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

Voat Is Shutting Down

voat.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 671 posts

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#611

Post by totony »

mariusor wrote: post #515
totony wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>your argument at best is in bad faith I disagree (although this was a question more than an argument) >Constant dehumanization of people does not eventually lead to physical violence? What it might lead to is irrelevant, the act of speech does not impede anything and a lot of things have the potential to lead to violence, yet legalizing it is arbitrary at best

I would say that the right to human dignity is being impinged upon by most of the *phobic types of discourse. [edit] A citation: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.asp...

This is a good point, but in my understanding of dignity was more of a physical "no slave" than a mental "respect." I'm having trouble finding a good definition of that.

Edit: i also understood the basic rights to be a property of the system rather than the actions of people; e.g. you should be free whatever people think of you; right to happiness whatever enemies you have, etc. If words can deprive you of dignity, then it seems as though the system is not giving you the feeling of safety in your rights that you should be expecting. This seems like a more logical application of the rights; since you cannot force respect out of others but can force the system to honor its promises.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#612

Post by heavyset_go »

lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #480
Recurecur wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I hadn't run across that writeup, though well aware of the issue. This was a little gem in that article, seemingly highly relevant now: > However, Rawls qualifies this with the assertion that under extraordinary circumstances in which constitutional safeguards do not suffice to ensure the security of the tolerant and the institutions of liberty, tolerant society has a reasonable right of self-preservation aga…

So that's the stance "the liberties of the intolerant should be limited only insofar as they demonstrably limit the liberties of others" most of the major social networks take and it falls short in that it's hard to draw that line. (also the ideas of constitutional safe guards applying to private entities is a whole other can of worms; id argue the speech the government can limit should be a subset of what any given…

> See the shootings in Charleston or Christchurch.

Don't forget about Cesar Sayoc's mail bomb campaign[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAGA_Bomber

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#613

Post by amadeuspagel »

lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #480
Recurecur wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I hadn't run across that writeup, though well aware of the issue. This was a little gem in that article, seemingly highly relevant now: > However, Rawls qualifies this with the assertion that under extraordinary circumstances in which constitutional safeguards do not suffice to ensure the security of the tolerant and the institutions of liberty, tolerant society has a reasonable right of self-preservation aga…

So that's the stance "the liberties of the intolerant should be limited only insofar as they demonstrably limit the liberties of others" most of the major social networks take and it falls short in that it's hard to draw that line. (also the ideas of constitutional safe guards applying to private entities is a whole other can of worms; id argue the speech the government can limit should be a subset of what any given…

The idea of stochastic terrorism covers all passionate political rhetoric. See the Reagan assasination attempt and the congressional baseball shooting.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#614

Post by pii »

anshumankmr wrote: post #382
pii wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? I don't doubt someone is repeating the CCP party line on Twitter, but are you actually saying anyone is taking those accounts seriously? Come on now, I'm on lefty Twitter, and nobody is saying Chinese flavoured capitalism is the answer.

Yeah. People do. They get a lot of RTs (not in the millions) but I have seen tweets with several thousand likes and shares. There are more psychos like anarchists and some other buzzwords that are popular nowadays etc... one of them even wrote a book saying rioting is good because all businesses are inherently promoting white supremacy. I am not even joking. This article on The Atlantic covered the sheer lunacy of th…

We can certainly agree that this is too much. You have inspired me to keep an eye out for such nonsense.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#615

Post by tialaramex »

ballenf wrote: post #569
conistonwater wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For 96¢ you could buy a dollar I'm skeptical of this because Withdrawals are subject to a 30-day holding period after your initial deposit and a 5% processing fee . ( https://www.predictit.org/terms-and-conditions ) If people have trouble getting in and out of trades those are the situations in which you expect market prices to be somewhat wrong. 5% is actually spectacularly high in most situations, imagine how muc…

You also have the non-zero risk of the site shutting down. Predict-It's been around a long time now, but I still wouldn't wire them more than I could afford to totally lose. 4% on what I can afford to lose really isn't worth the hassle.

