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

Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 443 posts

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#51

Post by singlow »

londgine wrote: post #25
basisword wrote: post #13

I’m generally in favour of some limits on speech. I don’t think you should be able to tweet racist messages for example. It’s obviously very complicated and something people are going to argue a lot about. BUT this case has made me change my opinion. Things much worse than this are tweeted every day and this is the one that gets prosecuted. It’s blatantly politically motivated (‘national hero’, British soldier etc) a…

I never understood why "slippery slope" was listed among other logical fallacies. It is exactly the opposite.

Look, if you stop considering slippery slope to be a fallacy, next thing you'll start making straw men arguments.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#52

Post by onion2k »

conradfr wrote: post #7
onion2k wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess ideological conformity is a good thing for stable society? I don't think this is about "ideological conformity". No one is stopping you thinking, or saying, whatever you want at any time. The problem is when you use a platform to broadcast that message to a wider audience, especially one like Twitter that will show your posts to people who don't follow you.

> No one is stopping you (...) saying, whatever you want at any time. Well it seems this law actually does that.

Only if you think there's no difference between saying something and publishing it on the internet. When I said "saying" I mean that in a literal sense - speaking to people face to face. That is not the same as publishing something.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#53

Post by roenxi »

londgine wrote: post #25
basisword wrote: post #13

I’m generally in favour of some limits on speech. I don’t think you should be able to tweet racist messages for example. It’s obviously very complicated and something people are going to argue a lot about. BUT this case has made me change my opinion. Things much worse than this are tweeted every day and this is the one that gets prosecuted. It’s blatantly politically motivated (‘national hero’, British soldier etc) a…

I never understood why "slippery slope" was listed among other logical fallacies. It is exactly the opposite.

It is a bit of a tricky one; there are a lot of valid and reasonable arguments in the same mental area as slippery slopes.

But the argument that must be rejected is "this is a step in the direction of X, therefore it is equivalent to supporting X", which is a common argument and a bad one. Arguments in that form should be rejected.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#54

Post by rndgermandude »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #24
hunglee2 wrote: post #2

Interesting case: drunken tweet to a small follower count, deleted after 20 minutes, leading to prosecution and conviction. The Online Safety Bill which is due to be passed, with further empower institutions to police 'harmful messages'. I guess ideological conformity is a good thing for stable society?

The fact he was drunk doesn't really have much to do with it. It wouldn't be an excuse for running somebody down in his car or stabbing someone and shouldn't be here.

It actually might be an excuse to some degree. Diminished capacity is considered in many jurisdictions, and defendants who can demonstrate diminished capacity at the time of the offense can often get lesser sentences.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#55

Post by Barrin92 »

tored wrote: post #38
basisword wrote: post #13

I’m generally in favour of some limits on speech. I don’t think you should be able to tweet racist messages for example. It’s obviously very complicated and something people are going to argue a lot about. BUT this case has made me change my opinion. Things much worse than this are tweeted every day and this is the one that gets prosecuted. It’s blatantly politically motivated (‘national hero’, British soldier etc) a…

Speech laws also requires the court to make a judgement on the intent of the perpetrator, the exact same expression can either be legal or illegal depending on intent.

Shooting someone can be illegal or legal based on the intent of the perpetrator, establishing the state of mind of someone accused of a crime isn't exactly a legal novelty

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#56

Post by tored »

jeffalyanak wrote: post #40
naoqj wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are in favour of limits on speech then you should not have a problem with this. Everything is offensive to someone. We should all go to prison!

Just like how speed limits necessitate the arrest of everyone who drives.

Your comparison would be true if the speed limit differentiated on the intent on the speeder, e.g. person A can drive over the speed limit but not person B because person B has the wrong intent.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#58

Post by tonyedgecombe »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #46
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact he was drunk doesn't really have much to do with it. It wouldn't be an excuse for running somebody down in his car or stabbing someone and shouldn't be here.

Drunk in charge of a communications device is hardly on the same scale as driving a vehicle. One is likely to cause actual bodily harm. The other is most likely to result in minor embarrassment, except in a few wild outlier cases.

True but you can argue the punishment isn't on the same scale either.

If I vandalised your car or even stole it then being drunk wouldn't be a reasonable defence in those cases either.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#59

Post by gonzo41 »

trashtester wrote: post #41
basisword wrote: post #13

I’m generally in favour of some limits on speech. I don’t think you should be able to tweet racist messages for example. It’s obviously very complicated and something people are going to argue a lot about. BUT this case has made me change my opinion. Things much worse than this are tweeted every day and this is the one that gets prosecuted. It’s blatantly politically motivated (‘national hero’, British soldier etc) a…

The problem with banning things like "racism" is that words change meaning over time. Maybe some time in the future, any reference to "White Privlege" may be considered racist, for instance.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN