Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Removing Holocaust Denial Content

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 823 posts

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#191

Post by Cthulhu_ »

lki876 wrote: post #184
NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and Goebbels and Stalin were both part of the government . Why is so hard to understand that government limitations on free speech are fundamentally different from private ones? Freedom of the press means being able to print what you want, not being able to compel the printer. Facebook doesn't have to be complicit in publishing speech it finds repugnant, and why should it?

The concept of free speech has nothing to do with governments or private institutions. The legal differences between those entities has nothing to do with the general concept.

The concept, no; however, freedom of speech also covers Facebook's freedom to not provide a platform if they choose to do so.

You cannot make me say, write, or publish something I don't agree with; freedom of speech is also the freedom to NOT speak. This extends to individuals and platforms both.

In WW2, newspapers were controlled by the invaders; they were told what to publish, even if the people behind it disagreed.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#192

Post by vajrabum »

vajrabum wrote: post #163
ComputerGuru wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's been shown that deplatforming and moving those nuts out of the mainstream social media channels reduce their influence. Would you mind linking to the studies you have in mind? In thinking about the likes of The_Donald and its current, banished form.

I got curious about it's current, banished form because I'd missed that bit of the story. It's about what I'd expect except they have a non-CCDA compliant cookie notice with no opt-out. Makes me wonder if that's because they have amateur web devs or if the management didn't want to include it because California and politics.

I also notice that if you search on that community there are lots of references to it on Twitter, Wikipedia, and other places.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#193

Post by yalogin »

Facebook is hedging hard these past couple weeks. Looks like they have decided that Trump is going to lose and so suddenly decided licking his boots is not worth it, just like Theil did. I don't trust FB is trying to do the right thing, I will only believe that they are doing this to make it seem like they are not targeting trump when they blocked qanon.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#194

Post by Dobbs »

globular-toast wrote: post #177
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I draw the line at hate. If one side wants to destroy me do I have to listen to their arguments?

I think it would be wise to learn why somebody hates you, yes. There might be a very good reason for it.

I've heard the same arguments from hundreds of people. The same misquoted, manipulated statistics, the same concern trolling, the same dog whistles. There isn't any point in listening. Some people hate me for what I am. They want to take my rights away from me, they want to restrict my ability to access medicine, they want to stop me from being in the military (not that I wish to join). Why should I listen to one more person lie and spread hate?

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#195

Post by Broken_Hippo »

zests wrote: post #160
duxup wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how that is a slippery slope?

Assuming you support facebook's move to remove this content, would you not also support the removal of similar content that you also consider objectionable? Do you not hope that this leads to more content removal or is this the only piece of content that you consider necessary to remove? By my estimation -- and there are certain individuals where this might not be true -- if you support this you likely _want_ this to…

Surely, you can see how objectionable things can be different?

I find most religious content to be objectionable. But for the most part, it is benign. In general, someone's religious beliefs don't affect me. Once it starts to call for the ill treatment of others, though, I think it should be removed. So religion-based anti-LGBTQ content should be removed (for example).

Holocaust denial stems from a long history of anti semitism, which in itself tends to advocate the poor treatment of others and enbraces a certain amount of dehumanizing language. All for something they cannot help and doesn't actually affect others. We know that hate groups embrace this. We also know it happened - we have pictures. It is simply lies to get folks to treat others badly. So, removal.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#196

Post by whoisburbansky »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #166
amadeuspagel wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost any kind of censorship could be justified with the argument that some voices are "drained out" by others, so to protect the former, the latter most be censored, which is not actually "an encroachment on free speech but a necessary impediment to keep the spirit of free speech and free society intact". WTF does this mean? The internet is not a room where some people have to be silent so that you can hear the oth…

> You can simply ignore people you don't like, or you deem "intolerant", etc. No, that's not how the Internet - or people in general - work.

The "ignore voices you don't like" argument completely fails to account for the effect of those voices on the millions of people around you, and the effect of their changed actions as a result, on you in turn. It's like saying "pretend you're the only person in the world."

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#198

Post by ardit33 »

HashingtheCode wrote: post #148

[flagged]

it is hateful speach, because it is like rubbing salt to wounds intentionally, and it has 3rd party victims. While flat earther, don't have any third party victims....

Instead of saying: they support the mass killing of particular group of people directly.

They say: it didn't happen

I do think holocaust denial is hateful speach, often used by neo-nazi groups. Should iy be illegall, like it is in Germany? No. As that is a step too far. But I think a particular platform is free to filter these idiots out from their algo and recommendations and FB is doing the right thing in this case.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#199

Post by whoknew1122 »

The slowest of slow claps imaginable. It's better to do it 5 years too late than never, I guess. But Facebook doesn't get any pats on the back.

Facebook's modus operandi is:

1.) Allow algorithms to grow and foster toxic ideas and communities, because these create the most user engagement

2.) Extract as much ad revenue as possible from the user engagement

3.) Say 'Oooops, our bad. We're doing something about this now' when Facebook's role in proliferating toxic content gets politically untenable

4.) Keep the bags of money they generated from this content and get positive press

5.) Wait until people start paying attention to the next abhorrent thing Facebook helps propagate

---

It's really getting old.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#200

Post by s_dev »

samename wrote: post #19

The unchecked power Zuck and co have has global implications for every tiny decision they make. Who gave them this power? What makes them the best people to be making these decisions? Can we always trust them to get it right?

> What makes them the best people to be making these decisions?

Because rightly or wrongly billions of people entrusted their data to FB in exchange for services. There is no best or worst about it -- FB are the only people who control FB servers.

Post reply on HN