I'm so glad US private tech corporations tell me what to think.
[deleted]
Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
51–60 of 333 posts
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#52Sometimes I think what would happen if China invades Taiwan? Would FB and IG still allow calls for violence against Chinese? I am pretty sure many people will change their tunes when it comes to China, similar to what happened regarding COVID.
FB and IG already don't operate in China. Out of all the big tech companies, I would think that FB would have the least issue with standing up to China.
Not necessarily saying they would. I don't know enough. But they certainly have a lot less conflict of interest.
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#53Hate is hate. Morality is absolute, not relative.
Even as a moral absolutist myself that's a laughable oversimplification bordering on deliberate obtuseness. Obviously all hate is not the same. You call for the extermination of covid-19 and nobody will disagree with you. You call for the extermination of mosquitos and most people won't disagree with you. You call for the extermination of destructive invasive species and a majority of people will agree with you. Some reasons for hate are acceptable and some are not. Hating someone because of their race is not acceptable. Hating someone because they invaded your country and bombed your fleeing women and children is acceptable.
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#54Hate is hate. Morality is absolute, not relative.
That's a hotly debated philosophical concept, moral absolutism and moral relativism and everything in between. I'd assume from your statement you're a moral absolutist, but that does not make that statement an absolute truth.
Not only is GP a moral absolutist, but GP's system of morality postulates that hate is bad. It is also possible to be a moral absolutist with other postulates from which you can derive that hate is bad in many cases but not all.
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
"A no-fly zone" is one of the worst misnomers out there. In this case, it means that NATO - and specifically the USA - will start shooting Russian aircrafts. Sending NATO aircraft is not different from sending tanks. I understand why Ukrainians are asking for it but there is a reason NATO can't get involved.
It's not a misnomer. And, asserting NATO air dominance in Ukraine is easy and guaranteed to succeed with de minimis cost (in lives and/or military equipment). Whereas creating land dominance with tanks is another matter. A no-fly zone is an easy win for NATO and would make Ukrainian civilians safe from aerial bombardment.
A no fly-zone officially drags NATO into the conflict and WW3 kicks off.
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#56Another brilliant move in the game of "let's only allow US approved opinions while claiming to be unbiased." Next up we'll be allowed to deadname russian trans people!
It's never been "US Approved" - it's been what's approved by one group of people in the US...
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#57It's ridiculous to assume that "I hate my neighbor and am going to kill him" and "there's a Russian army invading my city, we should set up an ambush" should be held to the same standard of speech. Of course, a larger question is whether Facebook should be the arbiter for this in the first place, but then the content is posted on their own private platform, and unlike a lot of people here I still think they should ha…
>It's ridiculous to assume that "I hate my neighbor and am going to kill him" and "there's a Russian army invading my city, we should set up an ambush" should be held to the same standard of speech
Yeah, those examples are the easy ones. What about "we should genocide russians"? Where does that lie on your spectrum? Should facebook be allowing such speech?
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#58What the actual fuck is wrong with these people? Calling for literal violence against Russians is less dangerous than claiming masks aren't helpful? Is there something here I'm not getting?
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which brakes? Russia's attack on Ukraine? Sure, let's stop or slow that down, but how?
it's unbecoming to willfully misinterpret someone's statement in order to make a point distinct from that which they were making, and then to go on to agree with said willful misinterpretation.
No post body was provided.
Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians
#60On a pedantic level, saying NATO should impose a no-fly-zone is a call to violence. Did these platform ever forbid calls for State-sanctioned force? I would have assumed that these parts of the user terms were referring to unsanctioned, or otherwise criminal violence.
"A no-fly zone" is one of the worst misnomers out there. In this case, it means that NATO - and specifically the USA - will start shooting Russian aircrafts. Sending NATO aircraft is not different from sending tanks. I understand why Ukrainians are asking for it but there is a reason NATO can't get involved.
That depends if you violate the no fly zone...
No one would be forcing Putin to violate it.