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

Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

rollingstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 407 posts

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#381

Post by michaelmrose »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #160
dane-pgp wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you honestly think this would go? They destroy the certifications of the electoral votes from the states (as almost happened[0]), causing various states to (disingenuously) disagree about how to replace the lost documents. Enough FUD (and lawsuits, and delays) would be generated during this period of public disorientation that the Republican party could exploit the ambiguity of the Constitutional phrase "a m…

If the US is so fragile that a box of paper is somehow key to the stability of an entire empire, we're pretty much doomed. Also your statement that "Since a majority of states at the time had Republican representation, they would have elected Trump" is laughable. It's well known that Trump asked multiple Republican governors to "find some votes" and they obviously did not do this. Even if someone is a demagogue that…

None of them did this because it has an absolutely awful cost v benefit ratio. In the present scenario they are likely to have a bright political future where the maximum downside is likely to be a political fizzle followed by a lucrative retirement whereas maximum downside of attempting to overthrow government is death or prison.

Comparatively playing for time, doing nothing, and then voting Trump are all low risk activities which is why it is entirely believable that they should come to pass.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#382

Post by michaelmrose »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #354
nobody9999 wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Under that logic, the US was over thrown back in 2000 when the supreme court decided the outcome of an election. That's a really reductive (and, in my view, incorrect) take on the issues in Florida in 2000. It was a hot mess, and I think (IANAL, so I may well be talking out of my ass) the Supreme Court should have kicked this back to the Florida courts, but all such activity was within the bounds of the US Constitut…

The government follows the processes of the government. That's how it works. Keep in mind, there is literally 1 mention of the Supreme court in the constitution. It says Congress can "ordain and establish it". It doesn't say anything about Congress authorizing the Supreme Court to decide the outcome of elections, which is what happened. So if we strictly stick to this idea that somehow one election is this critical,…

Neither democracy, nor decency, nor legitimacy, nor corruption are binary. One can say that the 2000 election was decided in a corrupt way while understanding that even such a decision left the electoral process largely as functional as it was in 1996 and decisions on the relative merits of different courses of action are left to be judged on their own merits. All your arguments are games and non arguments that refuse to engage with any topic at all in a meaningful way.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#383

Post by mynameisvlad »

lupire wrote: post #317
mynameisvlad wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It banned a film from its ad program. And the user who tried to advertise it. And the composer of the title track. I mean, they're not banned from Facebook, but the title didn't say that either. It said that the company Facebook banned a film. Which it did.

They can presumably advertise the film under a different title, with a clickthrough to info with the proper title. Facebook should have better credibility vetting, for things like movies distributed by recognized distributors with a good reputation.

Not the composer, who had his entire account suspended from the ads platform for this. I assume the ad account for the film also would have also similarly been suspended.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#384

Post by ben_w »

soundnote wrote: post #369
ben_w wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I have never directly encountered toxic social justice activism (not even an ex's mother whose activism made me realise "Champagne socialist" was more than just a right wing straw-man), there is no cause so pure it cannot attract numpties. There is a video (don't know if it's real, staged, missing context, a one-off, whatever) of of some activists going to a restaurant and apparently cajoling diners to agree wi…

Depending on what you mean by 'directly', it's been fun to see people say people who look like me are "born to not being human" and another (a professor of education, to boot) assigning reading (not as a warning) saying "white people are born human but abused into whiteness". There's a TON of double standards. Asian people want to cater to their own interests? Understandable. Whites would want to do the same? The fir…

By "directly" I mean nobody has ever made, or tried to make, me feel bad about being a naïve [0] rich white dude.

Plenty of other things about me (sexuality, politics, my facial hair, formerly my interest in paganism) lead to people trying to get at me, but not any of the issues normally associated with SJW.

[0] I self describe as naïve here because of all the times I've had to update my world view because British history lessons lacked important details like "why did the Irish and the Indians not like British rule in the first place?" and "Kenyans and Cypriots literally took up arms against the British" and "Malta was under British rule and asked for a seat in Westminster".

