Most comments seem to be assuming Europe-style hate speech laws that prosecute victimless crimes. But this looks like stronger criminal libel and harassment laws. Some places may not have criminal libel, but pretty sure everyone prosecutes harassment at some point.
Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
181–190 of 235 posts
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#182Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the big media and tech companies hate computers that don't obey them. Microsoft, ibm, hp, intel and the like have been working on removing software ownership from the public purposely. They want a future where all bytes and instructions are encrypted. From 1960's to roughly the early 2000's, all computers you bought ran local software exe's in plain text , aka you could open up the .exe, .com or .dll file and…
> From 1960's to roughly the early 2000's, all computers you bought ran local software exe's in plain text , aka you could open up the .exe, .com or .dll file and reverse engineer it and restore missing functions to get older software running on newer systems. I don't believe this part has anything to do with your conspiracy Binaries are in this format because it's convenient to store and more optimal to run them in…
No post body was provided.
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#184Personally I feel this is law is a great step forward to stop hate speech and other forms of severe harassment but the thought that if you happen to “rage” on someone mid game and receive jail time for that scares me. Society is becoming more and more closed off in a way where rather then freedom of expression you have to limit ur speech to not offend another.
Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me.
That works great on the playground when some kid is insulting you to your face. But at some point people figure out that while words themselves cannot directly harm a person, they can be used to influence future events in a way that will harm that person.
Then a different bit of writing, predating the "sticks and stones" saying by a couple thousand years, is more accurate. That would be Ecclesiasticus 28:17-18, which says:
> The stroke of the whip maketh marks in the flesh: but the stroke of the tongue breaketh the bones. Many have fallen by the edge of the sword: but not so many as have fallen by the tongue.
Or even older, "The word is mightier than the sword" from 2500 year old Assyrian writings.
I like Shakespeare's version: "many wearing rapiers are afraid of goose-quills".
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#185Mark my words, this will be used to punish people for ideas that those in power don't like. Hate speech laws are dangerous because hate groups are far more dangerous when their true motives are hidden from view.
So you're claiming hate groups are less dangerous when they are allowed to recruit openly and operate in plain sight?
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#186Laws 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…
Maybe people shouldn't say evil and hateful things about anyone, no matter how bad they are, because it makes the entire culture of public discourse more toxic. Americans seem to have very little reverence for the quality and civility of public discourse in general anymore, and often say "the other side is worse" or "I'm intolerant of intolerance" as their justification for personally contributing to the normalizatio…
This is exactly the mentality I'm afraid of. The worst censors are the ones that don't realize that they're being censorious, they think they're just promoting civility. What happens when, say, someone says that disapproval of natal males competing in women's sports is a violation of civility? What happens when someone claims support for termination of a pregnancy is violation of civility? The issue is that people have widely varied - and often conflicting - ideas of "civility".
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#187Earlier 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…
There have been numerous ludicrous prosecutions and lawsuits of people in your country for violating these laws. Mike Ward, for one. A few other comedians as well. Bill Whatcott. Gregory Elliott. Some of these people were found guilty, some acquitted. All were prosecuted under these laws. To be clear I don't agree with any of these people. I don't even find the Mike Ward joke particularly funny. It's a throwaway bit…
Thanks for engaging with specific examples, I do appreciate it. I wasn't familiar with most of these except for Mike Ward and I gave them a read. It seems that Mike Ward and Gregory Elliott were acquitted while Bill Whatcott was fined $17,500 for distributing anti-homosexuality flyers, containing images of dismembered fetuses and beheaded children, at schools. Perhaps this is just a difference of opinion, but I don't feel this outcome is unreasonable and I don't see the "slippery slope" aspect of it. It's unfortunate that the stress and cost of court were caused on people who were acquitted but that strikes me as a general problem of our legal system rather than one specific to free speech laws.
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#188Laws 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…
Maybe people shouldn't say evil and hateful things about anyone, no matter how bad they are, because it makes the entire culture of public discourse more toxic. Americans seem to have very little reverence for the quality and civility of public discourse in general anymore, and often say "the other side is worse" or "I'm intolerant of intolerance" as their justification for personally contributing to the normalizatio…
> Maybe people shouldn't say evil and hateful things about anyone
Noone is debating that. The concern here is about having law enforcement step in to such delicate personal issues. It won't work the way lawmakers say it would, and the abuse potential for such laws are too high.
> Japan doesn't seem to have these problems with people culturally defecting from civility even when they disagree
I assure you that Japanese people are every bit as human as the rest of the global population, for better or for worse. If you need an example, just look into the incident that prompted this law.
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#189As I get older I'm more in favor of this kind of thing. Freedom of speech ought (here I go; a terrible Kantian asserting an, "ought") to apply to political speech. Using FoS as a defense against aimlessly attacking others seems to undermine what is a basic expectation of civility (ie. not being made to feel unsafe) in advanced societies. I feel like there's a class of people that would gladly slaughter cows in front…
> not being made to feel unsafe
Not sure how I have any control on how people feel. Choosing to feel bad over speech is not really my problem. Words literally have no ability to hurt people unless screamed with such volume as to cause hearing damage. Actions can hurt people. I ought not be able to take an action that causes quantifiable harm on another person. But hurt feelings? What’s the legal standard there? How are hurt feelings provable? It’s ridiculous.
If words inspire an action, it’s quite literally the person committing the action that is at fault.
There are already libel and slander laws that work pretty well: one has to prove both malice and actual damages. But hurt feelings aren’t something that should ever be addressed by the legal system. People really need to get a thicker skin.
Re: Japan passes revised penal code with harsher punishment for cyberbullying
#19099% conviction rate. Nice law but practically, if you are accused you will get convicted. I don't know why they make a mockery of their judicial system. Either a ton of bad guys don't get tried or a ton of innocent people are getting convicted.
[deleted]