Live data from Hacker News

Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

rollingstone.com

371–380 of 407 posts

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#371

[flagged]

There's a sector of society that unironically uses phrases such as "anti-White hate-porn". Do you really want to be part of that sector?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34039063/

What would you call this, then? Sober, grounded analysis?

I'm sorry, but people getting away with shit like "white people are born to not being human" or "white people are born human, but abused by their parents into whiteness" is rather tiresome. People can just write 1930s Germany grade horseshit because the target's socially acceptable to the set in charge of a lot of social institutions.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The platforms do it because of armies of miserable people online looking for an outlet to their outrage. So the platforms are stuck trying to appease the angry mob, while spending as little resources on it as possible (hence, shitty algorithms). And I think I even know where the mob came from. Humans apparently have an intrinsic need to have some goals to be passionate about. And since the "economies of scale" have o…

The people also utilize political ideologies whose primary tenets are things like "destabilize" and "deconstruct" as a surrogate religion instead of the passé ones that have proven themselves capable of underpinning functional society for thousands of years.

I suppose your local warlord ordering you to murder people in the crusades was "functional" society and writing mean things on Twitter is "nonfunctional" society in your mind.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people also utilize political ideologies whose primary tenets are things like "destabilize" and "deconstruct" as a surrogate religion instead of the passé ones that have proven themselves capable of underpinning functional society for thousands of years.

I suppose your local warlord ordering you to murder people in the crusades was "functional" society and writing mean things on Twitter is "nonfunctional" society in your mind.

A society that doesn't loathe itself and goes to war to murder other people is healthier than a society that loathes itself and still goes to war to murder other people.

Neither is ideal, but one results in one place being shitty and one being okay, the other makes two places shitty to live in.

As far as I'm concerned, international politics / geopolitics is appallingly Melian and I wish it were some other way but I think it's just the sociopathic shitshow we're stuck with.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Crime sure is hard to stop." "Well, just make everything legal."

> "Crime sure is hard to stop." > "Well, just make everything legal." It's a bit of a straw man to say that GP meant we shouldn't enforce the law in the real world. GP wasn't very clear what he meant, but presumably he's referring to not doing excessive moderating and instead rely on the law mandates. More ~~laws~~rules, less justice. When you have a lot of internal policies, you're inevitably going to have ridiculou…

"Only worry about the law" is not a viable moderation strategy.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#375
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don’t just need human moderation, we need due process. These companies control too much of our digital lives and make so much money from us, but have zero regard for us as soon as it’s inconvenient to investigate a case, because that would cut into their insane margins. I was permabanned for Twitter recently merely for getting the attention of some large influencers who disagreed with me (no actual rule was broken…

They only control what we voluntarily give them. Social media controls nothing of importance in my life.

Yet, it has a huge influence on spreading certain ideologies. The effect does not have to be direct.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pornography is legal. If Facebook allowed pornography, it would quickly overwhelm the platform due to engagement metrics. It would make the platform unusable. Vile hate speech? Completely legal. But its mere presence would turn away huge numbers of users. It would make the platform unattractive and hurt the business. It is in the platform's best interest to block otherwise legal things.

> If Facebook allowed pornography, it would quickly overwhelm the platform due to engagement metrics. You're arguing with hypotheticals even through real world examples exist. Reddit has lots of porn and it's nowhere to be seen on the frontpage. Allowing something doesn't mean you shouldn't classify it and filter it.

I specifically mentioned Facebook because of how Facebook's news feed algorithm works. It's engagement based, and those algorithms are easy to saturate to specific types of content.

Reddit has a fundamentally different approach to front-page content and discovery, and moderation in general.

But even on Reddit, which is fairly permissive, they have hard boundaries which have little, if anything, to do with the "law".

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose your local warlord ordering you to murder people in the crusades was "functional" society and writing mean things on Twitter is "nonfunctional" society in your mind.

A society that doesn't loathe itself and goes to war to murder other people is healthier than a society that loathes itself and still goes to war to murder other people. Neither is ideal, but one results in one place being shitty and one being okay, the other makes two places shitty to live in. As far as I'm concerned, international politics / geopolitics is appallingly Melian and I wish it were some other way but I…

The crusades were just an example, Deuteronomy 21:18-21 says stubborn and drunken children are to be stoned to death by all the men of the city. No foreign adventurism is involved. Very "functional".

Many heroes of the bible also had slaves, and the bible does not suggest there is anything wrong with that. Although some religious people campaigned against slavery in America, the fact the bible does not state slavery was wrong, and depicts it as something God's favorite humans engaged in, was used as a counter argument to defend slave-owning by religious people.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why you circle back to peer pressure when we agree it isn't an issue. Are you reading past the comments? >it's completely absurd to imagine we'd ever turn away a good candidate because their name didn't hit on a social media search, Understand for a moment many of these people are not developers with well-established CVs. These are normal people working the bottom of the ladder where there are plenty of…

> I'm not sure why you circle back to peer pressure when we agree it isn't an issue. You're the one bringing it up. You've mentioned peer pressure in all of your replies. > Understand for a moment many of these people are not developers with well-established CVs It doesn't matter the industry or the CV, the idea that the absence of a social media account factors into hiring decisions in any real way doesn't make sens…

I think there was a remote possibility of it being an issue 6 or 7 years ago. Since then the problems with Social Media. People preferring not to participate, has become such a trend that it is extremely unlikely to be a hiring issue these days.

However, in *some* corners of corporate HR, it's certainly been part of their scoring, at the peak of Facebook's popularity.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Coups need weapons, you know. Preferably tons of them, and generally involve fun activities like killing or summarily imprisoning your political opponents. Somehow a huge swarm of a generally armed demographic left their guns at home when attempting a 'coup'. Or maybe they just went to protest what they thought to be a wrongful state of affairs, and the situation devolved into a riot. Who knows. Maybe you can pull of…

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/coup-d-etat

> a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.

It is an attempted coup to ask election officials,courts, and then lawmakers to toss out legitimate ballots or wholesale discard or modify results in order to change the outcome of an election and then attempt to intimidate lawmakers with a show of force and violence intended to convince them in the presidents own words to "show some strength" by which it is meant illegally discard democracy in favor of fascism.

This statement by you reads like an apologist for a rapist disregarding allegations by virtue of re-defining rape to mean a stranger dragging a poor misdirected maid into the bushes.

It also reeks of a peculiar strategy that suggests we dismiss the actual by virtue of how little sense the strategy makes in the cold light of day. To this day I refer to this as the Connie defense in honor of an erstwhile house guest who while living in my home stole and then explained when caught that she wouldn't possibly have done that because it would be such an extreme disadvantage to do so for such a small gain. Indeed it was and I don't logically need to explicate her stupidity in order to allow the evidence of my own eyes to trivially convict her and put her out of my house like Fred Flinstone's cat.

The same women got a vehicle towed because she was speeding down the highway, while smoking a joint, and driving without a license. I doubt the Connie defense availed her then either.

We all saw the attempted coup on TV. Personally I watched it in real time on multiple monitors showing the news cameras view on one side and the insurrectionists on the other side. I saw months of blatant lies followed by a plea directly issued by the president to intimidate lawmakers and an organized if badly organized attempt to intimidate lawmakers. It happened. There was no stolen election and indeed only one side was working double time to steal it for Donald Trump.

Post reply on HN