Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#281

Post by kolbe » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:35 PM UTC

fullshark wrote: post #92

ndjdjxjsjdjdhd wrote: post #32

> involving use of our platform to incite violent insurrection against a democratically elected government. From my understanding the video that got banned asked everyone to go home peacefully but then continued to claim election fraud?

See for yourself: https://nypost.com/2021/01/06/trump-releases-statement-telli... Someone described this video as taking a log off the fire while simultaneously pouring gasoline which I think is a fair characterization.

Can you explain? I don't think it's constructive to hide behind analogy and cliche when you could come out and tell us the causes and effects that you think are happening here.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#282

Post by dkjaudyeqooe » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:36 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #243

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Trump's 'voice' or anyone else's more important than FB's 'voice'? Is free speech only for some people? If I come to your house and rant about my favorite subject you shouldn't be able to silence me? Should Trump (or anyone else) have the right to sully FB in defiance of its management wishes? FB doesn't have a special responsibility, it's a for-profit business that has an obligation to it's shareholders.not s…

Right now, FB are getting to have their cake and eat it - Section 230 gives them almost complete immunity from how they use their "voice" on the supposed basis that it's supposedly their users' speech and not theirs, including getting to decide which political violence to support, but they also get full freedom to decide which not-their-speech gets heard and by whom based on their own whims. Ordinary humans who aren'…

Of course you can have this level of free speech rights, just start a website with a comments section and you can have the same awesome power.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#283

Post by randlet » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:36 PM UTC

silexia wrote: post #269

xxpor wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatsapp doesn't have enough penetration in the US for that to have ever mattered. I'd watch the EU for news on that front.

Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses. Social media platforms are not some sort of public utility. Social media platforms are private businesses owned by private individuals who can choose who they want to let in and who they want to kick out just like any restaurant or bar or concert hall. If you dislike who a social media platform allows or does not allow, just use a dif…

> Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses.

I don't think that is true at all. There's definitely lots of business owners here (myself included!) but I don't think it's anywhere close to a majority.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#284

Post by JeffCyr » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

This is a dangerous short term move. In the end it may create a division and popularize other social medias where this content and worse will still be available in an unmoderated space.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#285

Post by praestigiare » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

jtdev wrote: post #254

kevinmgranger wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're more or less encouraging a coup, the "fire in a crowded theater" analogy couldn't be more applicable.

I'm sure you were advocating for the silencing of BLM leaders who were encouraging violence during recent months too...

Absolutely, where that occured, and unlike Trump, both Facebook and Twitter has no problem suspending and removing accounts of BLM advocates when they made calls for violence.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#286

Post by Supermancho » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

goldenManatee wrote: post #185

Supermancho wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not relevant to the question he asked. > What exactly Trump said to spark this?

No? I did respond with the President’s response, and his response is called fomenting - the reason for the ban in question. > an eventual reiteration that the elections were rigged, they should be furious, but now they should go home and that he loved them very much and were very special people

Maybe add an attribution -Trump, otherwise it looks like the random ramblings he goes on.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#287

Post by modriano » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

viro wrote: post #232

taylus wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Fuck zuck, finally deleted my Facebook account because of this.

You deleted your Facebook account, because they banned someone for inciting treason and sedition?

Probably not because of the ban. Probably for Facebook's relentless facilitation of the person who incited treason and sedition, as well as the cultivation of conspiracy theory groups that produced the insurrectionists.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#288

Post by bidirectional » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

silexia wrote: post #269

xxpor wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatsapp doesn't have enough penetration in the US for that to have ever mattered. I'd watch the EU for news on that front.

Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses. Social media platforms are not some sort of public utility. Social media platforms are private businesses owned by private individuals who can choose who they want to let in and who they want to kick out just like any restaurant or bar or concert hall. If you dislike who a social media platform allows or does not allow, just use a dif…

> Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses.

Has there been a survey done on this? Because that's not the impression I have at all. Entrepeneurs are obviously over-represented in contrast to the general population, but I doubt they're the majority.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#289

Post by hammock » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #96

rasengan wrote: post #23

Facebook is not a platform to have a voice. It’s a platform that harvests thoughts and publicizes the ones FB most agrees with while censoring those it does not. This is a slippery slope and, quite frankly, it’s the people that lose.

I wonder what the implications are as far as facilitating folks who wish to take undemocratic steps that would seem to bring us closer to far more serious restrictions, imposed by those same folks as far as how a democracy is or isn't allowed to operate. Is it someone's right to use a platform to push an agenda that leads to impacting other people's rights?

>Is it someone's right to use a platform to push an agenda that leads to impacting other people's rights?

Seriously?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#290

Post by wincy » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #119

rasengan wrote: post #23

Facebook is not a platform to have a voice. It’s a platform that harvests thoughts and publicizes the ones FB most agrees with while censoring those it does not. This is a slippery slope and, quite frankly, it’s the people that lose.

So, perhaps, by no longer having access to Facebook, Mr Trump's eccentricities may moderate? Facebook does people a service by cutting them off. I honestly see such disconnections as healthy. If only they would cut people off before they are radicalized. Conversely, Mr Trump is now a free agent looking for a nest elsewhere. There is probably lots of closed door planning happening: "What do we do if he decides to use…

My guess is Trump is going to create his own media company to compete/destroy Fox News.