (Twitter here but still) and then complaining and crying about a "Google Play ban", I am laughing very very strong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem I have isn't that Google bans these apps. The problem is the fact that Google banning these apps borders on state censorship because of the monopolistic position Google has. Busting up Google solves the correct problem.
That doesn't make sense. The apps can be made available outside of the play s tore. There's no state level censorship here.
There we are. When framapiaf.org, mamot.fr and other "free speech" and "anti-censorship floss activists" will start to apply a proper moderation and clear blocks of fascists instances and users, maybe Google would reconsider to publish the Android clients on Google Play.
Those spaces are totally out of control and this is a part of the problem.
Earlier 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…
> [0] - Or, if they exist, they aren't sufficiently well known outside some think tanks or some random academic papers. Are you familiar with Judea Pearl's work regarding graphical analysis of causal problems? If not, he'd probably interest you. While he mostly falls in the category of "random academic papers" (and academic books), but he has also co-authored a very readable (and enjoyable) popular science book. A re…