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

Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 166 posts

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#81

Post by anonyfox »

concordDance wrote: post #76
anonyfox wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, for one, don’t want to see/read holocaust deniers, aggressive hate speech, or fascist propaganda. This stuff is not okay in any way. People being allowed to megaphone this FUD for cheap attention/clicks/manipulation always find idiots who actually believe this shit, and move the Overton window towards even more destructive speech being tolerated. While I do value free speech in general, there is a red line. Like,…

> I, for one, don’t want to see/read holocaust deniers, aggressive hate speech, or fascist propaganda. The solution to this is to let people use filters. Trying to have something like this as a rule ends up with existential conflict[1] over what the definitions and set of things allowed should be. [1] For instance, my personal red line is about people being allowed to express their political views and I will happily…

It’s not my personal feelings, we have actual laws over here for this. Some things like that have serious consequences. Why should we allow this hate on the internet suddenly?

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#82

Post by concordDance »

willcipriano wrote: post #22
nerdo wrote: post #16

Facebook should just block Europe. 'For your safety from your government which can imprison you for participating in this popular global website, we have blocked you from viewing this page'.

Limit them to just "verifiable content", so its a endless sea of bland posts from corporations and governments.

The idea that corporations and the government do not deceive has me raising eyebrows.

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#83

Post by concordDance »

jl6 wrote: post #73
Fin_Code wrote: post #11

There is no such thing as truth as seen by all parties. If this keeps going they will block everything and say they can't comply.

While I won’t defend strict objectivism, I’m not ready to give into this degree of relativism. For most purposes, objective truth is still discernible and worth pursuing. Yes, sure, there are a bunch of examples where it’s a really tough call, but giving up isn’t the answer.

"Most purposes" is doing a lot of work here. Which domain? Because in public policy things get murky quickly.

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#84

Post by nebula8804 »

bwanab wrote: post #9

Very few countries have freedom of speech enshrined quite as forcefully as it is in the United States. One really has to wonder where this is going to go? I understand why they want to do it, but once a censorship regime is established it will be very difficult to dislodge. What happens when the next set of elections puts in somebody who uses that power for less than ideal purposes?

What use is the freedom of speech if it results in you getting canceled or barred from jobs/contracts with the government because you did something like boycott a country they like?

This whole Israel-Hamas saga has really shown how little the general population knows about how many freedoms they have lost.

[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#85

Post by concordDance »

ros8 wrote: post #8

Mindlessness. There is a reason spectrum is regulated. Broadcast being free for all, has Never made any sense. Social media is an abnormality.

If you consider social media more like interpersonal discourse then regulation is a very new thing.

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#86

Post by slg »

f1shy wrote: post #80
slg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honor killings are outlawed in Europe and also occur in the US, so I don't understand what point you are trying to make here.

So the world is USA (I suppose that is what you mean with America/Americans) and Europe. You have a big big world my friend!

Remember the context in which this conversation is occurring. The article is about European law. Most people reading this live in the USA (yes, I also wish there was a better demonym for people from the US than "Americans", but there isn't).

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#87

Post by f1shy »

blitzar wrote: post #20
8bithero wrote: post #12

Sorry if this is a silly question: The article states that if the companies fail to comply then they can be issued with fines worth 6% of the company’s annual revenue. What would happen in the even where one of the companies just said "Nope. We're not paying it."? In that case I assume the offending company would be dragged into lengthy and expensive legal battles against the EU. But is it likely that the EU could or…

You stick the CEO in jail.

You can only do that if he is doing something listed in the penal law, not the commercial law.

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#88

Post by nebula8804 »

Animats wrote: post #61
bwanab wrote: post #9

Very few countries have freedom of speech enshrined quite as forcefully as it is in the United States. One really has to wonder where this is going to go? I understand why they want to do it, but once a censorship regime is established it will be very difficult to dislodge. What happens when the next set of elections puts in somebody who uses that power for less than ideal purposes?

> Very few countries have freedom of speech enshrined quite as forcefully as it is in the United States. The US now seems to have a censorship regime, but it's privatized. "Harvard student groups issued an anti-Israel statement. CEOs want them blacklisted."[1] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/11/business/harvard-israel-hamas...

Don't forget all the "anti- Israel Boycott" laws on the books in many states.

[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#89

Post by petsfed »

8bithero wrote: post #35
bwanab wrote: post #9

Very few countries have freedom of speech enshrined quite as forcefully as it is in the United States. One really has to wonder where this is going to go? I understand why they want to do it, but once a censorship regime is established it will be very difficult to dislodge. What happens when the next set of elections puts in somebody who uses that power for less than ideal purposes?

Your concerns about the potential pitfalls of establishing a censorship regime are 100% warranted. However the paradox of tolerance, as described by Karl Popper, is quite relevant here. Popper posited that for a society to remain tolerant, it must have the right to be intolerant of intolerance. This seems contradictory, but the essence is that unchecked tolerance can eventually be exploited by the intolerant, jeopard…

One of the better "solutions" I've seen to the paradox of tolerance is to stop viewing tolerance as a unilateral act, but rather as social contract: You agree to calmly, respectfully, and rationally engage with my ideas, and I agree to do the same for your ideas. But if either of us refuses, then the other is not obliged to maintain the tolerance.

I think whenever a bad actor tries to talk about tolerance re: being "muzzled", this different formulation of tolerance should be brought up.

Re: Europe gives Mark Zuckerberg 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas conflict

#90

Post by clubm8 »

r00fus wrote: post #63
gambiting wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's DSA?

DSA = Digital Services Act (original context) replied to by someone using DSA = Democratic Socialist of America (as a joke).

the DSA is no joke -- we went from the irish mafia handing out fifty cent pieces to children at the halloween parade in my home township to libraries and grocery stores where they were neither before all across the county and we did it without firing a single shot.

there are those of us who began to form memories as the USSR fell, who came of voting age during the not-so-great recession who have always been out of sync with this... timeline,,, even if we were born in a supposedly auspicious year's numerology.

sorry for being too flippant if i was in contravention of the site guidelines, but so often i meet people who never read orwell beyond "1984" and it pains me to have sound, evidence based policy conflated with stalinism.

(jospeh was a very bad man, and it scared me when people trundled up to me to tell me i look like young stalin as some sort of compliment or flirtation. real life is not a usa television series -- to do violence, to even think of it, changes you in terrible ways that those who cannot name me any other nabokov than lolita will never understand, for once you cross that line you can never go back, your innocence is gone and your world forever darkened, even if you don't actually pull the trigger but just think of how to place the shot.)

Post reply on HN