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

Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 262 posts

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#191

Post by cowpig »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #180

Mass communication seems to be the culprit. Yellow journalism had a huge impact in the US in the past, Rwanda's problems were inflamed via Radio and now social media is hurting the US and the world. Social media is the genie that's been let out of its cage. It's not going to go back in. I suspect the fix is to treat social media in the same way radio and TV are managed. They can't and should not be completely stopped…

> Mass communication seems to be the culprit.

I would change that to: Irresponsible use of mass communication.

The tool is no more to blame than the duffel bag in a burglary.

Mass communication is a powerful tool with many uses, both beneficial and harmful.

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#192

Post by indigochill »

deanCommie wrote: post #181
indigochill wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sexual mores have been fluid throughout history. There's no particular reason to think one side is more on the "right side" than the other from an absolute sense, looking at the historical track record. For that matter, the notion of human rights as we conceive of them is a relatively modern invention. Liberalism isn't even 400 years old yet (and the notion of universal rule of law as codified in the Magna Carta is i…

Transgenderism is not a sexual more, though. Is the trend of human history on the scale of thousands of years old relevant? Is that no different than saying "It's pointless to worry about climate change because the sun will explode and then there will be the heat death of the universe?" Surely there is some evidence that society and humanity is "stabilizing" to a certain plateau of morality and ethics not driven by r…

> Is the trend of human history on the scale of thousands of years old relevant?

Yeah, because...

> Surely there is some evidence that society and humanity is "stabilizing" to a certain plateau of morality and ethics not driven by religion but driven by humanism?

My point in my previous post is that I don't think we can make that claim yet because we don't have enough data. Surely the ancient Romans and Egyptians would have believed the same, yet here we are.

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#193

Post by mr_toad »

rvz wrote: post #20
sschueller wrote: post #6

I guess you could argue Facebook should be shutdown as parlor was. Although parlor was only used for hate, Facebook didn't do anything to stop it either. I think a big issue is how facebooks algo (and others) are built for maximum profit which at the same time also radicalizes people in their filter bubble.

Even if you wanted to, Facebook can't be de-platformed. They are entrenched in the internet and own their own data centres, are also themselves domain registrars and members part of the ICANN.

ISPs and other networks could in theory refuse to peer with them.

But from what we’ve seen in the past their behaviour would have to be especially egregious for this to be even contemplated.

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#194

Post by heavyset_go »

xupybd wrote: post #161
jandrese wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a counterexample you claim to have joined Parlor because Twitter wouldn't let you hate transsexuals openly? This is supposed to support the premise that Parlor had a use for something other than to amplify hate speech?

This is where it gets interesting and the devil really is in the detail on this one. If you define hate speech according to this: The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence shall be prohibited by law". You are saying that this group cannot broadcast a message if…

People have used their religions to give a pass to discrimination for a long time[1]. Today's scapegoat is trans people, but a few decades ago it was miscegenation. People discriminated against mixed-race couples and said it was a core tenet of their religion[1]:

> Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

Surely if we could handle situations like the above that were leveled against mixed-race couples half of a century ago, we can handle the same being leveled at trans people today.

When it comes to free speech and freedom of religion, the ACLU[1] has this to say:

> Instances of institutions and individuals claiming a right to discriminate in the name of religion are not new. In the 1960s, we saw objections to laws requiring integration in restaurants because of sincerely held beliefs that God wanted the races to be separate. We saw religiously affiliated universities refuse to admit students who engaged in interracial dating. In those cases, we recognized that requiring integration was not about violating religious liberty; it was about ensuring fairness. It is no different today.

[1] https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=55...

[2] https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/using-religion...

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#195

Post by xupybd »

deanCommie wrote: post #181
indigochill wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sexual mores have been fluid throughout history. There's no particular reason to think one side is more on the "right side" than the other from an absolute sense, looking at the historical track record. For that matter, the notion of human rights as we conceive of them is a relatively modern invention. Liberalism isn't even 400 years old yet (and the notion of universal rule of law as codified in the Magna Carta is i…

Transgenderism is not a sexual more, though. Is the trend of human history on the scale of thousands of years old relevant? Is that no different than saying "It's pointless to worry about climate change because the sun will explode and then there will be the heat death of the universe?" Surely there is some evidence that society and humanity is "stabilizing" to a certain plateau of morality and ethics not driven by r…

Humanism is one world view. One that you can build a moral framework around. Much the same way religious people build a world view based on their religious beliefs.

