Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

news.ycombinator.com

41–50 of 113 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

#41
Well, this goes way back:

There is no free speech on the Internet. Ultimately, it is a peer system and your speech is carried at the pleasure of those who own the means.

If our speech is worth carrying, it will be generally carried.

Even when we choose to set up as a peer, we are still in it together with everyone else. Get too toxic, and they may just turn their backs.

Some say that is all a great argument for municipal networks, and in the US, the First Amendment carries some weight. Even then, free speech is threatened right now with cancel culture.

Re: Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

#43
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their content policy is basically don't say anything illegal (inciting violence, etc.) and no porn. Their stance is that porn images are not speech.

Illegal in what jurisdiction? Free speech conversations tend to devolve very quickly into americentrism, which is fine until those with mass power try to impose their specific views on other countries.

> Free speech conversations tend to devolve very quickly into americentrism

In fairness, the US has about the strongest free-speech protections, so that kind of makes sense?

Re: Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

#44

I'm having trouble even understanding the question, because I think your usage of "free speech" means something different than is normally intended. Free expression and free will always have an implied caveat, like "free will except where it impedes that of another". Free speech is always going to have a Venn diagram with "behavior", some of which is illegal. So if you're asking where you can go do illegal stuff, tha…

The problem is that what is legal should not be decided by social media platforms or their users but by the law & the courts. But most often this is not the case.. maybe the OP is addressing this issue.

The platforms don't decide what is legal, but they do have the right, and in many cases the obligation, to moderate their platforms. They can be held liable for allowing CSAM for example. And these platforms have business goals that can be in conflict with, say, allowing anti-LGBTQ or Nazi content.

Re: Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that what is legal should not be decided by social media platforms or their users but by the law & the courts. But most often this is not the case.. maybe the OP is addressing this issue.

The platforms don't decide what is legal, but they do have the right, and in many cases the obligation, to moderate their platforms. They can be held liable for allowing CSAM for example. And these platforms have business goals that can be in conflict with, say, allowing anti-LGBTQ or Nazi content.

Sounds like the problem (for a platform like this) is that they have "business goals" in the first place. Freedom of speech shouldn't be up for sale, especially when it comes to discussing sensitive topics and creating a for-profit business around that would do just that.

Re: Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

#48
I think that in order to really have free speech, you need to own the platform. Because your freedom of speech doesn't mean that anyone else is obligated to listen to it or provide you a platform.

In that light, I think that peer to peer technologies seem really promising because it eliminates the technical know how and costs required for self-hosting.

Jami, Briar, and others come to mind. Retroshare. I feel like p2p is still in its infancy though, and the true easy, reliable, and private isn't quite there yet.

Re: Ask HN: Is there any place on the internet capable of freedom of speech?

#50

I'm having trouble even understanding the question, because I think your usage of "free speech" means something different than is normally intended. Free expression and free will always have an implied caveat, like "free will except where it impedes that of another". Free speech is always going to have a Venn diagram with "behavior", some of which is illegal. So if you're asking where you can go do illegal stuff, tha…

The problem is that what is legal should not be decided by social media platforms or their users but by the law & the courts. But most often this is not the case.. maybe the OP is addressing this issue.

This is basically X's position – they will enforce countries speech laws, no more, no less.

But OP says:

> Other places such as x/twitter, has some liberty but not very much. Real subjects are not getting through.

So I'm not sure if they're saying that isn't what X is doing, or that they're criticising X for not going beyond the law (illegally), or that perhaps they feel that some legal speech is not treated equally?

Post reply on HN