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

Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 333 posts

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#271

Post by helge9210 »

ABoredBirb wrote: post #223
ashwagary wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Where in the hell are you getting 10% from? Ukraine has a multi-party government and their neo-nazis don't have even a single seat in their rather large parliament.

Term "Nazi" originally and in modern Russian [propaganda] have a different meaning. "Being Ukrainian (speaking the language, knowing the history, preserving the culture)" is equal to being "Nazi" in the eyes of Russians.

So 10% are those, who would not make compromises related to language, history and culture to have some economic or political gains.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#272

Post by thesmok »

mardifoufs wrote: post #266
thesmok wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's awkward right now is how people in the west say "nazi" because some Ukrainians are wearing some pagan symbols while defending their land. While Russians are actually committing was crimes saying Ukrainian nation is not a real one.

The back sun isn't just a pagan symbol. This is pure revisionism, the exact version they use was literally designed by Himmler for the SS. Are we really doing " the swastika is just a religious symbol" or "the confederate flag is just about historic heritage" now?

Oh no, I'm just saying a lot of people concentrate more on symbols than they do on actions.

Nazism is evolving like everything else, and the new nazi symbol is Z.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#274

Post by esyir »

mardifoufs wrote: post #267
esyir wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. When you're fighting for literal survival, if you're so married to virtue signaling at that point that you don't fight the existential threat first, you're probably fucked. Do I like nazis? No. Do I associate with them? No. If working together with one is how I stop some jackass from killing us both, am I going to do it? Sure as hell yes.

What you don't seem to realize is that those aren't your LARPer nazis that roam around on discord just to sound edgy and cool. They have literally committed war crimes, rapes and torture. And that's been documented since 2015. By not trying to root them out now they will inexorably take over whatever will be left of ukraine. That's almost always what happens with radical armed elements, and as I said they are getting…

>What you don't seem to realize is that those aren't your LARPer nazis that roam around on discord just to sound edgy and cool.

Fully aware of this, thing is, given their circumstances, I can't really give half a shit. It's amazing easy to wax lyrical about "morality" when you've got the safety guarantee of the most powerful military on the face of the earth. A bit harder when they're literally dropping shells on your head and driving tanks into your cities. I cannot, and will not judge them for compromising when facing a literally existential threat.

Can't exactly get anywhere else when you're just a Russian puppet government. Historically speaking, that's bringing a hell lot worse of a future to anyone in the region than the Azov ever could.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#275

Post by mardifoufs »

AA-BA-94-2A-56 wrote: post #245

Misleading title and article. Facebook and Instagram are allowing people in countries neighboring Russia to call for violence against Russian who are not civilians. "We still won’t allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians,” Meta said in a statement." Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/mar/11/facebook-... This article from Reuters is at best clickbait, and at worse Russian pro-war p…

Why did they both say "Russians" and Russian Soldiers " then? They made the distinction and then included both. It's hard to take to blame people for thinking that basically means civilians too when they explicitly didn't just limit it to Russian soldiers. It's such an obviously ambiguous statement that was not even needed in the first place.

But yeah I'm sure Meta will be able to verify the military status of everyone that's being threatened or mobbed on Facebook.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#276

Post by mardifoufs »

esyir wrote: post #274
mardifoufs wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you don't seem to realize is that those aren't your LARPer nazis that roam around on discord just to sound edgy and cool. They have literally committed war crimes, rapes and torture. And that's been documented since 2015. By not trying to root them out now they will inexorably take over whatever will be left of ukraine. That's almost always what happens with radical armed elements, and as I said they are getting…

>What you don't seem to realize is that those aren't your LARPer nazis that roam around on discord just to sound edgy and cool. Fully aware of this, thing is, given their circumstances, I can't really give half a shit. It's amazing easy to wax lyrical about "morality" when you've got the safety guarantee of the most powerful military on the face of the earth. A bit harder when they're literally dropping shells on you…

So supporting AL Qaida was morally right in the context of the American invasion/interference in the middle east? They were after all at the forefront of the fight against the invaders too.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#277

Post by rightbyte »

yywwbbn wrote: post #241
mrtksn wrote: post #71

That's appalling and will be one of the last coffins on foreign run communication systems everywhere. Can you imagine that some techies in California start deciding which people are to be attacked in your country or by your country? It's also probably not techies that are deciding that but that's not the point. That's such a nation security threat that no country with sane government can afford to allow. Wars, genoci…

Facebook is not really making a decision themselves here, they’re just basically reacting to the prevalent public sentiment in the west. It’s not particularly different to what newspapers etc. were doing during WW1, WW2 or any other war (to a certain degree).

Facebook does not want to be a Western platform though. They want PI to sell from all over the world.

(God I hate that I actually started to use West as a political concept now ...)

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#278

Post by concinds »

AA-BA-94-2A-56 wrote: post #245

Misleading title and article. Facebook and Instagram are allowing people in countries neighboring Russia to call for violence against Russian who are not civilians. "We still won’t allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians,” Meta said in a statement." Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/mar/11/facebook-... This article from Reuters is at best clickbait, and at worse Russian pro-war p…

"We won't allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians," says Meta.

They define credible as: having two "indicators of credibility", such as location or method. That is a considerably higher bar than for any other group. And that's referring to civilians, not soldiers.

In a separate, internal memo, they explicitly say that hate speech and violent speech against Russian civilians is allowed "if the context is the Russian invasion". That's sufficiently vague that the policy allows for dehumanization.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#279

Post by ashwagary »

helge9210 wrote: post #271
ABoredBirb wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where in the hell are you getting 10% from? Ukraine has a multi-party government and their neo-nazis don't have even a single seat in their rather large parliament.

Term "Nazi" originally and in modern Russian [propaganda] have a different meaning. "Being Ukrainian (speaking the language, knowing the history, preserving the culture)" is equal to being "Nazi" in the eyes of Russians. So 10% are those, who would not make compromises related to language, history and culture to have some economic or political gains.

>Term "Nazi" originally and in modern Russian [propaganda] have a different meaning.

The militia that Stepan Bandera was a leader of exterminated an estimated ~200,000 Jews. I don't think the term "Nazi" is as different as you claim.

Please provide sources for any counterarguments you make. I welcome legitimate pushback to this polling data and the public historical claims.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#280

Post by esyir »

mardifoufs wrote: post #276
esyir wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What you don't seem to realize is that those aren't your LARPer nazis that roam around on discord just to sound edgy and cool. Fully aware of this, thing is, given their circumstances, I can't really give half a shit. It's amazing easy to wax lyrical about "morality" when you've got the safety guarantee of the most powerful military on the face of the earth. A bit harder when they're literally dropping shells on you…

So supporting AL Qaida was morally right in the context of the American invasion/interference in the middle east? They were after all at the forefront of the fight against the invaders too.

That isn't really the gotcha you think it is. The world isn't some simple good/bad binary; one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist after all.

Moreover, when the US went to Afghanistan, I certainly didn't judge Al Qaeda for using "terrorist" tactics like IEDs, or non-uniformed combat, in violation of the Geneva convention. They could have gone with honourable conventional warfare. Then they'd be honorable corpses relatively quickly.

In the end, when war comes, compromise is inevitable. You might regret the consequences down the line, but without that compromise to begin with, you might not have had that future.

Post reply on HN