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#385

Post by ben_w »

themitigating wrote: post #350
ben_w wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should we consider them public spaces when they are private companies? As the other commenter is suggesting a change to the status quo, what legal status they have now isn't important, but instead what matters is role they serve in society. Personally I think the US idea of freedom of speech is too anarchic to be sustainable, but even with that, the de-facto power that Big Tech has over communication (and comme…

What power do they have?

Big Tech?

The power of their algorithms that decide who sees what content and when. The power to remove people from platforms that are competing to become de facto standards for communication, and to do so for reasons not limited to their legal obligations.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#386

Post by anshorei »

acdw wrote: post #85
anshorei wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but the opposition that the left once fronted to the NSA's surveillance has withered in the past ten years or so and (some) republicans have picked up the slack. Not too long ago the "war on terror" was considered to be the road to authoritarianism, now democrats are openly championing making it a new domestic war on terror. To those who opposed the war on terror from the beginning it's scary how quickly this opp…

I'm really bothered by the way you casually conflate an actual war in the middle east---the longest war in American history, by the way---with a metaphorical war on domestic violent extremism and neonazism. these are two very different things.

I used quotes to indicate I'm not talking about the war itself but about the surveillance state established in the aftermath of 9/11 (and shenanigans such as the pushing of mentally ill people into acts of terrorism they would never have committed without interference), which is the clear parallel politicians themselves want to draw when they say "war on domestic terror" (unless you believe they want to start another civil war by deploying troops in the states). Same as one would with "war on drugs".

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#387

Post by dane-pgp »

soundnote wrote: post #360
michaelmrose wrote: post #90

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…

You're arguing against a strawman if you think the claim is "Every Trump supporter who turned up to the Capitol was part of an armed militia attempting to violently take over the government". The claim is merely that among the Trump supporters were some armed individuals who were prepared to do whatever it took to stop the process of counting the electoral votes, which would have potentially been enough to change the outcome of the election.

The fact that his supporters almost succeeded despite most of them not being armed should be a cause for more concern rather than less, since it shows what a soft target they were attacking (and presumably some were at least subconsciously aware of that, which might have influenced their decision to not bring their weapons).

Anyway, as for your specific claim that they "left their guns at home", I refer you to this[0] article from last year:

"At least three people arrested in connection with the insurrection are facing charges for carrying firearms on Capitol grounds. At least eight others carried knives or tasers at the Capitol, including two defendants who allegedly committed assaults with tasers, according to FBI and court documents. Multiple others arrested downtown and in the vicinity of the Capitol had rifles, pistols, explosive materials, and large supplies of ammunition. And communications among numerous January 6 suspects detailed in court documents indicate that many of their fellow insurrectionists were armed with guns."

[0] https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2021/09/trump-extr...

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#388

Post by gdy »

fnovd wrote: post #190
jgmmo wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit has a very bad antisemitism problem. It's a cesspool. By no means is reddit 'the model'. In practically any sub except the explicitly Jewish ones, I will find an avalanche of antisemitism on any post that touches on Judaism/Israel/Jews.

It's bad now, and only getting worse. The moderators of top subreddits (like PublicFreakout) are openly in favor of marginalizing Jews, they'll just use the word Zionist instead. You can report a comment like "Jews don't deserve to live" and Reddit will automatically respond within a few hours saying the comment didn't violate their content policy. You can visit the subreddit AntisemitismInReddit for hundreds more ex…

And Facebook is fine with "Russians don't deserve to live" comments.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#389

Post by lakomen »

end_of_line wrote: post #264
commandlinefan wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> using Facebook for its original purpose of keeping up with old friends and family Not that Facebook lets you do that any more. I was off of FB for a while and recently rejoined because my community and my kid's schools only use FB for communications now. I'm connected to a very small circle of actual friends and family, but I still get daily political memes in my feed (politics I vehemently disagree with as well) n…

The biggest spam I get from Facebook ads itself. I live in Switzerland and I am BOMBARDED with financial frauds, scams and ponzi like schemes served directly from their ads. I checked why in their system and got answer "primary location: Switzerland and male 25 - 35 years old". I tried to report, block them all but facebook support always if replied at all, it was saying all in line with their policies. So, I deactiv…

Same. Not Switzerland but those fraudulent ads made me delete my account for the last time now.

Facebook is a hostile platform.

Post reply on HN