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

‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

news.umich.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 645 posts

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#321

Post by chordalkeyboard »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #256
busterarm wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we should have never given those poors access to say whatever is on their minds, right? At least not in front of other people... It'll be the end of civilization. Everyone should agree with the rich and powerful.

Isn't that basically what the Allegory of the cave is advocating for? If you are uneducated (and almost certainly poor), you do not see reality for how it is, but instead you see shadows against the wall. Only through the process of a dialectical education can you begin to see reality for how it is. As a result, only the educated enlightened individuals should become kings or the guardians of a state. Any system whic…

> Isn't that basically what the Allegory of the cave is advocating for?

My interpretation of the allegory is that it suggests that everyone "should" employ epistemic humility.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#322

Post by root_axis »

Pils wrote: post #284
cristoperb wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure, but they might be talking about one of Vice's other founders, Gavin McInnes, who is known as a far-right provocateur: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_McInnes#Views

Maybe Tim Pool? Big far-right podcaster, was famously an early intern at Vice, regularly claims to be one of Vice's founders.

I tried Tim Pool and Gavin Mcinnes both have pretty similar results on both search engines. Besides, google is totally fine with Tim Pool, that guy has one of the biggest political channels on YouTube.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#323

Post by Rmblnm4n »

I’m self censoring due to corporatocracy. Slimming my consumer profile as much as possible. Making my own entertainment. No more TV and all that. Phone, personal laptop, work laptop, tablet, and some Rpi fun is all I do tech wise.

Meh at the wide open world. This was an intentional plan pre-covid.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#324

Post by kylebenzle »

jedberg wrote: post #310
Der_Einzige wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN really needs a way to force people to have at least clicked on the article before posting. Maybe something where the article has to be clicked on, and then a X minute timer is started so that people will be strongly incentivized to read the article before commenting.

We tried that on reddit a long time ago. It didn't work. We realized that a lot of people just want to see the discussion. I always click on the comments first myself to see if the article is even worth reading.

I thought that was the WHOLE point of Reddit when I joined years ago. It was like Digg but ONLY for people that had "Read-It".

I think that was the idea and it quickly devolved into horse shit.

I would love a site that was like Read-It but forced people to "read-it" first.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#325

Post by lurker619 »

I don't think there is any specific solution, just like there isn't any "solution" to the various wars going on around the world. Social media is going to be a geopolitical quagmire with governments and corporations constantly fighting for control in an ongoing game of whack-a-mole. The tech part has been commoditized. It's time to exit this arena and let the black-suited government guys take over. There should be more interesting technologies on the horizon soon.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#326

Post by ccn0p »

dragonwriter wrote: post #142
the-dude wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are talking about Bush the 2nd right?

I don't know if you've been under a rock for more than a decade, but, no, Bush the Younger is not President of the United States. (Sure, some of the bad acts under his administration prefigured bad acts under this one.)

i think it was sarcasm.... maybe /s would help?

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#327

Post by dragonwriter »

ttt0 wrote: post #312
dragonwriter wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that you're more likely to be fired for being a nationalist rather than a communist I see no evidence that that is the case.

I don't keep track of this, but there is a lot of "canceling" going on recently. If we talk strictly about politics, I did saw a couple of left-leaning people who got fired for politics, because the angry mob went after their employment. But most of the time I see it happening to right-leaning people. And what I never saw was anyone on the left got kicked off platforms like PayPal for example. Though it's within the…

> But most of the time I see it happening to right-leaning people.

And the question you have to ask is how do you see it when it happens to right-leaning people? Is it happening in your immediate neighborhood? Or is this supposed social "cancelling" happening to people who have pre-existing or readily-made-available access to strong, highly-visible, wealthy network that shares their story as outrage fuel and/or enables the socially "cancelled" a highly-visible platform to do so?

Information gathered as unstructured anecdotes, especially absent analysis of the systematic biases in how the information gets to you, is not a reliable basis for drawing conclusions about relative frequency, especially when the topic is specifically differential suppression of viewpoints and information.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#328

Post by ccn0p »

busterarm wrote: post #47
varispeed wrote: post #40

The problem is that we didn't teach people about manipulation techniques because that was governments' favourite tool to control the masses. Now that anybody can reach anyone with any information, bad actors use these techniques to control people to their advantage. Governments' are now in an awkward position - ramp up education in these areas and forever give up a tool that worked for ages, or censor the information…

It's worse than that. We're seeing the teaming up of governments and giant corporations to control the narrative and tell people what's true and what isn't. It's the literal definition of fascism. And you see it being championed by people as defending against "the greatest threat to our democracy".

You can see elements of the slippery slope happening with the rewriting of American history in public government-funded schooling.

“who controls the past controls the future. who controls the present, controls the past”

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#330

Post by seppin »

MeinBlutIstBlau wrote: post #234
ketzo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, in that article, he makes a pretty coherent point: > Obama: If we do not have the capacity to distinguish what’s true from what’s false, then by definition the marketplace of ideas doesn’t work. And by definition our democracy doesn’t work. We are entering into an epistemological crisis. I don't think that's out of place in a conversation about today's internet/media landscape. He's not saying "the internet i…

Disinformation assumes the average person is stupid though. Whose to say the inherent undisputable (because you can't prove or deny) conspiracy theory someone believes is true? Why is the onus on media companies to police how we want to live our lives and believe in whatever nonsense we want to? I play videogames and watch tv shows, because it inspires me to think a particular way outside of the norm, should it be ba…

You dont have to be stupid to fall for disinformation, you just have to want to believe a lie.

A lot of people are ok with lies if they confirm what they already believe.

Post reply on HN