Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying • Hacker News Board

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#161

Post by shitlord » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:17 PM UTC

makeitdouble wrote: post #148

theplumber wrote: post #90

Am I the only one who thinks that once you expose yourself to the public you should be prepared to take some "insults"? Just like celebrities you become a "mini celebrity" so you can expect some online harrasment. Not to mention that you can always close your account/make it private.

We wouldn’t expect well known kids at school to accept random verbal abuse all day every day, and ask them to just move school if they get tired of it. Why should it be different online ?

The difference is that you can always close the game or play a different game. I don't see why the government needs to get involved when individual companies already have a financial incentive to ban toxic players.

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#162

Post by ad404b8a372f2b9 » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:18 PM UTC

It's crazy to me reading all these comments applying the American cultural, historical and legal context to discuss a Japanese law about bullying. You can't translate your usual talking points about American politics 1:1 to another country.

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#163

Post by pfisherman » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:19 PM UTC

999900000999 wrote: post #46

This would suggest the only winning move is not to play. Aside from this, I haven't used Social Media/ Online Dating in about 5 years. For example, if someone posts something like "Where can I find an apartment in LA , my income is only 35k a year". And I respond with " Your not going to make it here, you should move somewhere cheaper." That can be interupted as an insult. On the other end of the spectrum, back when…

> And I respond with "Your not going to make it here, you should move somewhere cheaper." That can be interupted as an insult.

People interpret this as an insult because statement contains an implicit negative value judgement about the person’s competence - i.e. “you are not going to make it here”.

Contrast that with something like, “It will be very difficult to find an apartment in LA that will be affordable on a $35k salary,” which is conveys the same information without making it personal.

But I agree with you point that social media and online discussion can suppress the better angels of our nature and be mentally unhealthy.

I do not know that the answer is putting restrictions on social media companies by force of law. That seems like it would end up as a total disaster. I think a better approach would be to demolish the moray / expectations that social media ought to be “the public square” where few speech prevails - which is a platitude to justify sacrificing quality for scale and ad revenue. My experience (since the days of BBSs) has been that the tone of the board and quality of discussion has always been dictated by the sysop and their willingness to use the ban hammer. But that won’t get you massive reach and those sweet sweet ad dollars.

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#164

Post by shadowgovt » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:20 PM UTC

boredumb wrote: post #97

san_dimitri wrote: post #55

I am surprised how much less discussion takes place about cyberbullying and the deaths caused by it. I agree with freedom of speech but if it violates someones right to exist then shouldn't the culprits be punished? If not punished atleast have a legal process to discuss/debate it in the court of law? Thoughts?

Speech is not violence and it is absurd for anyone to imply otherwise.

We, who tread in the realm of computers where symbols have tangible weight, can probably appreciate the thinness of the wall between speech and action more than many.

https://daily.jstor.org/wittgenstein-whether-speech-violence...

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#165

Post by iforgotpassword » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:20 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #69

chrisfosterelli wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any practical evidence of this slippery slope? Here in Canada hate speech, defamation, and obscenity have been illegal for a while. The idea is that you have freedom of expression, but it only extends as far as it doesn't infringe on another person's entitlement to a life free from discrimination & harassment. I don't feel like this has been a slippery slope for us, only a different place to draw the lines b…

The problem with successfully silencing people is that you tend not to hear about it. Still, some examples can be found[0]. Take one where France used their hate speech laws to ban dissent from their foreign policy: > In 2015, France’s highest court upheld the criminal conviction of 12 pro-Palestinian activists for violating restrictions against hate speech. Their crime? Wearing T-shirts that advocated a boycott of I…

The US has their "matter of national security" bs for that. The Occupy movement was repeatedly referred to as a terrorist thread by the FBI and DHS to justify the brutal crackdowns. And if that doesn't work to silence someone, just declare your victim insane and have them mangled by one psychiatrist after the other for the rest of their life. That even works pretty much everywhere. There's a thousand ways to achieve this that don't involve limiting freedom of speech. The cases you cited are pretty much the opposite of that. They were public trials for everyone to follow.

The whole "freedom of speech" story in the US is the most successful brain washing story on this planet. You hammer this into children's brains from young age on, to make sure it becomes the knee jerk reaction to everything that the government does to fuck you over. Having only two political parties with candidates from the elite, detached from reality. Political decisions don't get made on the basis of what's best for the people, just do the opposite of what the other party would do. Working two jobs at minimum wage to feed your family. No health insurance, if you get sick just chew pain killers all day and keep working. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. US Life expectancy on the decline for several years in a row. "At least I can complain about it, so everything is fine. Just imagine I'd live in a country where I couldn't insult and verbally abuse others!"

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#166

Post by soraminazuki » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:21 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #52

I think the appropriate aphorism here is "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." No doubt the Japanese government believe that this law is for extreme cases where someone sends thousands of awful messages, or where a mob drives someone to suicide, but this will end up being used to prosecute some poor 14 year old kid who calls someone else a bad name in Call of Duty. Without strict limitations in laws they'…

I doubt lawmakers are that naive. They are perfectly aware of the abuse potential of such laws but went ahead anyways.

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#167

Post by umvi » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:22 PM UTC

IIRC it is a crime to defame someone in Japan, even if what you say is completely true. I.e. you could get in trouble with the law if you expose a lying CEO because the act of doing so defamed him, which is a crime.

So clearly Japan values different things than America.

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#168

Post by Manuel_D » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:22 PM UTC

san_dimitri wrote: post #55

I am surprised how much less discussion takes place about cyberbullying and the deaths caused by it. I agree with freedom of speech but if it violates someones right to exist then shouldn't the culprits be punished? If not punished atleast have a legal process to discuss/debate it in the court of law? Thoughts?

The fact that someone killed themselves following some public outrage does not mean said speech violates their right to exist. Say someone is so appalled that someone does not support a political candidate that they kill themselves over it. Does it mean any criticism of this candidate is "violating someone else's right to exist"?

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#169

Post by whatshisface » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:23 PM UTC

iforgotpassword wrote: post #165

whatshisface wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with successfully silencing people is that you tend not to hear about it. Still, some examples can be found[0]. Take one where France used their hate speech laws to ban dissent from their foreign policy: > In 2015, France’s highest court upheld the criminal conviction of 12 pro-Palestinian activists for violating restrictions against hate speech. Their crime? Wearing T-shirts that advocated a boycott of I…

The US has their "matter of national security" bs for that. The Occupy movement was repeatedly referred to as a terrorist thread by the FBI and DHS to justify the brutal crackdowns. And if that doesn't work to silence someone, just declare your victim insane and have them mangled by one psychiatrist after the other for the rest of their life. That even works pretty much everywhere. There's a thousand ways to achieve…

If it's that bad, surely you'd agree that it shouldn't get any worse.

Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying

#170

Post by dfxm12 » Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 5:24 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #112

Laws like this sound well-intentioned enough but are rampant for abuse and unequal application. If someone is outraged at some controversial policy or statement, how does that play out? Especially when the people in question are public figures: > professional wrestler Hana Kimura died in 2020 at age 22 following cyberbullying on social media over her remarks on a reality romance show that she had been part of. Imagin…

You really don't have to make up a guy/situation to be mad about. This also isn't really a new law, just different possible penalties for an existing law plus a longer statue of limitations, so if your theoretical situation happened, you can go back and see how it played out. Are the new possible penalties too harsh? Well, there is even a built in review process for that:

Due to concerns expressed during the Diet deliberation process that tougher laws could curb freedom of expression, the revised law requires examination by an expert panel three years after its enforcement.