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

341–350 of 823 posts

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#341

Post by coldtea »

Dobbs wrote: post #183
leftyted wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This heavy-handedness isn't an encroachment on free speech but a necessary impediment to keep the spirit of free speech and free society intact, one where the tolerant voices aren't drained out by the relentlessness and irrationality of the intolerant. What is tolerance? You can't tolerate something if you agree with it. Tolerance means putting up with things with which you disagree. This is an encroachment on free…

The really quick and dirty version: I can't tolerate (neo) Nazis because they want to harm queer people, Jews, disabled people etc. The people they want to harm can't do anything to stop being targeted by (neo) Nazis. Nazis can stop being Nazis and then I'll start tolerating them. It doesn't matter if a Jew stops practising Judaism they will be targeted. It doesn't matter if a gay person is in the closet, they will b…

>Nazis can stop being Nazis and then I'll start tolerating them.

So, it's OK to harass e.g. gay people? After all they can stop having sex with men and marry a woman. How about Christians? Muslims? Democrats? All of them can stop being what they are, so it's ok to harass them?

Looks like a half-thought argument.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#342

Post by whoisjuan »

jdpedrie wrote: post #284
whoisjuan wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Freedom of speech as defined in the constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Internet speech is not the same as freedom of speech. Facebook is a private platfor…

This is silly. Of course Facebook's censorship is censorship. It is true that they are not bound by the first amendment in the same way in which Congress (and via incorporation the states) are bound, but freedom of speech is a concept which exists independent of the first amendment guarantee to its enjoyment.

In many countries Holocaust Denial it's a crime. The world it's not only the US. So let's start there. If you want to call this censorship that's within your rights of course (your freedom of speech right, nonetheless).

Either way, I think people have also a wrong idea of what censorship is. If I tell you can't take a shit in the middle of my living room and you claim that I'm censoring you, then maybe you should reconsider your logic and definition of censoring. This is basically the same.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#343

Post by shadowgovt »

tarboreus wrote: post #319
jamamp wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that this is an encroachment on free speech. Your free speech protections are only protected _from_ the _government_. The government is not allowed to silence you on most things you say. However, things like shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater (the age-old example) are not free speech. Moreover, Facebook is not the government and does not need to allow you to say anything you want. People who would…

Our first amendment rights in the US restrict the government from prohibiting free speech. But that doesn't mean free speech isn't a principle that can, and should, be applied in other areas of life. When people say Facebook is violating free speech, that absolutely makes sense as a violation of a principle that many of us care strongly about, and that our society is to a great extent founded upon. Just because free…

But the utility of it on other areas of life is up for debate. The US considers the question settled for government intervention, not for private actions.

Free speech doesn't protect my right to blare Nazi propaganda 24/7 into your living room using focused sound technology. Nor should it.

In the US, it doesn't even grant a person the "right" to blare Nazi propaganda 24/7 using a licensed FM radio station.

Many people seem to take as granted that free speech is a virtue that an entity like Facebook should support, but their statements assume without evidence that free speech protection is a virtue in that context.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#344

Post by asah »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #114

How are they going to determine what is HD? Some scholars get labeled denialists because they have different estimates for the number of Jews killed in concentration camps. Seems worrying to have FB moderators determining what's acceptable historical debate and what is wrongthink.

Is this a real issue? If so, it's trivial to start with the blatant stuff and move onto the subtle stuff if/when that's insufficient.

https://www.adl.org/hate-symbols?keys=holocaust

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#345

Post by NovemberWhiskey »

josephcsible wrote: post #302
NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a nice soundbite you've got there, but what does it actually mean? Facebook can imprison people? Fine them? Revoke their permission to travel? Fire them from their jobs? Decide their contractual disputes? Determine the taxes they should pay? None of the above?

More power in terms of ability to censor/effectiveness of censorship.

Facebook can throw me in prison for saying the wrong thing? Facebook can issue notices to other publishers telling them they cannot publish what I write? Facebook exercises general control over which internet sites are available in my country?

None of the above?

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#346

Post by donatj »

CydeWeys wrote: post #237
jimbob45 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s a huge pain to re-establish their platform elsewhere, not that it can’t be done.

Can it be done? Who's been banned from the major platforms and has then established a similarly sized platform of their own elsewhere? You have to admit that this is at least a huge roadblock for hateful extremists, no?

Whose definition of "hateful extremist"?

Anyone who would censor another person qualifies as a hateful extremist in my book.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#347

Post by bjourne »

creata wrote: post #248
logicalmonster wrote: post #176

Digital book burning 2.0. “But it’s ok, we’re the good guys and doing it for the right reasons”, says every tyrant ever. Never let speech get censored no matter how good it makes you feel in the moment. It’s the worst precedent you can ever set. I’ll try and give an example here that might be safe to give because it rips the Republican Wing of the Military Industrial Complex. If Facebook was one of the world’s primar…

You call it "digital book burning", and you call Facebook a "primary communication channel", because your argument necessitates that you exaggerate so . If you see Facebook for what it is --- not an arm of the government, not the only voice anyone has, but just one of many communication platforms --- it's clear that this is no violation of free speech. Facebook isn't determining "what is true"; it's just determining…

Much in the same way that the Chinese firewall is just determining what it is okay with flowing through its fiber pipes.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#348

Post by [deleted] »

seattle_spring wrote: post #294
leftyted wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This heavy-handedness isn't an encroachment on free speech but a necessary impediment to keep the spirit of free speech and free society intact, one where the tolerant voices aren't drained out by the relentlessness and irrationality of the intolerant. What is tolerance? You can't tolerate something if you agree with it. Tolerance means putting up with things with which you disagree. This is an encroachment on free…

Here, I'll make it easy for you: We shouldn't tolerate things that are objectively and provably false. Denying the holocaust is one of those things, and therefore we shouldn't tolerate it.

[deleted]

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#349

Post by anm89 »

hggythhdtr wrote: post #288
anm89 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't say that. This is dishonest bullying.

Please, do clarify what they meant then. As I see it, they suggested that removing content denying the Holocaust was telling someone what opinions to have on the matter. The Holocaust is not a matter of opinion, it is a fact.

Care to quote where he made any quote regarding the history of anything at all?

He was criticizing facebook for their views on censoring content. All the bullying in the world does not make criticizing facebook holocaust denial.

Also I'm Jewish, no need to convince me the Holocaust happened.

Post reply on HN