UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech • Hacker News Board

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#141

Post by dfxm12 » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:13 PM UTC

rootsudo wrote: post #91

We're okay with social media companies regulating free speech, but draw the line at governments. Ironic, isn't it? And yes, I'm well aware that Governments should endorse and not stifle free speech, but this message is propagated on social media platforms. The very systems that enable voice and disable voices because it's a violation of "Terms of Services" or in other words, revenue. But then again, governments grant…

The very systems that enable voice and disable voices because it's a violation of "Terms of Services" or in other words, revenue.

Democracy enables voice. Capitalism, vis-a-vis putting revenue above all else, disables it.

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#142

Post by drummer » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:17 PM UTC

The solution here of course is to stop voting and giving away your souvereignty to politicians (criminals) who will rule over you by force.

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#143

Post by regularfry » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:19 PM UTC

SuddsMcDuff wrote: post #69

regularfry wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"challenges trans orthodoxy" is definitely picking a side.

They're picking the side of those who are no-platformed. That's the point.

Yes, and they are utterly disingenuous in doing so. "Free speech" has nothing whatsoever to do with the examples they've picked for their front page. "Free speech" is protection from persecution by the state. What they're arguing for is freedom from social consequences. Not only that, but the specific example they've picked could almost be designed to highlight a specific culture-war position; given that their front-man is Toby Young, it's hardly surprising that they're difficult to interpret as anything close to politically neutral.

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#144

Post by whatshisface » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:20 PM UTC

dfxm12 wrote: post #134

commandlinefan wrote: post #4

What I’m becoming more painfully aware of with each passing year is that “free speech” is actually (sadly) a very unpopular ideal. We haven’t really had it in a long time, and we have less of it with each passing year - cheered on by a not insignificant majority.

Why do you have "free speech" in scare quotes? What does having less of this ideal mean to you?

Having less freedom of speech is a pretty obvious idea, it means that there are fewer things that you are allowed to say or publish without retribution.

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#145

Post by save_ferris » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:22 PM UTC

disown wrote: post #116

djohnston wrote: post #2

The last 5 years have really made question the benefits of free speech in our hyperconnected world. My knee jerk reaction to defend free speech has certainly been dampened by the efficacy of disinformation campaigns in the West.

That's an argument against hyperconnection rather than free speech. Also, disinformation campaigns in the "West" have always existed. It's not anything new. And the only way to fight disinformation is with free speech. Free speech is what prevents disinformation to have total control.

> Also, disinformation campaigns in the "West" have always existed. It's not anything new.

True, but what is new is that disinformation campaigns can utilize popular online platforms to communicate directly with susceptible individuals on the scale of billions of people. That has never existed before and private companies are clearly struggling to address it.

> Free speech is what prevents disinformation to have total control.

Unfortunately, disinformation doesn't need total control to be able to hijack a democracy, it just needs to be effective enough to keep the electorate wanting to support the officials that disinformation supports.

To be clear, I'm very much on the fence on how we should move forward on this issue. But we now clearly live in a world that no longer has a commonly shared truth. One's perception of truth and belief in leadership style, or even the existence of criminal activity depends largely on your political background.

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#146

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:25 PM UTC

Shared404 wrote: post #19

raxxorrax wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not on this issue in Europe. Almost every party feels powerless and blindly tries to get power over content. Many parties are even afraid of democracy by now.

> Not on this issue in Europe. > Many parties are even afraid of democracy by now. So they are afraid of the consequences of elections?

[deleted]

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#147

Post by jlokier » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:26 PM UTC

Shared404 wrote: post #19

raxxorrax wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not on this issue in Europe. Almost every party feels powerless and blindly tries to get power over content. Many parties are even afraid of democracy by now.

> Not on this issue in Europe. > Many parties are even afraid of democracy by now. So they are afraid of the consequences of elections?

For the same reason that regular people are afraid of the consequences of elections.

It's heartbreaking, and for some life-ruining, what awful things the other side[1] do when they get in. Democracy is no game.

[1] for each individual's value of "other side".

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#148

Post by thowaosab » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:28 PM UTC

jlokier wrote: post #140

macinjosh wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. Words are just words. One may hear or read words that provoke them to violence or other negative behavior but blaming the speech in whole or in part removes agency from those who choose to react in a negative way.

Words can cause trauma. A lasting, debilitating effect. Even changes to brain structure (PTSD etc) and long term disability. I regard that as a harm. Note that "cause harm" does not always imply "blame". It does imply cause and effect though, suggesting "responsibility".

Sources please?

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#149

Post by idle_zealot » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:31 PM UTC

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #120

dlkf wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP said "successful doctor", it's unclear how chiropractors are relevant.

Quacks can be wildly successful too.

It's the "doctor" part that's missing.

Re: UK government’s plans to regulate the internet are a threat to free speech

#150

Post by thowaosab » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 7:37 PM UTC

AniseAbyss wrote: post #119

commandlinefan wrote: post #4

What I’m becoming more painfully aware of with each passing year is that “free speech” is actually (sadly) a very unpopular ideal. We haven’t really had it in a long time, and we have less of it with each passing year - cheered on by a not insignificant majority.

I am not in favour of it anymore, I have seen what it does in the US. I don't want Qanon to speak I want him to get run over by a truck.

I agree.

I want to see all BLM, Antifa and other looting pedophiles and rapists get run over by MAGA truck.