Live data from Hacker News

Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

eff.org

291–300 of 330 posts

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chris Hedges sometimes remarks that he finds people turn towards superstitious, religious, or conspiratorial world views when they find they have no control over their lives. I suspect that if the US somehow changed so that economic security were increased for most people, there would be much less unreason and general discourse wouldn't be so mean.

I think im general I believe that theory to be true, but that doesn't explain all the well fed boomers that went full Qanon. They have retirement accounts, own their houses, a few nice vehicles out front, a boat, maybe a second property, etc. These people ended up being Qanon's bread and butter. From the outside in they seem in control of their lives, but maybe it's all a ruse.

My father said something interesting to me once (he's a boomer of course): "Most people in my generation have this sense somewhere deep inside that they failed, but they're not sure exactly what they failed at."

Hunter S. Thompson wrote extensively on this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3iKBxJ9vQ0

Only a small percentage of that generation were into the specific sort of counterculture Thompson was steeped in, but the whole cultural zeitgeist of the generation was wrapped up in various forms of either political or mystical idealism or a heavily marketed idea that scientific or technological progress would deliver giant miracles in short order. These people expected some kind of big, glorious future and they feel like it just didn't come.

Nice retirement accounts and second houses was not "the dream." The dream was something bigger, an "ultimate triumph" as Thompson calls it, and they feel like they never quite reached it.

Instead they got the 1970s when it all seemed to crash down in a wave of urban crime, drug hangovers, crazy cults, serial killers of the week, pollution, and stagflation. Keep on truckin'!

A good number of them are still looking for "it." Apocalyptic evangelical Christianity with its rapture tapped into this. The unbalanced Internet techno-utopianism of the 90s and Singulatarianism tapped into this. Qanon's language tapped into this.

I'm a young gen-Xer or old millennial depending on how you count it. As a rule my generation is a bit jaded on movements and idealism, partly as a reaction to what many of us see as the delusional thinking of our parents.

I hope to leave the world better than I found it, but I don't expect some kind of shining utopia to rise from the waves. If we manage to solve the big problems of our era like climate change, sustainability, and wealth inequality, their absence will merely reveal other big problems that were building under the surface. Life is beautiful and fascinating but it's also a perpetual struggle against entropy.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#292
post #95

2020-2021 has shown me that most people happen to be 'fair weather fans' of civil rights. Everyone claims to love free speech but when suppression of speech opposing their own worldview comes into play, they suddenly dither and fall back on other rationalizations to justify the censorship. Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's 'hate speech'. Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's 'misinform…

What free speech advocates ignore here is that even they generally draw a line somewhere. Death threats, defamation, pedophilia, sharing bomb making materials etc are usually accepted by everyone to not be acceptable. 'But those are different' is usually the argument here. But why though? Because they cause harm? Doesn't inciting racial hatred cause harm? Once we stop arguing over the issue being black/white but inst…

> 'But those are different' is usually the argument here. But why though?

Because we already agree they're different, so they form a Schelling point. We don't have to argue about them, and so there's no slippery slope.

However, I'd say even these examples are not as clear as they seem:

Death threats: I can see the need to punish credible death threats (and any credible threats of violence), but that does not actually imply a need to censor the death threats. Allow them to exist on the platform, but punish the threatener.

Defamation: This seems like a pointless holdover from honor culture. If we didn't have laws against it, people would simply demand evidence more often when hearing someone defame someone else. I don't see why the government needs to certify that my statement about someone else is true. Let my reputation do that.

Pedophilia: Have any children been saved by child pornography laws? It's possible banning and deleting it only encourages them to make more. And again, you can punish the creator of the pornography without also having to censor the content. The two are separate.

Sharing bomb making materials: This is the only example you gave where the actual information itself is dangerous. I support this being banned for sure. (You could say defamation is dangerous, but I'd say it's only harmful when the government is certifying our speech. Take away defamation laws, and defamation itself becomes less harmful, because we won't believe what others say at face value.)

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#293
post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf This paper is trash. On defining hate speech, "we focus on textual content that is distinctively characteristic of these forums", so, yes, banning specific subreddits resulted in less of that content in the overall Reddit. Did it make Reddit a more friendly place? Probably not as tensions have never been higher.

> Did it make Reddit a more friendly place? Probably not as tensions have never been higher. Did allowing hate speech make 8chan/Voat friendlier? There are plenty of unfriendly communities that lack overt racism/fatphobia, but I can't think of any friendly ones that do.

8chan was a sacrificial site to distract the most fervent internet crusaders. Worked pretty well, I believe it still exists in some form, but it is out of peoples mind.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#294
post #225

Some of the comments in this thread seem intentionally bad-faith or ignorant to how much hate and abuse actually exists on these platforms. The Internet fucking sucks. I stopped using social media because I'm trans and I don't feel like there's a place for me online anymore. No matter where I go, including large platforms like Reddit and Twitter, I'm inevitably subjected to someone expressing their grievances about t…

LGBT has become political not to the preference of a lot of its members. But the flag has become a political instrument for signaling. Abused against, I guess.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#295
post #95

2020-2021 has shown me that most people happen to be 'fair weather fans' of civil rights. Everyone claims to love free speech but when suppression of speech opposing their own worldview comes into play, they suddenly dither and fall back on other rationalizations to justify the censorship. Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's 'hate speech'. Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's 'misinform…

What free speech advocates ignore here is that even they generally draw a line somewhere. Death threats, defamation, pedophilia, sharing bomb making materials etc are usually accepted by everyone to not be acceptable. 'But those are different' is usually the argument here. But why though? Because they cause harm? Doesn't inciting racial hatred cause harm? Once we stop arguing over the issue being black/white but inst…

> instead discuss _where exactly_ we draw the line then I think we are finally having a far more honest discussion

There doesn't have to be an agreement, on the contrary there cannot be an agreement because that depends on the community. But what we currently see is that people push into established communities that want their lines realized. So I see no advantage to discuss this topic.

