Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election • Hacker News Board

Re: Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election

#211

Post by im3w1l » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 3:15 AM UTC

mental1896 wrote: post #144

amalcon wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People also don't seem to realize that the action does not need to be real to cause a reaction by the other side. I'd provide an example, but to do so would just inject my own biases. I'm sure anyone reading this can think of at least 5-6 "reactions" by the other side which had no precipitating action -- regardless of which side they're on. It starts to seem a little silly to worry about the reaction on the other sid…

I actually can't think of any. Could you give just 1 example?

Censorship is often used by the strong to advance their personal interests. For instance two people "on the same side" have a lovers quarrel. One of them deplatforms the other. Another example: some official takes a bribe, and when the press realizes they are censored. Third: Some company has a competitor, and gets them censored for purely monetary reasons.

Another aspect where censorship creates issues is that every idea starts as fringe before growing mainstream. If they are censored it creates ideological stagnation.

A third is that true but "dangeroues" ideas, can have important implications. And those implications may be ideas beneficial to everyone. But since the dangerous idea is censored, no one will figure the implications out, and the benefits are not realized. For instance, let's say there was election fraud, but the censors "bet on the wrong horse" (nothing is certain, at some point you have to say it's >95% certain so we will treat it as true) and censor such claims. Then they may miss opportunities to make elections fairer in the future.

Re: Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election

#212

Post by pie_flavor » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

idrios wrote: post #193

throwaway894345 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “cult” (if you insist) was once much smaller, so something must be driving this phenomenon, which means there is hope that we can stop or even reverse it. What makes people go from believing the media, science, etc to unwarranted skepticism? Specifically, what changed in the last couple of decades that might’ve yielded this result? My pet theory is that our institutions increasingly pivoted from truth-seeking to…

There was a really cool article a few months ago that tried to model polarization on the political spectrum [1] -- on the premise that most people will start off moderate on issues and then update their weakly-held views to align with people they like, and against people they hate, until they converge. Through this lens, my own theory of what's happened is that a few conservative news outlets -- conservative talk rad…

As a conservative, this post is the first thing I have read on this subject, ever, that neither confirms any of my pre-existing biases nor is blatant 'the right just hates facts' garbage. Thank you for some genuine insight.

Re: Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election

#213

Post by pelasaco » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 8:22 AM UTC

chopin24 wrote: post #180

pelasaco wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if in one hand social media can be used for bad - as we saw with Cambridge analytics and etc, in another hand without social media, the Government or the most powerful party, can as usual - in Africa and South America - with a megaphone, money, medicament and old school propaganda, manipulate the opinion and consequentially win the elections. Let's say that without social media, you constrain who is able to manipulat…

Have we really seen the power return to the people because of social media? That was the theory during, e.g., The Arab Spring. But, it doesn't seem like it's held. It feels like the old guard has taken over social media and used it to their ends, putting us back where we started.

I don't think the power will return to the People, because the power never belonged to the People in the first place. But I think with social media, outsiders can get a more complete image from a social event other than the official one from the traditional media.

Re: Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election

#214

Post by dang » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 7:29 PM UTC

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #205

dang wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't break the site guidelines by flaming other users like this, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. We ban accounts that do that—we have to, because it destroys what HN is supposed to be for: curious, thoughtful conversation. The GP already stepped in the wrong direction with name-calling rhetoric, but the thing to do in that case is to improve the thread by stepping back in the right direction.…

I find this an interesting comment, coming a day before the best company in your employer's portfolio does this [0]. It looks like your "curious, thoughtful conversation," idea only applies to the very narrow confines of HN - and only, of course, when you choose to employ your moderator authority by bumping your message to the top of the thread. Perhaps the problem is your guys' rules. I cannot think of a community t…

Sure, HN moderation comments only apply to the very narrow confines of HN. It's hard enough to make a dent within these narrow confines—why would we waste energy trying to affect anything else? Someone trying to plug their roof in a rainstorm can't keep the whole neighborhood dry.

I'm afraid I don't understand your point about YC portfolio companies but obviously they all do what they want and have nothing to do with the operation of HN. At least I think that should be obvious?

Re: Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election

#215

Post by shoemakersteve » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 9:43 PM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #202

andybak wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but you will never in a million years convict someone of murder when they were returning fire. The USA seems to have got itself in a very peculiar place with regards to discharge of firearms by representatives of authority. Certainly in the UK and I think on most other western countries, you don't just shoot wildly into a property because someone inside has discharged a firearm. It just wouldn't have happened in an…

Agreed, but excessive use of force is an altogether different problem than the cited 'race' issues. Indeed, something like 90% of Americans support some kind of policing reform according to a Gallup survey last year. Unfortunately, in America, we have only a ~30% chance of passing a reform that 90% of Americans want passed unless the corporations also want it passed.

Or the incredibly powerful police unions that lobby politicians.

Re: Uganda bans social media ahead of presidential election

#216

Post by dgibby14 » Fri, Jan 15, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

spamizbad wrote: post #87

throwaway894345 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think these movements are the natural result of pivoting our epistemological institutions from truth-seeking to progressive political advocacy. The right in particular has less reason to recognize these institutions as “truth authorities” as even when the right has a good point (e.g., when the right asks, “how do we know that racism and not crime rates belies police shooting disparities?”) , they can rel…

Ashley Babbitt, the woman who was shot by capitol police, was in a polyamorous relationship. So the notion that people are turning to these tactics to free themselves from a perceived left-wing cultural hegemony doesn’t seem likely.

You people are mentally ill! Get a life! Go help someone who needs help!