Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump” • Hacker News Board

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#571

Post by beerandt » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:44 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #449

gfodor wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Why would you think that I thought the free Internet is the only thing that has value? That's a nonsensical position. My point was that if a company shuts this down with an SSL cert hack of some kind, it may be just or even backed by law enforcement, but it exposes a vector for suppression by corporations of the Internet that I had not considered before and we need to understand the high order effects from t…

Just yesterday HN had a link to an article on plaintext HTTP for the modern era. I'm not condoning illegal/dubious attempts to silence dissent, but loss of an SSL cert doesn't really suppress anyone's ability to communicate. Tell me I'm wrong.

1) Browsers no longer let you (easily/ 2-click) override some ssl errors, and the overwhelming trend has been to start treating a lack of https similar to an ssl error, as far as ui goes.

2) Is this practically any different than saying newsgroups, or even bbs(?), still exist, so those avenues for free speech are viable remedies for being otherwise suppressed.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#572

Post by scythe » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:45 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #349

nucleardog wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as those people take action and start murdering all the landlords, absolutely. Speech is speech, when that speech begets action then we have a problem.

So like several months of looting and burning in various cities like Portland?

It is wrong to say that there was "burning" for "several months", unless you're referring to the forest fires. A few buildings were burned down in isolated incidents during several months of protests across multiple cities. Looting is not well-documented but my friends in Portland didn't seem very concerned.

The vast majority of participants in the protests following the Floyd murder did not take part in any violence. It is all but certain that the fraction who did is much smaller than the fraction of 1/6/21 protestors who illegally entered the Capitol.

Comparing the one to the other is not justified.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#573

Post by ravenstine » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:45 PM UTC

Pils wrote: post #526

ravenstine wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not up to you. Real intellectual discourse isn't your way or the highway . You, like anyone else, has the potential to be wrong, and you're probably wrong a lot more than you think you are. If your arguments don't sway people, that's neither your failing nor the failing of those you are trying to convince. When you censor people, that only emboldens them, and proves to everyone that yes , there are people who…

> If you build a system that is so technologically perfect that it extinguishes violence from the public space, then you have created a system of slavery. I intuitively get the point you are trying to make (sovereignty, "government has a monopoly on violence," yadda yadda), but I don't think it reflects the real, both contemporary and historical, systems of slavery. Chattel slavery in the antebellum South's relied on…

> Why should we be worried about "benevolent AI overlords" going rogue when historically civilizations with high percentages of unfree people were extremely violent?

I think you're making a false comparison. There's at least 2 different kinds of unfree regimes, the first being monarchies and dictatorships that use force in a top-down manner to control their subjects, and the second being the system of mind control which enslaves people by feeding them simulations that convince them that they are sufficiently free and safe. The latter version of an unfree regime still benefits from creating a form of slavery, but it's slavery of the mind. Imagine a civilization comprised of figurative Uncle Toms of the system. Sex trafficking is concerning, but it's a form of slavery that can only work in the 21st century by staying underground

Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding your point.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#574

Post by buzzerbetrayed » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

davesque wrote: post #537

Unfortunately, it seems we've literally run out of options at this point. Social media companies can either act to silence violent insurrectionists (and hopefully prevent them from organizing) or they can turn the other cheek and risk allowing them to overthrow our government. And do we really believe that a Trump-led dictatorship would be more friendly towards dissenting views or permissive of media platforms that b…

> And do we really believe that a Trump-led dictatorship would be more friendly towards dissenting views or permissive of media platforms that broadcast them?

How is this relevant? We don't have a Trump-led dictatorship in the US. And since when is "Well it's not as bad as a " a well thought out argument?

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#575

Post by Covzire » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

andrewem wrote: post #232

You know what scares the shit out of me, to use your phrasing? The people on that site murdering me or overthrowing the government, so that they seize power and elections end or become irrelevant. “The free Internet” has value, but it’s not the only thing that has value. When it conflicts with other values, then there has to be a nuanced resolution.

