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

281–290 of 333 posts

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

#281

Post by csee »

kipchak wrote: post #80
paxys wrote: post #13

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. 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…

If I'm reading it correctly "violence against Russians and Russian soldiers" seems like it would apply to both civilians and soldiers.

At the beginning of the article:

> "We still won't allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement."

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

#282

Post by vetinari »

javert wrote: post #83
yonaguska wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A no fly-zone officially drags NATO into the conflict and WW3 kicks off.

Quoted post unavailable.

> What that sums up to, is that it's weak militarily.

Hitler thought the same ("elephant with clay feet"). So did Napoleon. Also Charles XII. See the pattern?

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

#283

Post by cato_the_elder »

sofixa wrote: post #224
cato_the_elder wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> War makes unlikely alliances. That is certainly true. There are many examples of that. Israel provided weapons and advisers to Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. They even bombed an Iraqi nuclear reactor for them. [1] A more widely known example is the alliance between US and the Soviets during the WW2. > What you've just discovered is that a unified policy across the entire world isn't actually the right policy. I dis…

But the laws are different in different countries ( duh!). Antisemitism isn't illegal in the US, but is an actual crime in France just to give one example.

Right, that's a contentious area. The extent of jurisdiction of e.g. France over FB seems very nebulous to me.

And even then, I'm sure they have a court process to determine who's guilty of "hate speech" (or thoughtcrime or whatever), and FB is capable of challenging the cases or complying with the rulings for French residents. I assume blanket prior restraint is frowned upon in freer countries of the world.

There are efforts to pass Draconian laws to limit free expression online though [1].

[1]: e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/18/world/europe/france-inter...

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

#284

Post by cato_the_elder »

eurasiantiger wrote: post #254
ratsmack wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had never heard of Oliver Stone's "Ukraine On Fire" documentary until YouTube banned it, so I watched it last night to see what the problem was. It seemed to be a well documented summary of the events in Ukraine in the last 25 years or so. One notable thing was the number of times Nazis were entered into the picture, and it is strange that no one is talking about it. I can say my perspective has changed a little bi…

Those Nazi groups may have been established by a certain foreign nation primarily to discredit the civil movement and to establish cause for military intervention.

Doesn't seem likely, TBH. Azov Battalion is apparently part of the Ukraine's national guard [1].

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion

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

#285

Post by vetinari »

wrycoder wrote: post #85
ejb999 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>A no-fly zone" is one of the worst misnomers out there. Its not a misnomer at all - it is exactly what it says it is - might not be a good idea, but calling it a 'no-fly zone' is completely accurate.

Yeah, it means, “We fly, you don’t.” Or maybe, “No Ukrainian or Russian aircraft - NATO aircraft will shoot down both.”

> Or maybe, “No Ukrainian or Russian aircraft - NATO aircraft will shoot down both.”

Not really. Response to any Russian aircraft shot down would be sending a bunch of rockets to the place from where the aircraft was shot down; whether the destination is NATO or not.

From there, it would escalate quickly. That's why NATO generals and saner politicians are not enthusiastic about it.

TL;DR: trying to enforce no-fly zone would hurt. Too much to be worth it.

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

#286

Post by nradov »

colpabar wrote: post #18

Another 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!

I don't think they ever claimed to be unbiased.

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

#287

Post by xdennis »

mrtksn wrote: post #249
hoffs wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Why don't you provide some arguments instead? That's seriously low quality comment right there that doesn't amount to anything other than a personal attack. This shouldn't have place in HN.

Your initial comment doesn't make any sense. Why would Facebook being American have anything to do with anything?

It's a natural right of people to defend themselves and that requires killing invaders. There is nothing wrong with people doing this or discussing this on any platform.

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

#288

Post by xdennis »

colpabar wrote: post #18

Another 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 has nothing to do with the US.

> apply to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, and Ukraine

Facebook is just recognizing the facts on the ground.

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

#289

Post by xdennis »

rightbyte wrote: post #237
paxys wrote: post #13

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. 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…

> "there's a Russian army invading my city, we should set up an ambush" I believe a zero tolerance policy on incitement to violence is the only tenable approach. No matter the cause. Replace "Russian" with "US" and you are on CIA's shitlist. Actual planning of armed resistance should not be done on Facebook or Twitter anyway.

> Actual planning of armed resistance should not be done on Facebook or Twitter anyway.

It's easy to say that from the safety of your nuclear armed country. We in eastern Europe have to do what we can.

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

#290

Post by xdennis »

Gravyness wrote: post #207
Ice_cream_suit wrote: post #191

Sadly, being anti-Russian has become the new green. Russian's are humans too and deserve as much respect and consideration as every other nationality. Remember, next time your race / religion / sexual orientation/ nationality might be the one being demonised, simply because someone powerful can make money out of having the masses hate you. Resist the urge to give into mindless hatred and jingoism.

You mean the actions of a single person in power does not reflect 100% of the population of a country? Carefull, next you'll be telling me to think for myself or something!

Putin would not be doing this if he didn't have wide support for killing Ukrainians.

The vast majority of Russians support the war.

Post reply on HN