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

511–520 of 645 posts

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

#511

Post by fps_doug »

anticodon wrote: post #510
fps_doug wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get the downvotes either. This is a somewhat valid point. I feel like many people, even here on HN really like to paint the world black and white in this regard. Everything bad we hear about Russia & China must undoubtedly be true, because it's reported by our press, and we have freedom of press, which means that our press never lies or has an agenda. At least when it comes to foreign affairs. So your Facebook…

Is it sarcasm? A bit hard to get for me. There's an old and very easy way to create a distorted image by selectively publishing the news: just ignore all the positive news and publish only negative news. Many opposition channels and blogs in Russia exploit this technique. E.g. there're some anti-Russian blogs (quite many) that publish only vivid descriptions of the most cruel crimes that happened in Russia recently.…

Yes, that was sarcasm, sorry if that wasn't clear enough.

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

#512

Post by mxcrossb »

hliyan wrote: post #434

I'm coming to the realization that misinformation has to be combatted at the ear and not the mouth. I feel the world needs to go through a learning period where everyone realizes that whatever they read on the Internet is default false and they need to verify before they believe anything. In the least they need to verify credibility of sources, if not individual articles or tweets. I suppose what we're experiencing n…

I think the problem is that humans by default assume what they’re reading is true for social cohesion. Especially if you think of social media (or comment sections), I mean why would I ever bother interacting with others if I assume everything I’m being told is false?

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

#513

Post by MrBuddyCasino »

scottlocklin wrote: post #133
AntiImperialist wrote: post #63

As great as free press and democracies are, they also come with huge weaknesses. Those make it easy for foreign propaganda to influence the public and hence run the countries from outside. Thanks to The Great Firewall and the CCP rule, China is mostly immune to foreign propaganda. At the same time, China is using a lot of effort to affect countries with democracy and free speech, like India and the U.S. China is obvi…

Anyone who actually use the excuse of "foreign interference" for totalitarian censorship basically basically doesn't believe in the concept of democracy. "Foreign interference" has been going on from day 0 in the United States. It very obviously got us into WW-1 (the British -a largely untold but very obvious info ops campaign for something that served no US national interest), it got us into the middle east (nothing…

> Anyone who actually use the excuse of "foreign interference" for totalitarian censorship basically basically doesn't believe in the concept of democracy.

David Atkins, Regional Director, CA Dems / Elected DNC Member:

"No seriously...how do you deprogram 75 million people? Where do you start? Fox? Facebook?

We have to start thinking in terms of post-WWII Germany or Japan. Or the failures of Reconstruction in the South." [0]

[0] https://twitter.com/DavidOAtkins/status/1328898661569363969

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

#514

Post by cryptica »

snazz wrote: post #199
lettergram wrote: post #188

Of my past 10 posts on HN 6 have been flagged and removed by users. Of those, many made it to the front page with 10+ votes. I contacted Dang and he was clear it was users censoring it, further that some users were also "vouching" for my posts. It's to the point, people don't want to know. I feel I'm fairly even handed in my discussion. Here's a couple of my posts (who knows if I'll get flagged): - Public Safety Anno…

Politics is generally off-topic here other than in a few specific posts that are explicitly allowed because they're so newsworthy, like the death of RBG and the media calling the election.

I think the fact that politics can't be discussed here is itself a form of censorship.

Because people are not able to freely exchange ideas about politics, you end up with silos.

The main reason why the subject of politics causes flame wars is because people are thinking about it emotionally because they have very little actual information to work with.

The less sharing of information there is on the subject, the more divided people are going to be.

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

#515

Post by cryptica »

ttt0 wrote: post #186
paxys wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? It's the exact opposite. In the US sites like Facebook & Twitter routinely refuse to censor conservative content even if it is against their policies because they are afraid of pissing off Republicans in Congress. A "liberal" on Facebook calling for the beheading of a conservative politican would be banned (possibly even arrested) immediately. The opposite can and does happen every day, with no penalty. And all…

I could bet money that the opposite of what you're saying is true. But I think that illustrates a much bigger problem. The society is so polarized, that we can't even agree on basic facts. Something went terribly wrong with the internet and the media and now we're living in two completely different realities, that are fundamentally incompatible with one another.

Yes I think Facebook allowed the Fauci threats as PR to make themselves look neutral. Mark Zuckerberg and his employees have been playing good cop bad cop with us since the beginning to make the public perceive Facebook as a neutral bystander when in fact they're in a large part responsible for the whole mess and are not neutral at all.

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

#516

Post by VBprogrammer »

tekknik wrote: post #372
VBprogrammer wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do agree with that to some degree. In fact I do find some of the pan rattling about how social networks "must combat disinformation" about the potential Covid vaccines troubling. However, maybe I'm just unlucky, but I have a number of family members who are predisposed to believing anything they see on the internet. I can see the need for social distancing when it comes to viral content too.