I don't read or follow thedonald.win, but I share your general feelings of apprehension for the well being of anyone who consumes CNN, MSNBC or NYT hoping to be accurately informed.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#576

Post by drm237 » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

stronglikedan wrote: post #53

Exuma wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please cite me tweets/descriptions of where he incited anything. He said something like "we will remember this day," and not long after condemned violence and supported law enforcement. Then the next day he condemned it again.

> Please cite me tweets/descriptions of where he incited anything. It's not gonna happen, because it didn't happen. I've asked everyone I know to cite the same thing, and no one has been able to. Of course, that won't stop the narrative, because truth has become irrelevant. EDIT: I find it amusing that even the people that have responded to you so far, still haven't actually cited anything yet.

"And after this, we're going to walk down there, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down ... to the Capitol and we are going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women," Trump told the crowd. "And we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong."

He told people to go to the capital, "take back our country", and you can't do it with weakness, you need to do it with strength. That seems pretty straightforward to me. And he did it all while fanning the flames by repeating discredited conspiracy theories that he knows plays to the people in attendance.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#577

Post by bondarchuk » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

Pils wrote: post #526

ravenstine wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not up to you. Real intellectual discourse isn't your way or the highway . You, like anyone else, has the potential to be wrong, and you're probably wrong a lot more than you think you are. If your arguments don't sway people, that's neither your failing nor the failing of those you are trying to convince. When you censor people, that only emboldens them, and proves to everyone that yes , there are people who…

> If you build a system that is so technologically perfect that it extinguishes violence from the public space, then you have created a system of slavery. I intuitively get the point you are trying to make (sovereignty, "government has a monopoly on violence," yadda yadda), but I don't think it reflects the real, both contemporary and historical, systems of slavery. Chattel slavery in the antebellum South's relied on…

>Modern slavery most often occurs in areas with widespread, violent conflict.

This is completely wrong, China and India top the list with 8 million and 3.8 million slaves respectively.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century#St...

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#578

Post by gremlinsinc » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

Exuma wrote: post #355

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are sea-lioning. They are going to constantly ask for "evidence", and then when provided for it, act as if it's biased/false/non-existant and then restate the question. The goal is to put all the labor of the conversation and gathering of sources onto you while they just get to reply: "I don't believe that, the MSM is biased, show me another source".

Are you claiming MSM isn't biased?

Are you claiming specifically biased-right-wing isn't biased? MSM (CNN, CNBC, MSNBC) is 10% as biased (to the left), Fox (probably 50% biased to the right), etc. Least biased is probably Reuters, AP, and PBS, and maybe NPR.

Local news is usually not so biased either.

But Washington Times, Breitbart, Random Youtube Vlogger, etc...none of those can be trusted. That's why they're never linked to on Hackernews, except maybe in comments, I'd imagine.

They're basically tabloids. Good to cross-reference with Snopes or Politifact if you are curious what's true. Personally, I like to read multiple sources and google a topic to get a better picture to see other 'takes'. Only way to not get bubble/group think.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#579

Post by eeZah7Ux » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

razius wrote: post #482

Diederich wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> please don't judge me I'll say it out loud: though I despise Trump and mourn the damage he and those enabling have caused, I spend more time online looking at pro-Trump, conservative and Republican focused material than anything else. I downvote none of it, even the legit crazy/scary stuff, and in the rare cases I comment, it's carefully worded to be neutral or even sometimes conciliatory, though always honest. It…

What kind of political governance doesn't take kindly to any opposing views and doesn't tolerate debates?

Authoritarianism in general.

However, the paradox of tolerance fully applies.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#580

Post by davesque » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

The way people blindly defend this simplified notion of Free Speech makes it seem as though they believe it is some kind of universally guaranteed right that is like a law of physics. No, we enjoy this luxury of debating the ethics of free speech because we live in a society that permits it. Right now, that society faces an imminent threat from violent insurrectionists. We need to prevent them from organizing and carrying out their plan. I don't care if it wades into questionable ethical territory. This is not the time for a nuanced debate. This is the time for action.