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

A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 121 posts

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#81

Post by AnimalMuppet »

VictorPath wrote: post #53
happytoexplain wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, regardless of any philosophy on morality, it is simply unrealistic to expect the citizens of a nation being invaded - a word applicable here without even the merest qualification - to not call for the violent repulsion of the invader, loudly and in great numbers, regardless of how "good" or "bad" the invader's justification is. Edit: To reconnect my point to the topic - the weight of millions of simult…

Then the citizens of Donetsk should be able to call for violence against the Ukranians invading their country.

Let me know when the Ukranian army crosses the frontier of the breakaway region. Until then, "the Ukranians invading their country" is rhetoric that is unconnected to reality.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#82

Post by freedomben »

giaour wrote: post #50
freedomben wrote: post #13

Before we all pile on Russia, if you aren't aware of the rule change that FB made to allow violent statements against Russians (but not against any other group), you should learn about that. The Moscow Court: > A Moscow court on Monday banned Facebook and Instagram as "extremist" organizations, after authorities accused U.S. tech giant Meta of tolerating "Russophobia" during the conflict in Ukraine. And that is at le…

You're trying to unfairly paint Facebook as having crossed a Rubicon with this decision. If the rules banned any exhortation to or glorification of violence, recruiting ads for the armed forces would have never been permitted. If Facebook forced itself to be blind to the difference between criminal violence and acts of war, Al Qaeda, Isis, and extra-legal militia groups would have been allowed to advocate for their v…

> You're trying to unfairly paint Facebook as having crossed a Rubicon with this decision.

No, I'm not, and frankly I don't appreciate the assumption of bad faith. My personal opinion is that FB made a good decision, and I support it. But I don't want to pretend that everything is completely binary and/or happens in a vacuum. I strongly believe that if humanity is to move beyond our current hyper-polarization, we need a renewed interest in separating facts from beliefs/opinions/perception.

Please point out any of the facts that I have that are incorrect. If you're arguing a similar position of most modern journalists that facts themselves aren't enough because people might reach incorrect conclusions with them, so we need to editorialize a bit to ensure people reach the "right" conclusion, then we have a philosophical disagreement. I'll still assume good faith on your part though, something you aren't willing to do for me.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#83

Post by pphysch »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #64
freedomben wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are soldiers in the Russian army not Russians? Do you consider members of your country's army to be fellow citizens of your country? Or do you think of them as different?

Let's imagine the issue is about gay people who murder their partners. Reframing it as "against gay people" might be technically true, but factually incorrect.

That's a contrived reframing. Why not have the issue be about "people who murder their partners"? What does their sexuality have to do with anything? If someone made your issue, I would immediately assume it was a veiled act of prejudice (e.g. replace "gay" with "Black").

A more honest reframing would be VK allowing/encouraging people to say "Death to America" and death threats against American soldiers, due to illegal invasions in Afghanistan/Iraq/Libya/Syria/etc.

How do you think Western governments would respond to that, if it became a big deal?

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#84

Post by slibhb »

freedomben wrote: post #13

Before we all pile on Russia, if you aren't aware of the rule change that FB made to allow violent statements against Russians (but not against any other group), you should learn about that. The Moscow Court: > A Moscow court on Monday banned Facebook and Instagram as "extremist" organizations, after authorities accused U.S. tech giant Meta of tolerating "Russophobia" during the conflict in Ukraine. And that is at le…

It's very odd to see a company release an statement containing the sentence "death to the Russian invaders". No company run by adults would trip over that wire.

The policy itself aside, there's no reason to provide that specific example.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#85

Post by splix »

pphysch wrote: post #74
xdennis wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not walking meekly into the gas chamber is a hostile action according to the Russians. Russia has neo-nazis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagner_Group ), islamists ( Kadyrov's thugs ) and they're planning on having al-Assad's soldiers over to slaughter Ukrainians. The Azov guys are at least doing something good for once: defending people.

