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

Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 600 posts

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#161

Post by MrStonedOne »

jsnell wrote: post #30

This all sounds very nice, but there's a bit of sleight of hand here since the article goes out of its way to avoid details. That way everyone reads into exactly what they want, and it's totally non-obvious whether this is actually a workable proposal or not. But what's the concrete proposal here? How would things actually work? Will the services be forced to accept whatever unmoderated feed of filth the linked to se…

>But what's the concrete proposal here? How would things actually work? Will the services be forced to accept whatever unmoderated feed of filth the linked to service sends their way? If not, how is this supposed to fix the moderation problem?

Does gmail block emails from your friends containing misinformation?

Why should facebook be allowed to do the same thing?

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#162

Post by PontifexMinimus »

root_axis wrote: post #124
PontifexMinimus wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will facebook be forced to show its users the same nastiness it just booted off, because of the interop necessities? Facebook should be forced to show me the feeds I choose to subscribe to. I'm perfectly capable of deciding for myself whether I find something nasty, and I find the idea of Zuckerberg as an arbiter of morality both absurd and dystopian.

> I find the idea of Zuckerberg as an arbiter of morality both absurd and dystopian This is a very common characterization that I find frustratingly absurd. Zuckeberg is not "an arbiter of morality" in any respect, the contents of Facebook is a corporate business decision, not a reflection on morality.

If FB are blocking things that they deem bad, then they are clearly setting themselves up as arbiters of morality, even if they say they aren't.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#163

Post by notatelloshill »

im just not worried at all ... this problem is only a problem for people that think social networks matter. They dont. These connections are vapor, their importance is only granted by the person that believes it to be.

To think that social media is important is to think being famous is important. Its the same mindset that makes people feel more or less confident based on how many likes they have.

Step away from the social media. Do something active in the real world. Learn a craft. Make a connection with someone in your area.

Please like this comment.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#164

Post by acituan »

notahacker wrote: post #116
readflaggedcomm wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the algorithm distorts conversation, then how can you be sure it more accurately reflects human nature? How does something that isn't a marketplace of ideas prove it's dumb? Or should this question be punished by your algorithm?

The main agenda the algorithm has is selecting stuff human nature has a high propensity to click on...

Kind of like drug cartels having the agenda of producing drugs that human nature has a high propensity to be drawn to?

In the face of hyperstimuli, we can't talk about mere human propensities as a justification, else we would have already turned ourselves into junkies many times over.

How many years did it take for heroin go from a cough medicine to a schedule I drug? Amphetamines, cigarettes etc.

There is a reason you can't put simply everything on the marketplace, and that is OK. That doesn't mean the idea of a marketplace is broken.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#165

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

ianai wrote: post #145
Nursie wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I genuinely don't have a good solution - I'm pretty sure "ban it" is not one. But I think we need to recognise, when we try to address this stuff, that our current picture of speech online is suffering not just from deplatforming, but also domination of some narratives by high volumes of motivated bullshit. > usually shit hits the fan in social issues of poverty, homelessness, abortion rights and such.…

For good reason we don’t accept people yelling “fire” in a movie theater. Anti-vax misinformation during a pandemic is definitely in the same vein as yelling fire in a theater. There are a few solutions. Don’t know that any of these are possible, but sometimes solutions only get found in a listing of possible solutions. Any sourcing of the internet as a source of truth could be called into question on face. Or massiv…

In a well-run theater yelling fire should lead to a prompt and orderly evacuation.

It's called fire drill.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#166

Post by bitwize »

0des wrote: post #3
SpywareThrow wrote: post #2

This is a ridiculous take. You will get censored no matter how much you try to “talk” about it. You’re dealing with people who will nod, say uh huh, and carry on doing what they were doing regardless of what’s written. Nothing has really been accomplished in the last decade. It’s a one way ticket to surveillance and censorship.

"Crises precipitate change" - Deltron 3030

"Only a crisis -- actual or perceived -- produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas lying around." --Milton Friedman

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#167

Post by Mountain_Skies »

mousepilot wrote: post #152
vsareto wrote: post #83

>The promise of the ACCESS Act is an internet where if you don’t like a big platform’s moderation policies, if you think they’re too tolerant of abusers or too quick to kick someone off for getting too passionate during a debate, you can leave, and still stay connected to the people who matter to you. Use any number of other communication methods or services that brilliant humans have invented to allow us all to talk…

Still there are folks that cannot deal with anything outside of Facebook, ie., cannot run a regular browser because they simply don't know how. We have CLEARLY reached such technical ineptitude.

Ineptitude might be the correct description assuming that one should have a certain level of tech savvy to participate online but should that really be the case? Apple not long ago ran a "what's a computer?" ad because participation in the use of computer powered tools no longer requires an understanding of how those tools work under the hood. While that might be disappointing to us geeks, for most people it's a good thing. I'm glad I can drive my truck to the National Forest without knowing anything about the correct ignition timing. Should an understanding of web browsers be a requirement to use the Facebook app?

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#168

Post by MrStonedOne »

FranchuFranchu wrote: post #85

"Whoa, it's the guy in that one xkcd comic!"

I love Randell but he was never right on that issue.

The United States Constitution doesn't own the concept of free speech. The concept existed before the constitution was written, it will exist after the usa falls.

While he is correct, in that somebody arguing a social network site censoring them has validated the first amendment, is fucking stupid.

He is not correct in arguing that all references to free speech refer to the 1st amendment, and the fact that the 1st amendment only applies to government censorship doesn't restrain the broad concept of free speech to only applying to government censorship.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#169

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

radley wrote: post #35
prepend wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Authoritarians gonna make up their own authority regardless. I think they’ll try to, but not always succeed. They will definitely use and abuse any existing powers. So I think it’s logically unsound, and quite sad to me, to argue that it’s pointless to resist allowing powers that can be exploited because authoritarians will do it anyway.

> They will definitely use and abuse any existing powers. They'll also abuse new powers, particularly known-but-unused powers. My point is that it's better to make the best rules you can for now, rather than limit yourself simply because a bad guy will someday make it worse. They'll make it worse regardless.

> They'll also abuse new powers, particularly known-but-unused powers.

Sounds recently familiar. I watched my state, city, ward, public health office and everyone in between or associated to “discover” new powers as a result of Covid.

My state did not do comparatively well over 2020. All we had to do we what was logical and we could have made these decisions early.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#170

Post by throwawayboise »

mandmandam wrote: post #141
throwawaysea wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The marketplace of ideas works. It may not work in the timescale you want or with the tradeoffs you want while the truth settles out, but I think these claims that it doesn’t work are hasty. Furthermore there isn’t a better alternative. Right now censorship from platform owners is abusively used to skew political discussions, using the pretense of factuality. I regularly see fact checkers make mistakes or make mislea…

>The marketplace of ideas works. It may not work in the timescale you want I'm astounded anyone can say that with a straight face. The misinformation for profit strategies employed by big tobacco, oil, military, pharma etc. have proven extraordinarily effective, time and time again. The timescales are nothing to do with "what I want" and everything to do with the fate of people's lives. From losing relatives to cance…

How can you say that with regards to tobacco? It's all but illegal, completely banned in most public places, you can basically only use it in your home or outdoors alone.

"Not on the timescale you want" is the salient point.

Post reply on HN