It's hard to make an argument that one world view is better than another. Because to do so you have to agree how to measure the outcomes of world views. Often this is impossible as the world views conflict.

The makes most assessments of societies progress subjective.

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#196

Post by anigbrowl »

newen wrote: post #101
anigbrowl wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Endlessly peppering people with questions is sometimes called Sealioning. How about engaging with the point(s) made by the person you're replying to, and offering your own suggestions for how you'd go about things. Also, the HN guidelines (link at the bottom of the page) encourage you to respond to the strongest possible interpretation of what was said, rather than the worst.

That's not what sealioning is.

http://wondermark.com/1k62/

Reasonable people can disagree

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#197

Post by anigbrowl »

bedhead wrote: post #94
anigbrowl wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Endlessly peppering people with questions is sometimes called Sealioning. How about engaging with the point(s) made by the person you're replying to, and offering your own suggestions for how you'd go about things. Also, the HN guidelines (link at the bottom of the page) encourage you to respond to the strongest possible interpretation of what was said, rather than the worst.

But that's the ENTIRE point here! This supposed itty-bitty exception - "Hey, just no bad stuff, okay?" - is actually EVERYTHING. You say something like "Just no hate speech" or "Only if they have violence in mind" and those statements inherently violate the very notion of free speech the people are erroneously saying they're in favor of, and those innocent-sounding qualifiers are why things are devolving so rapidly.…

By all means offer your own proposals, ideally taking account of widely known priors such as the events of last Wednesday.

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#198

Post by lrossi »

Alupis wrote: post #190
polemic wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where's the lie.

>>> only used for hate >> This reminds me of "BitTorrent is only used by illegal downloaders", "bitcoin is only used by criminals" etc. > Where's the lie. Right here: https://downloads.raspberrypi.org/raspios_full_armhf/images/... There are all sorts of legitimate use cases for torrents, including downloading large linux distro install images.

Many games have been using as well BitTorrent to distribute their installation files.

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#199

Post by temp8964 »

99_00 wrote: post #163
sschueller wrote: post #6

I guess you could argue Facebook should be shutdown as parlor was. Although parlor was only used for hate, Facebook didn't do anything to stop it either. I think a big issue is how facebooks algo (and others) are built for maximum profit which at the same time also radicalizes people in their filter bubble.

It's impossible to believe that Facebook, Twitter, iPhones, and Google weren't in major ways used by the perpetuators and organizers of the assault on the capital to facilitate their criminal conspiracy and actions. Selective enforcement of rules is being used to against political positions and, let's face it, competing platforms. >Although parlor was only used for hate, I don't think that is in evidence.

Anytime you look at the trending hashtags on Twitter they are always divisive and hatred. Even when unify was trending, the top twitters and top comments are the ones against unification, like "we don't unify with nazis".

Re: Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar (2018)

#200

Post by mr_toad »

indigochill wrote: post #179
deanCommie wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although parlor was only used for hate > Right. I used parler to do such things as . I stopped using Twitter for because I figured that ... it was only a matter of time before they were banned (for ) I know you don't think it's hate. I know you think trans rights are a subjective ethical issue. But what if you're wrong? What if it's an objectively human rights issue? Like sexuality, and race? I know there is still…

Sexual mores have been fluid throughout history. There's no particular reason to think one side is more on the "right side" than the other from an absolute sense, looking at the historical track record. For that matter, the notion of human rights as we conceive of them is a relatively modern invention. Liberalism isn't even 400 years old yet (and the notion of universal rule of law as codified in the Magna Carta is i…

Or you could argue that as long as no one is getting hurt what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ for other people is none of your business.
Post reply on HN