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

441–450 of 600 posts

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

#441

Post by PicassoCTs »

Nevermark wrote: post #400

Big tech censorship will not solved without addressing the other half of a problem with two sides. Without systems that promote quality, non-ideological, nuanced, original, tolerant dialogue we will keep running into the false dilemma of unmoderated cess pools or heavy handed moderation. If we are to avoid this dilemma we need systems that organically promote constructive, tolerant and inclusive communication, and or…

Right and Left are basically ideologies carrying to the different ideas of society depending upon gender. On average for females a more redistributing, moderating society is more attractive. For men a society that allows them to display "provider" status seems more attractive. To frame the whole thing as a ideological debate, in a society with massive change of roles and influence is intellectual dishonest.

Some transcend these "stereotypes" and are for a more redistribution society based upon the insight that these transformations require a reform of policy. They are sadly in the minority - in both ideologies.

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

#442

Post by originalvichy »

cable2600 wrote: post #440

Actually the people getting banned and censored did Gab and a few others that were cut off from Paypal, Visa, Patreon and others. They have to go somewhere, and are not wanted on Big Tech social networks. They have been radicalized as a result. Believing conspiracy theories and alt-right groups.

My experience with peeking into Gab was being greeted by a suprisingly large amount of neo-nazi posts dominating the site.

From my experience you don’t really need to push neo-nazis into conspiracy theories – their ideology is already a one big conspiracy theory.

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

#443

Post by exporectomy »

Nursie wrote: post #285
exporectomy wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with actual vaccine science Who decides what that is? Plenty of actual scientists publish papers in actual science journals that conflict with each other and with official public health advice. The whole vaccines cause autism idea came from what looked like actual vaccine science. Knowledge isn't actually that sure. Sometimes the authorities are wrong. Remember when bread was at the bottom of the food pyramid? > bu…

So there’s no way at all, to your mind, to distinguish millions of shitposts about “The covid vaccine causes infertility, and contains 5G chips” from, for instance, genuine risk information? We truly are swimming in a world in which nothing is true. Or you are anyway.

I can make up my own mind for my personal opinion but I don't want other people's ideas to be censored. Even if they're factually wrong, it's still OK to share them, I think.

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

#444

Post by exporectomy »

jhanschoo wrote: post #309
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You take an extreme example (5G chips in vaccines) to support the idea that we can draw a line in the sand and say what's true & what's false. But if you take an example closer to the line, things start to become less clear. Are masks useful to the general public? If you said "yes" a year ago, you would've been censored for spreading misinformation. If you said "no" yesterday, you would've been censored for spreading…

You take a moderate example to support the idea that we cannot nevertheless have a threshold where we can be sure that something is false. But while we cannot clearly say where the land ends and the ocean begins, there are large swaths of places that we can positively identify as ocean. The OP never claimed to have an appropriate solution so I don't know what you are talking about regarding them thinking censorship i…

Here's a claim that's definitely in the ocean - Mohammed is the messenger of God. Do you want that claim banned from the internet because it's clearly false (God doesn't even exist)? Do you want to exterminate Islamic faith?

Just because it's wrong, doesn't mean nobody should believe it or be exposed to it.

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

#445

Post by bryanrasmussen »

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #47
Nursie wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will the services be forced to accept whatever unmoderated feed of filth the linked to service sends their way? I was kinda wondering that. If a user gets banned, and moves off-platform to continue the behaviour there, but is somehow magically still linked to everyone they were linked with before... has anything really changed? Will facebook be forced to show its users the same nastiness it just booted off, because…

> 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.

>Facebook should be forced to show me the feeds I choose to subscribe to.

What about constantly manipulating you to become aligned to the more extreme versions of your ideals, so you will subscribe to more extreme feeds?

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

#447

Post by stale2002 »

clucas wrote: post #410
stale2002 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you not end up with a censorship department of the government That department of censorship will exist no matter what. Internally, it is called the trust and safety department, at most big companies. The only question is do you want to have the decisions of that department to be limited by judges and rights that are laid out in the constitution, or do you want it to be an unaccountable free for all, where th…

> rights that are laid out in the constitution Just to be clear, under US law, what you are describing (creating a government censorship department that determines how social media companies are allowed to moderate) would have NOTHING to do with the rights laid out in the constitution - it would in fact need to overcome the companies' constitutional rights to publish whatever they wish, just to exist. You can argue t…

> Just to be clear, under US law, what you are describing (creating a government censorship department that determines how social media companies are allowed to moderate

Yes it could.

The point is that if the government is doing the "censorsing" or whatever you want to call it, then at the very least, whatever that "censoring" is, we have judges and rights and similar checks and balances that prevents the government from doing too much.

If something is so bad, that it needs to be censored, then our court system should handle it.

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

#448

Post by stale2002 »

clucas wrote: post #430
rndgermandude wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legislatures are already the "censors" and the executive the once enforcing "censorship". And there is an "appeal" process to some degree in the judiciary branch. The legislatures already write the "moderation rules" for entire societies. Unlike the big companies who are only beholden to their share holders - and sometimes only really that one shareholder called Mark - the legislatures are beholden at least in th…

Having the government writing censorship rules sounds absolutely dystopian to me. There are plenty of ways to get information on the internet - just because Facebook says "no porn" doesn't mean you can't get porn on the internet, you know? But there's only one government (per country, of course). If your government says no porn... What then?

> Having the government writing censorship rules sounds absolutely dystopian to me.

No, because our court system could prevent any censorship that infringed on our rights.

It is better to have our court system stop people from censoring too much, than it is for there to be zero rules at all, as to what could or could not be censored.

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

#449

Post by ngc248 »

Nevermark wrote: post #400

Big tech censorship will not solved without addressing the other half of a problem with two sides. Without systems that promote quality, non-ideological, nuanced, original, tolerant dialogue we will keep running into the false dilemma of unmoderated cess pools or heavy handed moderation. If we are to avoid this dilemma we need systems that organically promote constructive, tolerant and inclusive communication, and or…

Exactly ... We need to be "liberal" in some things and "conservative" for others.

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

#450

Post by chroem- »

knownjorbist wrote: post #385
chroem- wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. > We are in regular touch with these social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff > https://www.newsweek.com/biden-administrations-admission-the... Psaki also discussed how they're building blacklists of people so that if you get banned on one platform, you also get banned on all of the other platforms.

Nowhere in this article does it support what you're saying.

The first is a direct excerpt from the linked article, which is a high level summary of the press conference. The second is a reference to this

https://youtube.com/watch?v=IwwwRC2xLC0

Post reply on HN