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

Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

1b677b8f8bb20100.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 218 posts

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#71

Post by ethbr0 »

tanseydavid wrote: post #53
cmeacham98 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about libel/slander? What about child pornography? What about doxxing? Surely you agree we have to draw the line _somewhere_, even if you disagree with where we currently draw it?

Has anyone, anywhere, ever suggested that child pornography is 'speech' let alone 'free speech'? It seems bizarre to include in this list.

It's typically included on lists because of the implications. One either takes the position (1) child pornography should be allowed to be shared, (2) child pornography should be suppressed, but may be shared, or (3) child pornography cannot be allowed to be shared.

(3) obviously requires very different technical solutions (like: no private encryption, ever) than (1).

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#72

Post by ojnabieoot »

encom wrote: post #67
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Frustrated with Parler deplatforming" was kind of a giveaway.

Yea, if OP opposes cancel culture, he must be a nazi. There's no other conclusion.

[flagged]

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#73

Post by cortesoft »

tanseydavid wrote: post #53
cmeacham98 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about libel/slander? What about child pornography? What about doxxing? Surely you agree we have to draw the line _somewhere_, even if you disagree with where we currently draw it?

Has anyone, anywhere, ever suggested that child pornography is 'speech' let alone 'free speech'? It seems bizarre to include in this list.

Well, if you create a message board that accepts images, and you make it so there is no technical way to remove those images, you are implicitly including child porn in your definition of free speech.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#74

Post by jojobas »

ojnabieoot wrote: post #30

You can pretend to care about North Korean censorship all you want, but if you name your platform “Pepe,” positively cite 4chan as an influence, and take the time to criticize “cancel culture SJWs” then it’s quite clear what your intentions and motivations are, and who your audience is: you want to create a space run by and for racist pieces of garbage. You don’t actually care about free speech at all, and neither do…

Free speech is a public good in itself.

Voltair would not approve of "I might agree with what you're saying but you drew a pepe so you need to be shut down".

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#75

Post by tanseydavid »

ethbr0 wrote: post #71
tanseydavid wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone, anywhere, ever suggested that child pornography is 'speech' let alone 'free speech'? It seems bizarre to include in this list.

It's typically included on lists because of the implications. One either takes the position (1) child pornography should be allowed to be shared, (2) child pornography should be suppressed, but may be shared, or (3) child pornography cannot be allowed to be shared. (3) obviously requires very different technical solutions (like: no private encryption, ever) than (1).

I fail to see any relevance to a discussion centered around debating implications and boundaries of 'free speech.'

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#76

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

ojnabieoot wrote: post #30

You can pretend to care about North Korean censorship all you want, but if you name your platform “Pepe,” positively cite 4chan as an influence, and take the time to criticize “cancel culture SJWs” then it’s quite clear what your intentions and motivations are, and who your audience is: you want to create a space run by and for racist pieces of garbage. You don’t actually care about free speech at all, and neither do…

It seems like you might have sympathies with the cancel-culture SJWs and oppose whatever this gal is behind. Rather than letting your emotions run wild, perhaps asking questions and thinking carefully might make more sense.

For instance, foremost in my thoughts is the question: to what extent do makers of effective open-source tools have any control over how they're used? Popularity for Pepe might mean use by progressives in Iran, racists in America, and regular Chinese who just want to chat without minders. Much more likely it'll be all sorts of folks who use such a tool.

I encourage you to remember that you aren't on the wrong side of cancel culture now, but you could be soon.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#77

Post by teh_klev »

gchamonlive wrote: post #4

In a tolerant society, should we tolerate intolerance? I am genuinely interested to hear your thoughts.

> In a tolerant society, should we tolerate intolerance?

What if in a society once tolerant to gaybashing, and other things (not so long ago), should one not tolerate "intolerance" to this? I think your question needs re-phrased.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#78

Post by loceng »

hexadec wrote: post #47
drusepth wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What is fundamentally different with Pepe is moderation. Instead of relying on a centralized entity with a banhammer, each board and thread owner may anonymously moderate their spaces on their own. However, nothing can actually be deleted, it can only be shadowed, and each user decides whether they want to see the light or the full version of the page at any moment in time. People can still reply to shadowed posts i…

This begs the question, which is the default: light or full. You cannot claim to support freedom of speech and have this capacity in my opinion. It is implicitly saying some voices are less valid. It is an interesting project technically, but I do not think it will replace the *chan model for edgy people to be edgy on the internet. If your opinions are so extreme that you feel that you must be anonymous and free from…

I think the issue, if there ever becomes a protocol allowing for full freedom of speech, is that of time-resource management: if you know a certain user just isn't responsive or open to listening to reason - closed heart, closed mind - blind in rage like the boar demons in Princess Mononoke. I believe there needs to be a system to tag such individuals and then some sort of intervention in-person - we're not going to work through people's anger and build trust, relationship, with them online. I think that also then requires developing a culture - so "sheep" following the new status quo - of a protocol to help people develop their self-awareness - to gain and maintain their health, which in part is to heal past trauma that closed off their heart and mind, blocking their critical thinking and empathy development.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#79

Post by bilbo0s »

threeseed wrote: post #54

Everyone says this. Until they have to deal with the realities of what true free speech means: child pornography, child exploitation, rape, ultra violence, terrorism, organised crime, drug dealing, doxxing innocent people etc. My Reddit account is 13 years old so I've seen personally seen communities of all of the above grow and flourish and the true levels of depravity that humans can reach. Ultimately it got to the…

child pornography, child exploitation, rape, ultra violence

Sometimes people get into a position where they have to defend the indefensible, and in the process end up rhetorically fighting a rear-guard action against the truth. There was the question of a particularly horrific death video of a 7 year old girl being disemboweled (among other things) a while back. Instead of simply conceding that there is some filth that has no place in civilized societies, these absolutists stubbornly stuck to their talking points. This makes all of us look bad. People start looking at all free speech advocates as being this same level of unreasonable.

I always try go out of my way to separate my ideas of privacy protection, anti-surveillance, and free speech from those of these absolutists. I do not believe little girls should be able to be publicly raped and disemboweled, even virtually and digitally created, simply because there exists a market of sickos for it. But I do believe that unpopular opinions should be countenanced and the right to express unpopular opinions should be supported.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#80

Post by tone »

ThomW wrote: post #9

Parler is a shit hole, and at this point I’m not sure we need another social network anything. The major ones do a lousy job of policing fake news and misinformation, and from your tone it sounds like you support that garbage. I’m pretty sure giving every moron on earth a globally-accessible soapbox is about the stupidest idea humankind has ever had.

I'm not sure how anyone holds this opinion. Do you really believe that this will result in fair, unbiased reporting? Who is the long-term great arbiter not only of the news but removal of non-news?

I'm also not sure why your worldview seems to be that given access to all opinions, the stupidest ones too, people will not and cannot learn to make informed judgements for themselves. You will see some stupidity but it's a very bleak and arrogant worldview to presume that people are incapable of making rational decisions given information and time.

Post reply on HN