These lines are subjective, even by culture, country, region, age, gender or whatever. There is no universal line.

> instead discuss _where exactly_ we draw the line then I think we are finally having a far more honest discussion

There doesn't have to be an agreement, on the contrary there cannot be an agreement because that depends on the community. But what we currently see is that people push into established communities that want their lines realized. So I see no advantage to discuss this topic.

You animosity towards free speech advocates already tells me that we probably don't share a common line at all.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#296
post #225

Some of the comments in this thread seem intentionally bad-faith or ignorant to how much hate and abuse actually exists on these platforms. The Internet fucking sucks. I stopped using social media because I'm trans and I don't feel like there's a place for me online anymore. No matter where I go, including large platforms like Reddit and Twitter, I'm inevitably subjected to someone expressing their grievances about t…

FWIW r/actuallesbians is extremely supportive towards trans women. (I don't know subreddits for trans men) But even then, abusive PMs are still a problem.

That’s cool but I’m not a lesbian. I’m a straight trans woman who just wants to live her life and not be bothered.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should be a term for this, when conservatives in USA have so little exposure to actual leftists that they confuse MSNBC, the Democratic Party, and censorious anklebiters with "the Left". Here's a hint: actual leftists aren't cheering on the persecution of Assange, like everyone on MSNBC is.

No true Leftist, hmm? Okay, I'll humor you, what should we call " MSNBC, the Democratic Party, and censorious anklebiters " (sic) and the rest of the broad coalition to the left of the American center, if not the left? Aside from that, if you're suggesting I'm a conservative (no worries, it's a common mistake; it's tough being politically homeless), I'm a liberal unhappy with the broad coalition that used to be calle…

...left of the American center...

As you admit here, in any nation in Europe (or any nation in Latin America whose government wasn't recently installed by CIA), the name for MSNBC and the Democratic Party would be "the Right". Even in USA, they're the ones banging the drums most loudly for global thermonuclear war.

Your dissatisfaction is that you aren't a pure liberal. If you were, you would go along happily with their efforts to conserve this mess they've created. You just have an unfortunate fixation on the Bill of Rights or whatever. Keep in mind that Madison owned slaves when he wrote that, just as he had owned slaves when writing and campaigning for the Constitution the excesses of which the Bill of Rights pretended to control.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#298
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, if the government isn't using the extraordinary power's granted to them (search, seizure, arrests, fines, imprisonment, etc) against it's citizens strictly for the words they say or write, "free speech" hasn't been violated and it would be incorrect to use the term in that context. I think even a government hosted forum could filter content without violating even the spirit of "free speech", and I'm pretty sure…

> IMO, if the government isn't using the extraordinary power's granted to them (search, seizure, arrests, fines, imprisonment, etc) against it's citizens strictly for the words they say or write, "free speech" hasn't been violated and it would be incorrect to use the term in that context. "Free speech" is overloaded. There's the abstract concept of "free speech" and then there's the first amendment which specifically…

I know there's technically a distinction, the abstract concept is what I was alluding to when I mentioned the "spirit" of free speech, but I'm not convinced it's useful to make a distinction between the spirit and the law anyway. The concept of government and law is just as abstract.

I think it's more accurate to say the first amendment specifically limits _how_ the US government is allowed to censor speech i.e. they can't use their extraordinary powers to do it. It doesn't say they can't use the same tools and tactics everyone else legally uses to minimize the visibility and impact of certain speech.

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#299
post #225

Some of the comments in this thread seem intentionally bad-faith or ignorant to how much hate and abuse actually exists on these platforms. The Internet fucking sucks. I stopped using social media because I'm trans and I don't feel like there's a place for me online anymore. No matter where I go, including large platforms like Reddit and Twitter, I'm inevitably subjected to someone expressing their grievances about t…

LGBT has become political not to the preference of a lot of its members. But the flag has become a political instrument for signaling. Abused against, I guess.

Most of the people I see making LGBT “political” are people outside of our community who feel the need to constantly tell trans people how they feel about us - our pronouns, what gendered bathroom we should use, who we should be able to compete against athletically, whether we were lying as kids, whether or not they would date us. Like ugh, stop. Then you have the daily /r/Cringetopia or /r/HolUp thread that makes it to the front page when the only point of the thread is for grown ass men to take the piss out of some random gay teen on TikTok or no-follower account talking about pronouns on Twitter. What do we have? Selfie threads on /r/lgbt? Threads about how to come out to your parents on /r/asktransgender? Are you serious right now?

The harassment doesn’t even stop when these trolls and communities are banned. They will literally mass create fake accounts with hateful usernames and follow trans users in an attempt to harass them via the notification feed [0]. It’s scary when this happens to you and I think it’s the reason why you mostly see activist types from the trans community on these platforms, because they’re the only people who are willing to put up with this.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/oi4cmn/tran...

Re: Private censorship is not the best way to fight hate or defend democracy (2018)

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then cf. "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"[0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_tur...

Not sure how that has anything to do with free speech.

You put forth the idea in your parent comment that there is a simple bright-line test -- apparently textual -- for deciding whether a remark is an innocuous opinion or a credible threat.

So -- bearing in mind that the speaker's henchmen said they interpreted it as a command -- which side of the line does "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" fall on?

Post reply on HN