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

631–640 of 823 posts

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#631

Post by shadowgovt »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #624
shadowgovt wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule of law doesn't exclude an employer deciding an employee is more trouble than they're worth outside of some very specific situations (class protection, etc.). Within the constraint of the rule of law, a group of people can organize to petition an employer to remove an employee for behavior A, and the employer can evaluate A and decide whether the group's claims are untrue, A should be removed for the behavior…

> The rule of law doesn't exclude an employer deciding an employee is more trouble than they're worth outside of some very specific situations (class protection, etc.). "Rule of law" refers to "judgment in a court on the basis of a codified law" as opposed to "mob rule" where the mob takes it upon itself to determine who is guilty. My point is that I hope we can agree that the mob is bad at determining who is guilty…

> Personally I think we should make it harder for employers to terminate their employees for their private free speech, such that mobs can "protest" employee behavior but they can't even implicitly threaten the employee's livelihood and access to health care.

I'm personally nervous about a law enacting that creating a situation where a black employer can't fire an employee for organizing a Klan rally.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#632

Post by mcfly1985 »

shadowgovt wrote: post #606
mcfly1985 wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost like certain aspects may have been exaggerated or have been outright lies.

I know it's not what they're going for, but sometimes I wish HN would follow FB's example.

Another HN commenter who's never wrong and knows everything!

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#633

Post by shadowgovt »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #441
tarboreus wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My goodness, "Free Speech" whatever HN folks imagine it to be does not mean you get to use FB's infrastructure to disseminate it.

Basically. Forcing them to disseminate it infringes Facebook's freedom of the press. Or freedom of association; there are arguments to be made in both directions.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#634

Post by audessuscest »

whateveracct wrote: post #258
jcadam wrote: post #155

To save free speech, we have to destroy free speech. In the future, some historian is going to write the seminal work on the decline and dissolution of the United States - and there's going to be an entire chapter dedicated to social media.

Facebook removing Holocaust Denial content isn't a step towards dystopia lmao. Video game forums in the '00s did this.

yes it is

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#635

Post by stormdennis »

voxl wrote: post #12
stormdennis wrote: post #3

If you remove Holocaust denial content all you achieve is to fuel conspiracy theories. It's completely counter-productive.

Yeah I don't think so. And such an extraordinary claim requires some evidence.

To begin with, I think it's fair to say that it's doing something rather than leaving things as they are that requires evidence.

Secondly it is arrogant in the extreme to believe that you are critical enough to see deniers for what they are but others must be protected from having to form a reasoned opinion.

I don't have specific evidence but banning things, in general, is counter-productive. It drives the activity underground. Examples include prohibition and narcotics in general.

In the case of Holocaust denial it also suggests a lack of confidence by the establishment, that they fear that the deniers have a plausible case. I, like most people have seen mountains of evidence showing that the Holocaust did happen. All bar a few cranks and simpletons having taken the trouble to look at both sides would surely come to the conclusion that the Holocaust did happen and see the promoters of denial for what they are.

Denying people the opportunity to hear the deniers' case promotes the suggestion that there is a conspiracy concealing the truth from the public.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#636

Post by shadowgovt »

mcfly1985 wrote: post #632
shadowgovt wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it's not what they're going for, but sometimes I wish HN would follow FB's example.

Another HN commenter who's never wrong and knows everything!

N'ah, there's plenty I don't know. I'm just using my free speech to make my preferences known regarding this service I use and support via my attention.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#637

Post by nostromo »

heylook wrote: post #614
nostromo wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is how people work, as evidenced over and over again by a widening view of compassion for others. Just look at the past 20 years and the success of the gay rights movement. Views changed because of millions of one-on-one conversations between people who disagreed on gay marriage. No censorship was required for progress. In fact, censorship would have been counterproductive, as I believe it is here. It's no coincid…

Political change of this magnitude happens because different people are voting, not because the same person changed their mind. Literally it’s because the old people died before they could pass 100% of their bigotry to the next generation.

This isn't true. Approval for gay marriage has gone up for all generations. It's now at 45% approval among people born before 1945, up from just 17% in 2003.

https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/changing-attitudes-on-ga...

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#638

Post by throwaway894345 »

shadowgovt wrote: post #589
throwaway894345 wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we're talking about the US, that's already extremely firmly cemented outside of specific union protections (I haven't heard about unions going to bat for employees getting called out; I'd be interested to see if it's happening). It's not firmly cemented, it's a common law, but it's well within the realm of possibility that Congress would pass a bill that strengthens employment protections. This is something the…

> I'm guessing you would argue that this is immoral and harmful behavior I do not. I argue that the public putting pressure on individuals who spread bad ideas to stop doing that---up to and including looping their employer in, up to and including the employer terminating that employment relationship---is part of the healthy public immune system to bad ideas and antisocial behavior. "We live in a society" and all tha…

> I do not. I argue that the public putting pressure on individuals who spread bad ideas to stop doing that

The whole point is that there's not a good way to determine what ideas are "bad ideas" apart from ongoing public debate.

> up to and including the employer terminating that employment relationship---is part of the healthy public immune system to bad ideas and antisocial behavior

The obvious problem is that "employers can terminate any employee at will" is that it does at least as much harm to "good ideas" as to "bad ideas". It optimizes for "popular ideas" and your ideas might not be popular, especially if you believe (as many cancel culture proponents do) that we live in an abhorrent white supremacist, rape culture. If these ideas are indeed popular, then a mechanism that allows employers to terminate employees for any reason coupled with an incentive system that encourages employers to terminate employees with unpopular ideas will naturally result in the propagation of those popular ideals.

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#639

Post by [deleted] »

AHappyCamper wrote: post #510

My grandparent's families were mostly wiped out. We lost over 300 on my Dad's side, and there's no number for how many we lost on my Mom's side - everyone was killed. I grew up listening to my Grandmother screaming when she had panic attacks and night terrors, and the stories we heard were horrific. I'm so so glad that Facebook has done this. Maybe it hurts freedom of speech, and maybe it's overreach - I don't know -…

[deleted]

Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content

#640

Post by Rebelgecko »

shadowgovt wrote: post #463
Rebelgecko wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>book burning is a real issue only when its state sponsored. Strong disagree from me. These corporations are becoming an increasingly large part of how people communicate. Imagine if phone companies started deplatforming people the way social media sites do- it would become incredibly hard (perhaps impossible) to live a normal life in 21st century america.

Different media. Phones are a direct-messaging platform; Facebook is a highway full of roadside billboards.

FB has direct messaging and will refuse to send a PM to a friend if it contains a "bad" link
Post reply on HN