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

Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

nationalreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#901

Post by 542354234235 »

CyberRabbi wrote: post #812
codyswann wrote: post #801

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you can say whatever you want at your job without any repercussion from your employer? Yikes.

If you’re being sincere that’s a false characterization of the freedom of speech. It is not the ability to say whatever you want but it is the ability to share legitimate information or dissenting opinions, the former being the topic of OP. Employers should not be able to deny people their rights.

> Employers should not be able to deny people their rights

Freedom of speech means the government will not target you for expressing your opinion. It does not mean that your employer has to tolerate it. If I write an op-ed about how my employer makes a shoddy product, they are well within their legal rights to conduct their business how they see fit and terminate their business relationship with me. You seem to confuse freedom of speech with freedom from consequence of speech.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#902

Post by tootie »

aksss wrote: post #769
tootie wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're also declaring a "smoking gun" of Hunter peddling influence when the only data point is an email from a Ukrainian to Hunter saying that he was looking forward to meeting the Vice President. There doesn't seem to be any message from Hunter, and Joe has already said his official schedule is public record and no meeting ever happened.

I think what’s considered the smoking gun here is the direct contradiction of what Biden has publicly attested to. This, in the context of Hunter’s questionable nexus of high compensation, dearth of professional qualification, and familial connections. All of this in context of Biden’s last failed presidential run.

It is definitely not a direct contradiction. It's very indirect. We have an email thanking Hunter for a potential meeting. We have no confirmation from Hunter. We have no confirmation the meeting happened. We have no confirmation any quid pro quo was offered. We have no confirmation Hunter said anything to his father.

The laptop was supposedly dropped off a few years ago. Giuliani, Bannon and the FBI have seen the data at least months ago. The NY Post has had it in their possession. None of these details are confirmed. Which means they either failed to verify any of it or they may even know it's a scam.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#903

Post by dionian »

Karunamon wrote: post #451
jeremyjh wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree they blundered here. They don't want to be hijacked by another "leaks" story days before the election but now the suppression of this has become the entire story, and its convinced a lot of people the story is true and dangerous to Biden. Even if the email is true I don't see how its dangerous and if the only media carrying the story are the NY Post and Fox it doesn't hurt Biden.

That's an angle I hadn't even considered, but I'm surprised Twitter didn't. SV social media companies, of all the organizations in the world , should understand the implications of a Streisanding. If they had just left it alone, maybe attached the standard "this might be false" disclaimer, it would likely have passed as yet another partisan thing , but now they've gone and infused it with a bunch of power it didn't h…

Clearly their partisan activism got the best of them. No longer can they merely label trump's tweets as misinfo, they have to start full-on censoring. They were probably trying to find a way to call this hate speech or racism to justify it.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#904

Post by dionian »

skrowl wrote: post #874
robertlagrant wrote: post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does the immigration system violate human rights?

Some people believe that open borders to all countries are a human right.

I wonder what they use to justify this belief. I dont think it has a specific historical precedent

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#905

Post by jlokier »

CaoCao wrote: post #881
bipson wrote: post #849

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not GP, but most immigration systems violate human rights all the time by treating people as if they were people without these rights - or not people at all. Most of the time the legal leeway is based upon them not being citizens (yet). What is the path to immigration in your country? It begins with a legal dilemma: E.g. asylum is a human right, but how to determine who is eligible? In a timely manner that is. Especi…

"asylum is a human right" "determine who is eligible" Well, if it's a human right, then everyone. But it's not, which is why you have this twisted logic. There is no right to freely cross borders.

Asylum is a human right, that doesn't mean everyone can successfully claim it!

It means everyone has a right to put in a claim to asylum and have it assessed properly by the authorities.

> There is no right to freely cross borders.

In some circumstances, yes there is.

If there's a war in country A, and non-combatants flee to neighbouring country B out of genuine necessity for safety, yes that border crossing is widely regarded as a human right.

It derives from the basic right to life.

Doesn't mean country B will respect it.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#906

Post by Balgair »

blisseyGo wrote: post #657
Balgair wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR was posting fake news?

I know this will get attacked for the source but this summarizes it well. There's numerous other examples too: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/npr-busted-framing-self-... The whole "russian bounty" was completely false too.

I mean, on average, articles published by some dude calling himself Tyler Durden (in 2020) probably should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Also, hedging that you;ll get attacked isn't a good foot to start off with either. If the evidence is sound, let it stand on it's own.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#907

Post by jlokier »

dionian wrote: post #904
skrowl wrote: post #874

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people believe that open borders to all countries are a human right.

I wonder what they use to justify this belief. I dont think it has a specific historical precedent

Isn't every human right without historical precedent at first, until it becomes established?

Doesn't that always happen step by step, with "early adopters" arguing on grounds of morality and other arguments, until eventually enough people start to believe something has a high moral value and should be raised to the level of a human right, enshrined in law?

Those who would argue for open borders as a human right are like "early adopters" of that idea.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#908

Post by jfengel »

awerawerawrjhui wrote: post #794
refurb wrote: post #780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Highly underrated comment. It's easy to be a free speech advocate when it benefits your own views. It's not easy when it doesn't.

Being a free speech advocate when it benefits your own views is an oxymoron. Defending free speech by definition means defending people's right to say things you disagree with. If you only defend people's right to agree with you then you're not a free speech advocate.

I think that's precisely what they're saying: a lot of people talk about "free speech" because free speech benefits them. When you're in a dominant position, free speech doesn't threaten you. Or at least, you think it doesn't.

Few free speech advocates think you should be free to call for violence. That's free speech that does threaten them. Speech that calls for discrimination against groups they don't belong to, however, is perfectly fine -- they know that they're too important to be threatened by it.

So practically all self-described free speech advocates do put limits on free speech, and there aren't any True Scotsmen.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#910

Post by surge »

save_ferris wrote: post #882
Rochetshipz wrote: post #871

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Particularly, claiming Russian collusion the last time did not turn out to be true, but the Media jumped on this narrative. Let's not do it again.

This has been repeatedly debunked. Crowdstrike, who was hired for the security audit, states very explicitly that their IR team had proof that COZY BEAR and FANCY BEAR had breached the network.[0] > To reference, CrowdStrike’s account of their DNC investigation, published on June 14, 2016, “CrowdStrike Services Inc., our Incident Response group, was called by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the formal govern…

OP is talking about collusion and the years of investigations and other nonsense.

You're talking about an ineffective hack that's used for scaremongering, that was caught and had little to no effect on the out come of the election.

Post reply on HN