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

Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 239 posts

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#151

Post by watwut »

zarzavat wrote: post #56
md8z wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not trolling, I've personally suffered psychological harm from online abuse. There are many places on the internet that I'd like to go but can't because people are too abusive and nobody does anything about it. What am I supposed to do if people don't even want to talk about this or acknowledge that it's a real problem that we can solve?

When I was a kid my teachers used to say to me "sticks and stones can break your bones but words can never hurt you" when another kid said something mean. Were they wrong? Yes, as an adult I've found that words can actually be quite hurtful. But usually from people I already know. Strangers? I don't think strangers can hurt with words, they are strangers after all, unless they get your real identity. I think a lot of…

Those teachers were very often enablers. And to add to it, had they tried to actually deal with issues instead of blaming victim or expecting the victim to just take it, the overall situation might have been better.

The words in fact can hurt and always did. Men used to kill each other over who said what. Words can damage reputations and make other kids mistreat the victim too.

It is easier to say the above sentence then to deal with kids verbally abuse others. It is easier to tell the victim to shut up then to teach the victim to defend himself, to undo damage to their self confidence and so on.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#152

Post by citizenpaul »

zepolen wrote: post #140
umvi wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Hello I am Internet Officer Badge #762783.

Do you feel that user "clairity" harmed you? If so I will begin the paperwork for detainment and evaluation for reeducation by the Internet Feelings Agency (IFA).

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#153

Post by citizenpaul »

nradov wrote: post #133
II2II wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You are right. We should probably have a law the prevents adding laws to already handled laws.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#154

Post by kradeelav »

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…

I can't speak for more than myself, but here's an alternative viewpoint: as a female that fits into other undisclosed minorities, and as an erotic artist who regularly gets threats (comes with the package) - I am far more afraid of the consequences of this dystopian line of thinking than I am of the occasional hate mobs. There are tools out there to deal with mobs/threats, even if it's unpleasant, but giving puritans a legal leverage to take down my art (and anyone who's creative work is remotely controversial) is going to wreck an unholy amount of damage. The typical line of attack is claiming that our art is "harmful" because of BDSM content, and the proposed legistlation would just reinforce that.

I feel like you mean the best in your heart, but would encourage anyone to think deeply before white knighting for minorities. A lot of times well meaning laws can have disastrous consequences in smothering less-powerful voices (laws against "immoral" content referring to anything sexual online regularly making things worse for actual sex workers, for instance). The ACLU has a long list of historical incidences where "legal" censorship ended up hurting civil rights activists, queer activists and creatives, and too many other groups to name.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#155

Post by Levitz »

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…

>I think people who regularly get rape threats and racial abuse, many of whom are calling for such legislation ( recently there have been numerous cases with black footballers and also some with female journalists), have a slightly higher priority than people who just want to insult freely without fear of consequences.

They don't have higher priority than the rest of society, which enjoy an important lack of authoritarianism in this regard. It's not about wanting to insult freely, but about the right to offend.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#157

Post by Levitz »

KittenInABox wrote: post #93
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…

> 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. This solution does not account for the following ways a troll can harass you: * sockpuppets pinging you, * sockpuppets impersonating you, * sockpuppets mass reporting you, thereby suspending your accounts * findin…

Honestly half of that is already illegal and the other half is more of a problem with how social media fundamentally works. The idea of making laws so someone doesn't spam pings is preposterous.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#158

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

maccolgan wrote: post #148
13415 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the UK, not Europe in general. The UK is not even part of the EU anymore and has been steering towards authoritarianism for two decades already - together with the US as their closest ally.

The EU and its constituent countries aren't authoritarian?

Nowhere near that level, and most importantly, we tend to make fun of the US "Offense Olympics".

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#159

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

Subsentient wrote: post #26

And this is why I'm never going to move to Europe. My jokes would be considered "obscene" or "indecent" or something and I'd be thrown in prison. At least here in the States, for now, the government is letting the private companies perform the censorship, and not imprisoning people for tasteless humor.

In my experience, the range of socially acceptable jokes is far wider, and people make fun of what the US counts as offensive.

Re: Trolls will be jailed for ‘psychological harm’

#160

Post by sofixa »

Levitz wrote: post #155
sofixa wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

>I think people who regularly get rape threats and racial abuse, many of whom are calling for such legislation ( recently there have been numerous cases with black footballers and also some with female journalists), have a slightly higher priority than people who just want to insult freely without fear of consequences. They don't have higher priority than the rest of society, which enjoy an important lack of authorit…

> A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins

I don't know why you think your freedom to offend/insult is higher than another person's freedom to not be offended/insulted.

Post reply on HN