Live data from Hacker News

Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

theverge.com

141–150 of 443 posts

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

#141
post #126

Crickets from the usual crowd who would be crying "cancel culture!" on all TV and radio for weeks and calling for heads to roll had the tweet been about something other than a cause they support (military worship). Governments and companies continue to get more and more empowered to do this stuff because people always show that it has never really been about freedom but rather pushing their own views.

I normally cry cancel culture and I find this awful despite not sympathizing with the man's views. Likewise I'm concerned about the impact of 'nuisance' laws in the UK on legitimate dissent despite finding most protestors to be annoying.

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

#142
post #126

Crickets from the usual crowd who would be crying "cancel culture!" on all TV and radio for weeks and calling for heads to roll had the tweet been about something other than a cause they support (military worship). Governments and companies continue to get more and more empowered to do this stuff because people always show that it has never really been about freedom but rather pushing their own views.

I think you may be looking for an issue where there is none on this one. While "the usual crowd" absolutely rightly believes in canceling the cancelers as pushback for anti-freedom policies like the cancel culture embraced by the left and progressives, I just Googled the guy's name and there's barely any news articles on it at all aside from a few tabloid-tech style sites like this one, starting a day or two ago. I'd chalk this one up to "most people have no idea this even happened".

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

#143
post #126

Crickets from the usual crowd who would be crying "cancel culture!" on all TV and radio for weeks and calling for heads to roll had the tweet been about something other than a cause they support (military worship). Governments and companies continue to get more and more empowered to do this stuff because people always show that it has never really been about freedom but rather pushing their own views.

because it didn't happen in the US. we've long since accepted that freedom of thought in Europe is a lost cause.

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

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not baffling to me that people don't like people who act this way. I don't like such comments either. What's baffling to me is the punishment given for it. Using the given parallel, I'm not familiar with a case where such punishment was given to someone who burped loudly at their dinner table (or some other social faux pas). It seems currently and historically, such social norms and expectations have been primar…

What about China’s supposedly social credit system? Maybe government intervention on such “trifling” matters is now possible thanks to IT systems, and we will come to see this as the norm, rather than the exception, as more and more people forcefully or willingly give up some of their liberties in order to have (or merely feel?) more security.

I'm aware of the existence of China's social credit system, but that's not exactly a system I'm keen on holding up as a something to strive for. This being in the UK, I feel we should look at UK historical norms, not China's.

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

#145

I feel like I must have been corrupted by the internet or something if the tweet in question is considered "grossly offensive". It certainly isn't nice , but 18 months supervision and 150 hours of community service? I don't even know how to put my bafflement into words here.

At first glance it may seem baffling, but if you see it from the “different culture different values” framework, you realize it’s just how people there want their society to conduct itself. It’s no different, from this perspective, to how baffling may seem cultures where burping loudly in the dinner table is not frowned upon, where people really value their personal space or not, and on and on.

I get the different values part, but even if I set aside the "as an American" free speech issues, 150 hours of community service seems WAY over what's necessary. That's nearly a month of full time work!

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

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well "white privledge" IS racist. So that's already the case. Just some people don't consider it that way.

It depends. Judging people's lived experienced based on their skin color may be racism under the MLK definition, but the far left has created a new definition of racism that allows one to discriminate against others based on the color of their skin, for paler colors of skin.

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

#147

I feel like I must have been corrupted by the internet or something if the tweet in question is considered "grossly offensive". It certainly isn't nice , but 18 months supervision and 150 hours of community service? I don't even know how to put my bafflement into words here.

It's just standard 'edgy' anti-english diatribe from a Scot. It's really nothing I don't hear regularly either out in public or from friend-adjacent people here.

It's bad taste and trashy but that's kind of it.

The problem is exactly that it's not an unusual attitude to hear. The difference is who it was aimed at. So for me the real issue is that we're cherry picking when we apply a very vague and loosely applied law based on who said it to whom, and in my eyes it should be a valid case for the defense, and element of a judges decision for sentencing, of just how situational it is.

Making 'an example' of someone is not a basis for a societally-positive criminal justice system.

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

#148

I feel like I must have been corrupted by the internet or something if the tweet in question is considered "grossly offensive". It certainly isn't nice , but 18 months supervision and 150 hours of community service? I don't even know how to put my bafflement into words here.

At first glance it may seem baffling, but if you see it from the “different culture different values” framework, you realize it’s just how people there want their society to conduct itself. It’s no different, from this perspective, to how baffling may seem cultures where burping loudly in the dinner table is not frowned upon, where people really value their personal space or not, and on and on.

Similarly, some cultures today enjoy the practice of tossing homosexuals from rooves. Before you rush to condemn the practice, recall that they are from a different culture, with different values.

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

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about China’s supposedly social credit system? Maybe government intervention on such “trifling” matters is now possible thanks to IT systems, and we will come to see this as the norm, rather than the exception, as more and more people forcefully or willingly give up some of their liberties in order to have (or merely feel?) more security.

I'm aware of the existence of China's social credit system, but that's not exactly a system I'm keen on holding up as a something to strive for. This being in the UK, I feel we should look at UK historical norms, not China's.

I get it’s UK and may be the most influential western country in the last 200-300 years. But time goes on, countries evolve and often they do so in unexpected ways. My argument is that, at some point we must detach a country from its past (whatever that means) and accept the direction its constituents are now wanting to take. Even if we personally don’t approve of said direction.

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

#150

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.

Slippery slope is a logical fallacy, and not a rhetorical one. Logic and rhetoric follow different rules. Logic is purely binary - If I say "Burgers are unhealthy", and you can find one example that fits the definition of a hamburger that is made of plants and not full of fats, you have disproven my logic. Rhetorically, though, the point will stand as most burgers are "sometimes food".

One great way of thinking about it in modern terms is thus: Rhetoric is Bayesian. You're operating on probabilities. There's a ton of things that are likely to happen but not guaranteed. There's a ton of questions to which there is a large field of possibilities, and one action can cause opposite effects in different cases.

One of the best examples in modern times is "Appeal to authority:" This Doctor say X is true, therefore X must be true. Even large groups of doctors have gotten important things wrong[1]. Thus, a logical fallacy - X says Y is enough to create a predicate as the beginning of a chain of logic, but it is not "Proof" within a logical chain. "X says Y. X is a Doctor. Therefore Y" is fallacious logic. Nonetheless, you should listen to doctors, because rhetorically they probably know what they're talking about on medical issues.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

Post reply on HN