I haven't checked for PredictIt since I am not an American and can't bet there. But the usual financial construction for a betting market where you can take both sides is the same as for a law firm, or a share dealer, all your money held by them is legally separate from their money so even if they get into horrible debt problems their creditors have no possible claim to your funds and you just get it all back in a few weeks after the paperwork is done.

It's clearly not as truly safe as government bonds or insured savings where the government is ultimately on the hook to make you square - but it's pretty safe. I wouldn't put next week's rent money (if I rented) on "Trump lost the election" at PredictIt. But money put aside for the new car, for next year's vacation or for a birthday gift in February? No sweat.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#616

Post by [deleted] »

lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #558
likeclockwork wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do know that people are not required to take hormones to be considered transgender right? It's not a medical state, it is a social one.

Trans people are required to be on hormones (and even maintain certain levels) to compete in elite sports. See WA and the Olympic committee's rules[0][1] So yeah, not a transmedicalist, just we have existing frameworks for how to balance inclusion and fairness; there's no open question that needs debate around how trans people can compete in sports (unless you get all your cues from South Park i suppose). The only re…

[deleted]

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#617

Post by sneak »

novok wrote: post #592
sneak wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is current top competition sport is not natural anymore so I do not really care about whether they take drugs (illegal today, maybe legal tomorrow) or not. Or modify they genome. Two things: This is a minority viewpoint. I believe most sports fans and participants want sports to remain free of exogenous performance enhancing drugs. The second: the situation you describe would disadvantage everyone who does not…

There is a big risk of causing permanent damage and significantly reduced lifespans by creating drug league, which has its own ethical issues. It would create incentives for people to push naive children or newly-adult into taking many drugs that will destroy the rest of their lives. Drug league could have people dying mid competition, as they took too many drugs that they had a heart attack when trying to go all out…

As long as everyone involved consents and isn't coerced, it sounds ethical and entertaining to me.

I imagine that many of the people who would participate are already taking these things (these are not the people competing professionally today). Perhaps mainstreaming it would incentivize more research into safety and sustainability around artificially pushing humans beyond their current physical limits.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#618

Post by rnd0 »

rchaud wrote: post #529
whereistimbo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why I suddenly felt like voat is a psychological science experiment?

In a way, it is. It's the perfect embodiment of "careful what you wish for", which is referencing people's inability to anticipate unintended consequences. Every HN post about Patreon or Youtube banning somebody leads to lengthy treatises about free speech. Well, here's Voat. All free speech, all the time. What's that, bigots have taken over the platform and chased out all the non-bigots? Who could have seen this com…

That's a true -but incomplete- picture of what happened.

I never made an account there, but from what I read on reddit they modified some of the parts of their software so that you weren't able to do anything if you didn't get upvotes or whatever, and if you got too many downvotes you were basically shadow-banned.

The impression I had was that it's a more extreme version of what Reddit does.

Free speech would be "ok, here's my sub on anarcho communism", but that's not what happened -because you'd be effectively shadowbanned before you had the chance to create that sub.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#619

Post by rnd0 »

eropple wrote: post #133
x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is why the right-wing is so up in arms about private sites booting them off their platforms. Because if they have to start their own i.e Voat, Parlor, they will find that they don't have the necessary tech and financial structures to run such a site. So by fighting to stay on Reddit and Facebook, they can freeload off of the other parts of the sites that provide value and can support the marginal cost of the…

That's only part of it, though it is part of it. Fascists--and Voat is populated largely by fascists and by those for whom fascism is not a dealbreaker--need to seem normal in order to get their hooks into credulous people. When you don't eighty-six the fascists, 1) they bring their friends, and 2) they make new friends, because the garbage they spew is emotionally effective and requires an overwhelming amount of cal…

...but wait -there's more!

Not only is that a factor, but they need to be able to disrupt neutral or leftish forums as well. That's why the notion that "only" /pol/ on 4chan is tainted is totally laughable. It's not, they do raids on other boards and are disruptive and the whole site has become garbage.

That is what they want to be able to do on twitter and on facebook -disrupt neutral or left spaces and make them garbage as well.

Post reply on HN