The "Wagner = neo-Nazi" narrative appears to be disinformation based on 1 unverified image

Well, the "Wagner" by itself is a reference to Richard Wagner which is commonly associated with Nazy Germany [1].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagner_controversies

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#86

Post by rendall »

pphysch wrote: post #83
hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's imagine the issue is about gay people who murder their partners. Reframing it as "against gay people" might be technically true, but factually incorrect.

That's a contrived reframing. Why not have the issue be about "people who murder their partners"? What does their sexuality have to do with anything? If someone made your issue, I would immediately assume it was a veiled act of prejudice (e.g. replace "gay" with "Black"). A more honest reframing would be VK allowing/encouraging people to say "Death to America" and death threats against American soldiers, due to illeg…

The OPs claim is that allowing violent rhetoric against the Russian army is anti-Russian. True or not, how "Western governments would respond to" allowing violent rhetoric against US soldiers, isn't relevant to that claim.

And, no, violent rhetoric against an invading national army is not equivalent to violent rhetoric against an ethnicity. The idea is offensive.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#87

Post by jamincan »

freedomben wrote: post #57
xdennis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> allow violent statements against Russians Nonsense. It's against Russian invaders, which makes complete sense. When they come in to bomb schools and maternity wards how else are you going to stop them without killing them? The Russians are acting like victims even when they're Nazi invaders.

> Nonsense. It's against Russian invaders, Are you saying that "Russian invaders" aren't "Russians" ?

Russian invaders are a subset of Russians. Acting against a subset is not the same as acting against the whole. The 'invaders' is the critical part and whether they are Russian, Chechen or Syrian makes little difference.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#88

Post by happytoexplain »

VictorPath wrote: post #53
happytoexplain wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, regardless of any philosophy on morality, it is simply unrealistic to expect the citizens of a nation being invaded - a word applicable here without even the merest qualification - to not call for the violent repulsion of the invader, loudly and in great numbers, regardless of how "good" or "bad" the invader's justification is. Edit: To reconnect my point to the topic - the weight of millions of simult…

Then the citizens of Donetsk should be able to call for violence against the Ukranians invading their country.

Your premise isn't really comparable, not least due to its unrealism. However, generically, if Ukraine invades somebody's country under similar circumstances to Russia's, then yes, absolutely.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#89

Post by boardwaalk »

propogandist wrote: post #66
xdennis wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not walking meekly into the gas chamber is a hostile action according to the Russians. Russia has neo-nazis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagner_Group ), islamists ( Kadyrov's thugs ) and they're planning on having al-Assad's soldiers over to slaughter Ukrainians. The Azov guys are at least doing something good for once: defending people.

>The Azov guys are at least doing something good for once It looks like Putin called them out early on in the conflict (Feb 25) so I believe their presence is doing more harm than good >Russian President Vladimir Putin calls on the Ukrainian army to overthrow the country’s leadership whom he described as “terrorists” and “a gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis.” https://timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/putin-calls-on-u…

I don’t understand what you’re saying here. If Putin is against something it’s doing more harm than good? That’s an extremely low bar, because he and the Russian gov say a lot of things, a lot of which are untrue.

Re: A Moscow court has banned Facebook and Instagram as “extremist” organizations

#90

Post by yucky »

mrits wrote: post #33
freedomben wrote: post #13

Before we all pile on Russia, if you aren't aware of the rule change that FB made to allow violent statements against Russians (but not against any other group), you should learn about that. The Moscow Court: > A Moscow court on Monday banned Facebook and Instagram as "extremist" organizations, after authorities accused U.S. tech giant Meta of tolerating "Russophobia" during the conflict in Ukraine. And that is at le…

FB did not "play into their hands". Facebook made a sane decision that most corporations are incapable of making. You don't want to ban Ukrainians for talking about killing Russian soldiers, it should be encouraged.

Counterpoint - encouraging the average Ukrainian to "kill Russian soldiers" puts their lives at risk as well since the Russian soldiers are better armed. And lets say they get geeked up and start firing into the street form an apartment building, to which the Russians respond by launching a missile into and killing others who weren't trying to engage the soldiers.

The sane response would be to consistently call for non-violent posts only on the platform.

Post reply on HN