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

The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

thefire.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 428 posts

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#21

Post by elpool2 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #6

> The popular radio program “On the Media” feared Musk’s support for free speech would lead to a free-for-all environment rife with child pornography. But that’s a strawman: child pornography is illegal. This is itself a strawman. No one thinks Musk will permit it on Twitter. The gutting of the moderation teams who tackle it is the concern. An underenforced rule is often not a very effective one.

This is the quote they're referencing:

NATALIE WYNN (the mind behind Control Points, a left wing YouTube channel) I do think that looking at 8Chan is a pretty good case study in what happens when you create a "okay, let's just let people say anything." People are posting child pornography to this website on a fairly frequent basis.

I think you're right. "On the media" was just talking about how having an "anything goes" policy leads to a place where nobody wants to hang out, where people post illegal stuff even though its technically not allowed. Which I think is valid when Musk has previously said Twitter should allow anything legal.

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#22

Post by skorpeon87 »

throwawaydad12 wrote: post #8
ceejayoz wrote: post #6

> The popular radio program “On the Media” feared Musk’s support for free speech would lead to a free-for-all environment rife with child pornography. But that’s a strawman: child pornography is illegal. This is itself a strawman. No one thinks Musk will permit it on Twitter. The gutting of the moderation teams who tackle it is the concern. An underenforced rule is often not a very effective one.

Quoted post unavailable.

> (or who's old enough to remember Polanski)

That's not a resolved matter by the way. He's still alive, still a convicted rapist, still a fugitive, and still defended and respected by Hollywood-centric media. He continues to evidently be immune to 'cancellation' because... influential people in movie industry like his movies I guess.

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#23

Post by Amezarak »

ceejayoz wrote: post #19
Amezarak wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least some activists are saying that since the takeover, the moderation of CSAM has been dramatically improved after complaints had been falling on deaf ears for years. There are complaints that the old moderation team was ignoring clear and well-documented reports. https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1566255230374842369 https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1594137408186073089 What's shocking is that apparently T…

That thread is debunked in the comments; the CSAM report option predates Musk. https://twitter.com/ChronicBabak/status/1594762640357982208

Thanks, I will remove that part of the comment. Assuming good faith from someone who appears to be extremely active in this area, perhaps this was an A/B tested feature and she didn't have it.

What I find more concerning about this is the way media attention is used offensively. Clearly CSAM has been a problem on Twitter for some time. But only post-Musk is CSAM on Twitter becoming a focus of attention in the media. Is it increasing or decreasing? We're likely to get only fearmongering articles about the T&S team layoffs.

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#24

Post by seydor »

Then maybe you need a free "Speech Culture". Meaning, you need to be free to choose to have the Cleansed Speech or the full fat experience. Now that's a freedom that 18th century people did not think about.

It always surprises me that people never question the writings of the constitutions as if they were godsend in a monolith.

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#25

Post by anigbrowl »

skorpeon87 wrote: post #10
mikkergp wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would be the “cultural value” piece

There's probably not much point explaining the cultural value of free speech to somebody who thinks free speech is so awful they can't even bring themselves to mention it without using a minced oath, as though they fear even the term itself.

'freeze peach' is a dig at the blatant disingenuity of some self-styled 'free speech absolutists' who are actually dedicated trolls out to upset people. Since you're new here this trope might not be familiar to you.

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#26

Post by mikkergp »

ceejayoz wrote: post #19
Amezarak wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least some activists are saying that since the takeover, the moderation of CSAM has been dramatically improved after complaints had been falling on deaf ears for years. There are complaints that the old moderation team was ignoring clear and well-documented reports. https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1566255230374842369 https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1594137408186073089 What's shocking is that apparently T…

That thread is debunked in the comments; the CSAM report option predates Musk. https://twitter.com/ChronicBabak/status/1594762640357982208

The world has become so weird. That elizableu person responded to one of her tweets 'Important to note, Elon Musk himself “liked” a tweet in this thread last night. If this information wasn’t valid, if it wasn’t factual, that wouldn’t have happened.' and turned her story over to 'teslarati.com'

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#27

Post by ceejayoz »

autoexec wrote: post #20
mech765 wrote: post #5

Freedom of association captures the idea of freedom of speech better than freedom of speech itself, I think. Private parties are (with some number of government constraints) free to pick who to work with, who to play with, and who to talk with, and who they don't want to do anything with.

> Private parties are (with some number of government constraints) free to pick who to work with, who to play with, and who to talk with, and who they don't want to do anything with. This is so true. The problem we have now is that online platforms are preventing us from making those choices for ourselves. We're being told we're not allowed to talk to certain types of people, often for ideological reasons. Online pla…

Why doesn’t Twitter, one of your “private parties”, also get to pick “who they don't want to do anything with”?

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#28

Post by woooooo »

pixl97 wrote: post #15
autoexec wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! I should be able to join or leave groups discussing any sort of topic or view point I like on social media platforms without having my options limited or my views censored. If I don't want to associate with someone I can unfollow them, unsubscribe from their subreddit, block them etc. What matters is that it's my choice to do that. We shouldn't have that choice made for us by the people running online platfo…

Um what? So me and my buddy Tim are going to come to your house and talk about how much you suck. Autoexec: But this is MY private property. So yes, So are online platforms. They can kick you out at any time they want and you can pound sand. If you don't like it set up own server online to freely associate. You don't get to demand their resources. You don't get access to their network.

The undersea cables are private property, also.

What if all of the layer 3 networks got together and decided to not allow you in particular to demand their resources?

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#29

Post by autoexec »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #9

Quoted post unavailable.

> I think he and the Cato Institute want to create a world where their funders can tell lies with impunity.

Free speech only makes it harder for people to tell lies with impunity since people are then free to discuss your lies and call them out for what they are.

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant". By all means, get those lies out in the open so we can publicly tear them to shreds, even better when online platforms are themselves fact checking posts.

Re: The distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value

#30

Post by zmgsabst »

ceejayoz wrote: post #27
autoexec wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Private parties are (with some number of government constraints) free to pick who to work with, who to play with, and who to talk with, and who they don't want to do anything with. This is so true. The problem we have now is that online platforms are preventing us from making those choices for ourselves. We're being told we're not allowed to talk to certain types of people, often for ideological reasons. Online pla…

Why doesn’t Twitter, one of your “private parties”, also get to pick “who they don't want to do anything with”?

We view certain companies that provide essential services as “common carriers” — who aren’t allowed to discriminate based on how you use their product. Common carrier status for essential services is one of the ways we protect freedoms in the US.

Examples: power company, phone company, ISP.

People are starting to view Twitter et al as similar to phone companies — and hence think they should be bound by common carrier rules.

Post reply on HN