Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’ • Hacker News Board

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#131

Post by unclebucknasty » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

concinds wrote: post #68

A society where: - you are held responsible for other people's feelings, and for their feelings as a result of your words and actions, and: - anything that causes anyone to feel bad, is looked down upon by the collective Is tyranny by the emotionally stunted. The fundamental problem with it, is it makes society more enmeshed (a pathological relationship dynamic). People start caring more about going with the grain, t…

I'll take the other side of that argument.

In a world where we spend increasingly more time online, sociopaths and other bad actors have been handed far too much power/influence and that's net negative for society.

Like it or not, the online world has become a public space--The Public Space. And, now we're talking about metaverses that will further immerse us.

If someone were to follow a person down a public street, screaming obscenities and generally harassing them, of course we'd want the rightful laws on the books against such a thing to be enforced. Why should this be any different in the online world?

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#132

Post by zarzavat » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:17 PM UTC

lbriner wrote: post #74

Zpalmtree wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inconsistent application of unjust laws is maybe even worse than them being applied to everyone, now you have a great reason to discount the people being abused if they don't agree with your politics.

Inconsistency is terrible regardless of how high-quality the law is. Law is about setting boundaries but if you see everyone else breaking a law and then you get prosecuted for breaking it yourself, you don't create anything except resentment. I think poorly written and inconsistently applied laws is a big part of why the UK has become so selfish. Easier just to worry about me and mine rather than what I think societ…

> I think poorly written and inconsistently applied laws is a big part of why the UK has become so selfish

It's much deeper than that. The UK's national identity is tied up in things that no longer exist: the British Empire and WW2. That was the peak, and everything since has been a decline.

People have become selfish because the British nation has evaporated. It barely exists. There is no sense of being compatriots, because there is nothing to be compatriots of.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#133

Post by nradov » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:20 PM UTC

II2II wrote: post #120

concinds wrote: post #68

A society where: - you are held responsible for other people's feelings, and for their feelings as a result of your words and actions, and: - anything that causes anyone to feel bad, is looked down upon by the collective Is tyranny by the emotionally stunted. The fundamental problem with it, is it makes society more enmeshed (a pathological relationship dynamic). People start caring more about going with the grain, t…

We are reacting to a tweet that has very little content, notably how high is the bar for psychological harm. It is undoubtedly higher than making someone feel bad, but the question is: is it high enough? Consider your words, "you are responsible for your own thoughts, feelings, and actions". For the most part, that is true. On the other hand, we also consider some segments of society as vulnerable. In some of those c…

Credible death threats are already illegal and can be handled through both criminal prosecution and civil restraining orders. We don't need any new laws. Sometimes the existing laws aren't enforced effectively, but piling on more laws won't solve that problem.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#134

Post by mdavis6890 » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:23 PM UTC

sofixa wrote: post #96

concinds wrote: post #68

A society where: - you are held responsible for other people's feelings, and for their feelings as a result of your words and actions, and: - anything that causes anyone to feel bad, is looked down upon by the collective Is tyranny by the emotionally stunted. The fundamental problem with it, is it makes society more enmeshed (a pathological relationship dynamic). People start caring more about going with the grain, t…

> The most fundamental piece of applicable psychology is the idea that you are responsible for your own thoughts, feelings, and actions, period. You are responsible for making yourself happy, for asserting yourself, for setting any boundaries you choose. People on Twitter can just block, or mute, or turn off their DMs for people they don't follow. What's wrong with that? Now there's a human right to use Twitter unhin…

We currently (in the US, anyway) have laws against harassment and threats. They may not be well-enforced, but we do have those laws. Adding additional, vague laws will not help with enforcement, but it would open the door for authorities to prosecute lower and lower levels of 'harmful' behavior which go well beyond what you would want.

The solution is to crack down hard on the real harm, based on the many laws we already have on the books.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#135

Post by Clubber » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:24 PM UTC

md8z wrote: post #37

Clubber wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in the US, you get to choose from a group of politicians. All those politicians need money to run their campaigns. Those politicians get money from corporate interests to fund their campaigns. Therefore, nearly all politicians you are able to choose from have already been tainted by corporate money. Corporate interests don't just cut big checks and expect nothing in return. Point being, this is a law that helps th…

I really don't see how that's relevant here, if you really want to take that angle, then every law can be abused by corrupt officials. I agree with your complaint about that, corruption in politics is sadly nothing new. But that is a different problem to address, can we please discuss policy and not derail the discussion with cynicism about politicians? It's not interesting conversation and I feel like this is just s…

>I don't understand, these decisions appear to be made by people appointed by democratically elected MPs?

I assumed you were trying to say that since the law would be created "democratically," it was either just or can't be corrupted. In response, I explained how the democratic process works in the US, trying to say that just because we have a democratic process, that doesn't necessarily mean the people we elect to represent us do it in good faith. They represent the corporate interests who funded their war chest first and foremost and the citizenry who elected them incidentally. Democracy as currently in practice is very different from democracy in theory. I love the theory.

