631–640 of 1001 posts
> 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?
All of these HN comments are defending shouting "Fire!" falsely in a theater under the guise of it being a slippery slope before all speech is lost. I have lost a lot of respect for these slippery slope arguments because they are easy to make and ignore the obvious problem which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated... Especially intolerant or harmful speech.
The "slippery slope" / "free speech" arguments are boring, and come into play almost anytime Facebook gets mentioned on HN. "Slippery slope" is also most commonly a fallacy , which a lot of people seem to ignore. > the fallacy of arguing that a certain course of action is undesirable or that a certain proposition is implausible because it leads to an undesirable or implausible conclusion via a series of tenuously con…
Slippery slopes can be shown throughout history. Trump himself has put us on a slippery slope it seems. No, it doesn't matter that some college debate class student included it on a list of debate fallacies on Reddit. It's an idiom to succinctly describe a chain of causality.
When people say anonymity online is bad and that having people use their real names would make people more polite, I point them to facebook comments.
And I would, in turn, point you to Parler. Facebook being a cesspit doesn't prove that anonymity can't make things worse.
The response to crazy fringes minorities by authoritarian governments has almost always been many times worse than the small fringe groups doing stupid dangerous stuff. This lesson after 9/11 in Iraq and what we’ve seen in many other authoritarian governments has been downright counterproductive and equally worse.
It was always naive and overrated thinking banning hate groups or extremists on Facebook and Reddit was sufficient to make them go away. That was already the default before Trump, lets not forget.
And we’ve already gone way further than just banning legitimate hate groups to banning even more stuff so everything is moderated and politically appropriate by some unelected representatives, with no recourse, as many tech companies have tried. Mostly just flailing about. And has only fueled distrust in media companies and authority systems we used to look to.
Hate Inc talks about general outrage being the danger, not specific politically acceptable outrage. Which is something that is quite obvious to anyone non-partisan watching.
I know Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit and all the rest don't count as broadcast media but I feel like we got here in part because the 1987 elimination of FCC's fairness doctrine slowly allowed a shift in how we communicate with each other. We went from specious claims and conspiracy theories being the subject matter of newsletters to their public broadcast to millions via talk radio ~and Fox News~, thus allowin…
> It'll be interesting to see if whoever replaces Ajit Pai holds a different view on public intercourse over the airwaves. Really hoping you mean "public discourse" :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So basically you are saying: - Asking for peace isn’t enough - And. He really needs to stop believing his claim of fraud? Wild. Am I crazy or is everyone else right now?
You're misunderstanding. What he should have done was strongly condemn the violence and call for the people to go home immediately and peacefully. And nothing else. With no softening weasel words. He would be able to keep believing his claims of election fraud uninterrupted. And continue to pursuing them, just after the violent insurrection was diffused, not during it. It's important to note that the insurrection was…
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/inciting to stir, encourage, or urge on; stimulate or prompt to action
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/violence an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws
I agree he should have strongly condemned those actions and asked them to leave immediately. But I also don't see any evidence that he incited violence. Alleging election fraud, or encouraging people to protest are not the same as inciting violence. I'm open to evidence of Trump inciting violence, but thus far no one has been able to provide it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trump - and his supporters - are the "they". They are the monsters here. They are the ones invading capitols. They are the ones emboldening white supremacists, racists and fascists. They are the one demanding to overturn the legitimate outcome of a democratic election. It's an insult to the millions and millions who died during WWII to corrupt the message behind this famous poem/statement and insinuate that Trump and…
> Trump - and his supporters - are the "they" 70 million people. All of them are fascists? I'm pretty sure people in Germany though they were stopping the fascists by supporting the Nazis. You have no idea who the "they" is until it's too late. That's why the freedom of speech covers everybody. In America, we are not afraid of ideas. My dad survived a civil war, got his degree and immigrated here legally to be a part…
Yes. They are de facto fascists.
I’m not going to argue history with you beyond this comment, but I seriously, seriously doubt any serious historians would agree that Germans “thought they’d be defeating fascists” by supporting the Nazis - who were, you know, actual fascists.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny how "I should be able to say what I please" and "I should be able to say what I please AND have no-one challenge me or criticise me" are so conflated. Don't dish it if you can't take it.
I'm fully able to take the parent's criticism. However, those who are downvoting me so that my post will be hidden, clearly are not able to accept criticism.
I know Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit and all the rest don't count as broadcast media but I feel like we got here in part because the 1987 elimination of FCC's fairness doctrine slowly allowed a shift in how we communicate with each other. We went from specious claims and conspiracy theories being the subject matter of newsletters to their public broadcast to millions via talk radio ~and Fox News~, thus allowin…
Fox (however detestable you may find it) was created as an alternative to the corporate media hegemony on thought, I fear you have it backwards.
This model has been pretty successful financially and the other major media outlets in the US have followed suit (though often leaning left instead). I think MSNBC was one of the first with the obnoxious melodrama of Keith Olbermann.
All of these HN comments are defending shouting "Fire!" falsely in a theater under the guise of it being a slippery slope before all speech is lost. I have lost a lot of respect for these slippery slope arguments because they are easy to make and ignore the obvious problem which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated... Especially intolerant or harmful speech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shut the fuck up. Seriously. I live in Fulton county. My wife worked the polls. We're engaged in the democratic process here. This was audited to hell and back. It was checked, and checked again. It was checked by both parties. It was checked by the courts. It was checked by the governor, by the secretary of state, by the media, it was even checked by the fucking companies who made the ballot machines. So when you sa…
Just because you worked there doesn't mean you know everything that went on. How do you even explain the pipe burst that never happened and the counting that continued. Everything in your area might have been on the up and up, but things happened you may have not seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keANzinHWUA Also keep in mind Georgia never did re-canvasing and when they did a re-count, they recounted the IMAGES o…
I believe that releasing that data would be in contravention of GA state law.
> It was a Settlement Call,
That is a lie. If it were a settlement call, there should have been lawyers from all parties involved. All of the live cases in Georgia regarding the election have Marc Elias present as co-intervenor, and that he was not on the call means that it cannot legally be a settlement call: https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1345887358101688320