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

Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 889 posts

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#871

Post by Rick1 »

throwaway29399 wrote: post #844
Rick1 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody likes the "in-group" and hates the rest. Although the word hate tends to mainly be used about other people.

Absolutely not. You are implying that hating people based on something they cannot control (e.g. ethnicity) is normal.

Actually that's not what I said it all. The concept on in/out-group can be completely arbitrary, e.g. assigned by flipping a coin. The principle still holds.

That said, since you bring it up, the history of humanity is largely the history of war between different ethnic groups. So yes, hating people based on ethnicity has been the norm for most of human history. It's still largely the case in varying degrees in different parts of the world.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#872

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

ttt0 wrote: post #866
ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providing a service to fit the definition of a unit of society is not the same as forcing endorsement of a particular point of view, and even so, there is no law requiring social media from offering fair POVs. You're arguing for a fairness doctrine - e.g. Fox News should be forced to show the other side an equal amount of time.

That's a really weird way of looking at this. HN is not endorsing my point of view by letting me publish comments here. Isn't that what the Section 230 is all about, by the way? I know there is no law preventing social media from censoring people. If there was, we wouldn't be arguing about this right now. What I'm saying is that free speech should be extended to social media.

Section 230 affords protections to HN - that doesn't mean HN doesn't moderate. It does, which involves removing potentially harmful posts. Is this censorship to you?

Now regardless of 230, if the government says "twitter, you can not moderate." That is a violation of Twitter's freedom of speech. It can moderate content however it pleases as of now.

> I know there is no law preventing social media from censoring people. If there was, we wouldn't be arguing about this right now. What I'm saying is that free speech should be extended to social media.

The reason there is no law is because it's unconstitutional. The government can't force speech on platforms, even if said platforms are not responsible for its content.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#873

Post by ttt0 »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #872
ttt0 wrote: post #866

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a really weird way of looking at this. HN is not endorsing my point of view by letting me publish comments here. Isn't that what the Section 230 is all about, by the way? I know there is no law preventing social media from censoring people. If there was, we wouldn't be arguing about this right now. What I'm saying is that free speech should be extended to social media.

Section 230 affords protections to HN - that doesn't mean HN doesn't moderate. It does, which involves removing potentially harmful posts. Is this censorship to you? Now regardless of 230, if the government says "twitter, you can not moderate." That is a violation of Twitter's freedom of speech. It can moderate content however it pleases as of now. > I know there is no law preventing social media from censoring peopl…

> Section 230 affords protections to HN - that doesn't mean HN doesn't moderate.

Sure it doesn't, I brought 230 up because you've equated the ability to post content with endorsement of that content. And again, I'm not sure where do you got this "censoring you is actually my freedom of speech" thing from.

I already posted a wikipedia article proving that in fact yes, you can legally "force speech". I'm not a lawyer, I don't know the law, but it seems to me that we have all those politicians wasting time on nonsensical stuff like trying to ban E2E encryption, so why shouldn't they for once do something useful and ensure that corporations cannot abuse their powers?

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#874

Post by phobosanomaly »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #860
tshaddox wrote: post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU has an explicit process for members to leave nonviolently. The United States has, well, one example of an extreme opposite of that.

The former USSR dissolved rather peacefully at the end of the cold war.

With the notable exception of the former Yugoslavia.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#875

Post by calinet6 »

mistermann wrote: post #830
calinet6 wrote: post #808

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"precisely zero" was an exaggeration to be sure, but it's rather close to reality. Look up a Fermi problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem That's a good place to start with these kinds of questions. I figure this is true simply because of the remarkably low population of Hacker News compared to society at large; there's simply not enough people here for changes to this specific site to make an impact on…

To review, the question was: >>> How do we get back from where we are now? I have to admit, my social skills are lacking, my patience is low; and the problem just seems so vastly overwhelming that I can't imagine where to even begin. I suggested a novel idea: >> I suggest that we fully acknowledge in comprehensive, "dimensional & behavioural complexity", that which lies at the bottom of all of these problems: the hum…

I guess you did not appreciate any corrections I might have.

More seriously, I think you would be surprised at the variety of human experience that’s not covered by your ideals here.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#876

Post by calinet6 »

motohagiography wrote: post #765
calinet6 wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst argument for designing an experience is that users want it. We can do far better. But I get your point. Realistically this has to be a societal change that demands better social media platforms, not something just thrown into the market with no demand.

> The worst argument for designing an experience is that users want it. This statement may be the crux of disagreement in the culture wars as well. To me this is an alien and hostile idea against all that can be good. I'm sure you have some reasoning based on an experience behind it, but it's very likely one of those irreconcilable differences of interests that we have conventions and civilization to navigate and neg…

I doubt we think as differently as you believe.

I am just a user experience designer. There is a wide, wide rift between what users desire and what will actually solve their problems. I'm paid to reconcile that difference.

I do not intend to design society. But then, people are, as we speak. I don't know what's better--letting them design for what people want regardless of what it does to society, or designing for a society that's better regardless of what individuals desire.

We're primitive creatures. All of us, myself included. We're mostly run by our lizard brains, going after what spurts the happy chemicals into our brains.

I don't think society should be shaped to battle against human nature; but I certainly don't think uncontrolled human nature should shape society. As in all things, a balance.

That is what design is, always.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#877

Post by calinet6 »

im3w1l wrote: post #827
calinet6 wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point we'll need to deal with the fact that the clubs self-reinforce any beliefs the tribe wants to put forward, and isolate them further from society, creating true problems for actually running said society. At some point we'll need to have a psychological nuclear weapon disarmament... the question is when and how, not if.

The big dilemma is which rules should be written to make sure that republicans are deradicalized by democrat information, without democrats having to be traumatized by propaganda from the cesspools of the republicans, isn't it?

No, keep in mind not all of us are brainwashed libs, even though we still care about the impact of social media on society.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#878

Post by epakai »

forgingahead wrote: post #274

If you look at Donald Trump's Facebook account, every post of his (including one about getting a new COVID relief bill to him to sign and one wishing people Happy Diwali) is "flagged" by Facebook with their "helpful notice". Twitter has plenty of their own notices as well, spawning several memes already[0][1]. Dick Costolo, the former CEO of Twitter, made a post about "lining up and shooting" people. AOC recently twe…

AOC suggested making record of sycophants in Trump's wake so they can't distance themselves from him[0]. These aren't opposition supporters. They are the senators, representatives, and other politicians who refuse to be the check on Trump because his (distr)actions benefited them, and still do.

[0] https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1324807776510595078

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#880

Post by fsociety »

dimgl wrote: post #230
notahacker wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think Big Tech got every call right, but I really don't see how they please both sides here. Especially when one side, from the top down, considers everything other than sycophantic praise for its leader to be 'fake news', and the other side has some people opining that even reporting things the other side says without qualification is irresponsible journalism. If anything, I'd say hindsight makes some of thei…

I have to disagree. It’s not about pleasing both sides; it’s about being a fair and unbiased platform. And on that front I think big tech absolutely blew it this time across the board. Our society is fractured. There is so much hate and whining online. So much righteousness and loathing. And big tech has only amplified the problem. At times they even fan the flames, what with dubious fact checkers and their “hate spe…

In today’s political landscape, being unbiased in content moderation will anger both sides because of the intense polarization that is occurring.

Then if you go the way of Reddit you will please one side and make the other even more angry.

I think the problem is that we see what is happening in the US with poverty and the middle class, but instead we focus on tribalism.

Not sure what the solution is here.

Post reply on HN