Let me try to make a bad analogy. Say you are in a union and it's time to vote for your union rep. There are 4 candidates and they are all mid and high level managers. Yes, they would be democratically elected, but the choice is limited to people who have a serious conflict of interest. It's unlikely you would be represented in good faith. Because of this, any law proposed we should be highly skeptical of as it likely isn't in our best interest but more in the best interest of "management," i.e. corporate interests.

>Are you making a different complaint about the democratic process? That's fine for you to do, but that seems to be unrelated to the topic.

See above.

So collectively, as a single voice, I think our politicians are using this as a way to censor the population and I collectively, as a single voice do not in any way support it. If people don't want to get their feelings hurt, they shouldn't go on Twitter or Facebook or talk to people in any way; otherwise, people probably have to get accustomed to getting their feelings hurt sometimes. It sucks, because nobody likes getting their feelings hurt, but the alternative is way worse.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#136

Post by teakettle42 » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:25 PM UTC

unclebucknasty wrote: post #131

concinds wrote: post #68

A society where: - you are held responsible for other people's feelings, and for their feelings as a result of your words and actions, and: - anything that causes anyone to feel bad, is looked down upon by the collective Is tyranny by the emotionally stunted. The fundamental problem with it, is it makes society more enmeshed (a pathological relationship dynamic). People start caring more about going with the grain, t…

I'll take the other side of that argument. In a world where we spend increasingly more time online, sociopaths and other bad actors have been handed far too much power/influence and that's net negative for society. Like it or not, the online world has become a public space--The Public Space. And, now we're talking about metaverses that will further immerse us. If someone were to follow a person down a public street,…

> … sociopaths and other bad actors have been handed far too much power/influence and that's net negative for society.

Why would you assume that the sociopaths and bad actors wouldn’t be the ones exploiting laws like this to do great harm to those they disagree with?

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#137

Post by nradov » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

unclebucknasty wrote: post #131

concinds wrote: post #68

A society where: - you are held responsible for other people's feelings, and for their feelings as a result of your words and actions, and: - anything that causes anyone to feel bad, is looked down upon by the collective Is tyranny by the emotionally stunted. The fundamental problem with it, is it makes society more enmeshed (a pathological relationship dynamic). People start caring more about going with the grain, t…

I'll take the other side of that argument. In a world where we spend increasingly more time online, sociopaths and other bad actors have been handed far too much power/influence and that's net negative for society. Like it or not, the online world has become a public space--The Public Space. And, now we're talking about metaverses that will further immerse us. If someone were to follow a person down a public street,…

The San Francisco Police generally don't do anything to stop deranged homeless drug addicts from following people down the street, screaming obscenities and generally harassing them. SF residents seem to be fine with that state of affairs, or at least it doesn't bother them enough to vote to change it.

And to be clear I don't intend that as a criticism of SF necessarily. The point is that there is no universal worldwide standard of tolerable behavior, and some people are apparently willing to put up with a lot.

Would you be happy if the laws of Saudi Arabia or North Korea were enforced online? They might consider you a sociopath and bad actor.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#138

Post by floatingatoll » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

teakettle42 wrote: post #129

floatingatoll wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it morally appropriate to get together a group of your friends and pressure someone to commit suicide on social media? By your logic, it seems that it is; their suicidal reaction to malicious and intentional verbal abuse is not anyone else's problem but their own. Many people seem to feel otherwise, and there are laws in place in various regions as a result. Are they wrong to choose to restrict your speech in favo…

> I read your moral position here as "if you are too frail to resist someone's words, you don't deserve protection from their verbal abuse with malicious intent" I’m not the original parent, but I read (and share) the position as: Barring intent by the speaker to inflict direct and immediate physical harm, if you are too frail to maintain your mental health in the face of someone else’s speech (or you pretend to be),…

In the case of the UK's laws, they are targeting people with specific intent to cause psychological harm. That's a critical component of "trolling": if no harm was caused to the abused party, then the trolls wouldn't bother, because they're fixated on hurting others for personal pleasure. So, then, "barring intent" is an invalid condition for this discussion, right?

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#139

Post by teakettle42 » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:32 PM UTC

asxd wrote: post #110

selfhoster11 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a false dichotomy, it's a hyperbole meant to illustrate an uncomfortable trade-off.

Presenting two choices as mutually exclusive, when they are not, is definitely a false dichotomy.

How are they not mutually exclusive? This is a profoundly fundamental idea about human freedom.

You cannot both grant people the freedom to act — even if that means they might use that freedom to harm others — and simultaneously, ensure that nobody can come to harm.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#140

Post by zepolen » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:38 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #92

_fat_santa wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The proposed law change will shift the focus on to the “harmful effect” of a message rather than if it contains “indecent” or “grossly offensive” content, which is the present basis for assessing its criminality. I'm feeling very harmed after reading your comment. I realize the content's of your message are objectively harmless, but I "feel" harmed. So...off to jail you go. --- But on a more serious note. Like you…

> we have come to the point where what you actually say, you intentions, are completely irrelevant, it's all about how your message is perceived The way this is typically framed is "impact matters more than intent". Like if you weren't watching where you were walking and accidentally stepped on someone's foot. You didn't _intend_ to harm them, but the overall _impact_ was that you did harm them. As you rightly point…

Hey, I find your comments offensive. Can you stop?