> However, maybe I'm just unlucky, but I have a number of family members who are predisposed to believing anything they see on the internet. I can see the need for social distancing when it comes to viral content too. So censor what they see to ensure they only receive the information you approve of correct?

No, but the 30 thousandth time a meme resurfaces proporting to show guns being delivered to terrorist refugees it would be nice if Facebook automatically tagged it with the information that actually it's a scene from some movie or where ever it really came from.

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

#517

Post by cryptica »

anticodon wrote: post #485
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #453

The big problem in todays age is we can no longer assume the government is accountable to us, or even get straight answers from the right people there. Why can't I ask someone at the government directly exactly what their policy is on blocking websites, which sites are blocked, and what the legal basis for blocking is? And get a real, detailed, authoritative answer? And contest that answer if it does not meet legal s…

I don't get what any government has to do with it. Almost all information now is consumed via Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube. These are private companies that has their own censorship rules and push their own agenda aggressively. Government has no control over this, even USA government as was seen recently when Facebook blocked links to NYT articles and Twitter was censoring Trump twits. All other countries (exce…

The government does have control over this. They could easily introduce a law which forbids platforms from censoring any legal content. They choose not to do this.

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

#518

Post by Cthulhu_ »

igorkraw wrote: post #508
chordalkeyboard wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The big problem in todays age is we can no longer assume the government is accountable to us, or even get straight answers from the right people there. Consider the notion that government has always been this way however its easier to tell this now because we are all so interconnected and informed.

That's a cynical take, a slightly less cynical take is that the rich and (privately) powerful have always tried to cement their power in form of organising a feudal-ish state and that the rest of us had to actively support democratising forces to counteracting them. What this means is having everything which lends itself to monopoly to democratic control, not private control, and to work together to make democratic c…

Even if the post office was not profitable and paid for by the tax payer, that is absolutely fine; it's an essential service, it made America great (I feel dirty saying that), it created the need and provided the funding to set up the core infrastructure of the US - post wagons, trains, airlines.

The US mail is part of the infrastructure and should be protected, funded, and kept alive at all costs.

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

#519

Post by ohthehugemanate »

chroem- wrote: post #463
hliyan wrote: post #434

I'm coming to the realization that misinformation has to be combatted at the ear and not the mouth. I feel the world needs to go through a learning period where everyone realizes that whatever they read on the Internet is default false and they need to verify before they believe anything. In the least they need to verify credibility of sources, if not individual articles or tweets. I suppose what we're experiencing n…

How should we handle misinformation from official sources? It wasn't that long ago the New York Times told the world they had evidence of Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction, setting off a chain of events that literally killed hundreds of thousands of people. In today's political climate, the misinformation that led to the Iraq War could never have been exposed. Edit: surely I'm not the only one who…

Keep remembering and reminding people, please. Also the political backers, including the new president-elect and many of the talking heads currently employed by the "left" side of the media spectrum. I know they're considered good guys now, but they did much worse than the current crop of bad guys ever managed.

David Frum, Bill Kristol, Nicole Wallace, and General Michael Hayden are now MSNBC and #resist heroes. James Clapper and John Brennan are on CNN payroll as talking heads. At least the orange guy and his particular complicit press never passed a Patriot Act, didn't start any warrantless kidnapping/detainment/torture/execution programs, or mass surveillance programs against their own people, and didn't start any wars. More than I can say for NYT, CNN, et al.

The "official" outlets are populated by former CIA/NSA/FBI, and similar people with a documented history of lying (even to Congress) to protect abuses of constitutional and even human rights. In that context it's very hard to trust ANY information source, especially algorithmically. I don't know how to write a program that recognizes these people who were liars yesterday are now the good guys.

So yes, please keep remembering and remind people. Large parts of the current problem rest on a bed of forgetfulness.

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

#520

Post by jrumbut »

tsimionescu wrote: post #501
colordrops wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a suggestion or thesis? It's not so hard that it couldn't be taught to average humans. Even if it was extremely hard, it should still be taught, considering its importance.

The problem is that, for many topics, there just isn't a reliable source to go to. Sure, if you want information on scientific topics, you have very good options - go to one of the celebrated journals and read some papers, or at least the press releases from those same journals. When it comes to current domestic affairs (has there been massive election fraud in the US? is ANTIFA terrorizing the US?) then the mainstre…

I really agree with your point that you need to have a way to know what to believe and that there are serious blind spots.

But I think a small, un-elite media is exactly where the problem is right now. All these blogs and YouTube channels that wants to spread the truth, then discover you can make money pushing conspiracy, have actually been crowding out actual journalistic organizations that have actual reporters.

To me, they are the spiritual successors of the small journals which would have great original reporting on local labor or environmental issues and would also casually report on medical myths and other pet causes of the authors.

I'm not sure what the answer is though and I think you're making some great points here.

Post reply on HN