581–590 of 1001 posts
do people here consider comment moderation to be online speech policing? Seems pretty clear that there are certain things hosts don't want on their platform there's an economic bottom line where advertisers drive a lot of the need as well. users themselves aren't paying for the service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because of criminalizing "deadnaming" or in spite of it? For those that don't know, so-called "deadnaming" "is the act of referring to a transgender or non-binary person by a name they used prior to transitioning, such as their birth name." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadnaming
That should not be a criminal offence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's where problems arise. Most of us are comfortable oppressing people we disagree with. The reality is that you can't silence voices you don't like without making yourself vulnerable to the same treatment. We either value the freedom to express ourselves within the limits of the law or we don't. As soon as there are more people who think like you do, none of us are safe and it just becomes a system that silen…
It's not the opinion I disagree with, it's the actions and policy changes that result from it, which turn into genocide. If a website has people talking politics, that's fine; if a website has doxxing and organizing lynchings, that's not fine. The problem is that one thing (opinions) can lead to the other (genocide) if not kept in check.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> despite readily-available facts that Naziism is racist delusions? A lot of people on the right are talking about the US having a mental health crises when it comes to mass shootings. If that's really true, then yeah, that's how we get natsies. > Isn't it a slippery slope directly from banning Naziism direct to North Korean-style authoritarianism? Well I mean if there's a mental health crisis then yeah, people are g…
> I personally don't think the founding fathers of the US understood the future gullibility of their citizens. They absolutely did. When only white, male, decently educated property owners could vote, they had decent reassurance that a constitutional republic with state-specific voter management could work. I think they'd be horrified to see that today we don't even demand a basic proof of civics education. And I hat…
Are you talking about his "failed Civics 101" gaffe re: historical ordering of Constitution and Revolution?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because of criminalizing "deadnaming" or in spite of it? For those that don't know, so-called "deadnaming" "is the act of referring to a transgender or non-binary person by a name they used prior to transitioning, such as their birth name." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadnaming
That should not be a criminal offence.
And these kinds of laws also exist in more extreme "free-speech" countries like the United States (where the guarantee of free speech doesn't cover, for example, libel).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because of criminalizing "deadnaming" or in spite of it? For those that don't know, so-called "deadnaming" "is the act of referring to a transgender or non-binary person by a name they used prior to transitioning, such as their birth name." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadnaming
That should not be a criminal offence.
Much like many other things. But, alas, we do not yet live in a world where people treat each other with even the simplest basic respect and we have to force the issue via laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's right. Authoritarian censors found an exploit. They couldn't use the government to clamp down on civil liberties because of the pesky constitution, so they invaded the administrative layer of big tech. It's not the engineers who built the web and these companies with Silicon Valley ideals. They were never intended to be used this way and are secretly horrified. > play moral police at the moment Moral fashion p…
From the article, the EFF explicitly calls out the government for failing to enforce existing laws which would have shut down Kiwifarms >That’s what must happen here. The cops and the courts should be working to protect the victims of KF and go after the perpetrators with every legal tool at their disposal. We should be giving them the resources and societal mandate to do so. Solid enforcement of existing laws is som…
Eh, maybe, but don't most of these laws mostly fail to work across international borders anyway?
I mean, I haven't seen many cryptolocker authors appearing before US courts. And wikileaks remains online despite the best efforts of US authorities.
Surely anything that could shut down or block kiwifarms could do the same to wikileaks and pirate bay and sci-hub?
I agree, and I’m extremely far from a free speech absolutist - to a level that I’m sure most at HN would disagree with. I completely believe in limits to free speech on a case by case basis, online and otherwise. For example, I think HN would be a worse place without moderation, same with Reddit, I think my home country Canada would be a worse place without hate speech laws, etc. Not against limits to free speech onl…
Also, trusting the government is silly. It has a lot of opportunities to call any speech harmful to state policies as 'hate speech', 'misinformation', etc. - and before long you could find your country turned into a authoritarian failed state like Russia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even a literal Nazi should have access to utilities. Though I would say cloudflare isn't quite up to that level. Edit: Seeing this downvoted is disappointing. Access to utilities needs to be treated as a right . Only the courts should be able to take it away.
You think hosting a website is a right?
I think website hosts should be able to drop people for most reasons, but that's not what's happening here
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or if the IRS investigates the President's political opponents.
Kk, so if I want to do crimes I just gotta be a political opponent to whoever is in charge this year and no one can do anything to me. Got it.
Say, instead of be denied of water, you'll get to face justice without your life being at risk nor you being deprived of essential rights.
Just imagine drinking water is like carrying guns ;)