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

Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

get-frisbee.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 134 posts

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#111

Post by keedot »

steveeq1 wrote: post #28
keedot wrote: post #16

I honestly hope one of these takes off. I don't want to ever go there, I don't take amusement in other people's suffering. But seeing so much outrage on reddit from assholes bitching that they can't be racist/bigoted/loathsome on a private forum screaming about freedom of speech which belies their own ignorance makes me long for the days of gopher. I find it repugnant, and I'm glad to live in a country where I'm free…

English translation: "I believe in freedom of speech. . . except for things that I find offensive" There is no such thing as hate speech in a free speech environment. There is no guarantee you won't be offended.

That isn't the argument. Racism, bigotry, exploitation, bullying are all examples of speech that has no place in an enlightened society in my view. Freedom of speech is limited in America too, the rest of us think that if you're going to have limitations, then set limitations which promotes human cooperation and understanding, and excludes speech which only serves to promote violence and the insularization of arbitrary groups.

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#112

Post by __z »

frizbee wrote: post #90
__z wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its even worse than that. Navigation is just totally broken. For example I clicked your link then on that page I clicked Our Manifesto. The URL changed to https://frizbee.co/#OurManifesto5589a552786d5 but the page content did not change! This seems to happen all over. Totally dont need to re-engineer hyperlinks. They are hyperlinks! (logo in the left hand corner does change the url to https://frizbee.co/#HotPosts but…

These glitches have since been fixed.

No they haven't. I don't notice anything different - still navigation bugs.

The real question is why? What are you getting from replacing hyperlinks with something that performs horribly and needs debugging and has a poor user experience?

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#113

Post by __z »

NeutronBoy wrote: post #82
__z wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't "handling vote rings" be a form of "censorship"?

You have a right to say what you want, you don't have a right to manipulate the ranking of the content.

I don't see the difference. If you want to be free of censorship that also means free of moderation. Every community needs moderation if only for spam for a reason. That's why this doesn't make sense, there will have to be some choices at moderating the content thus choosing what is displayed or not.

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#114

Post by mike_hearn »

soneil wrote: post #109
DanBC wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very common sentiment in eg England. Americans tend not to realise that their free speech laws are sometimes seen as extreme in Europe. It's not surprising they used a throwaway, they already got downvoted. (It wasn't me.)

The Westboro Baptist Church make an easily graspable example of this. In the US the consensus (if any) seems to be "vile, but within their rights". But they're banned from entering the UK or Canada, because we draw that line differently.

More specifically, the government draws that line differently. And as civil liberties are basically never an election-defining issue, there is no pressure to change or improve things.

Unfortunately this means the UK tends to be run for long periods by social conservatives, because that's the only way to get people who are also fiscal conservatives. I don't think you can draw deep conclusions about the value of free speech to people in Europe or the UK when it's so rarely debated.

(British guy speaking here)

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#115

Post by mike_hearn »

keedot wrote: post #111
steveeq1 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

English translation: "I believe in freedom of speech. . . except for things that I find offensive" There is no such thing as hate speech in a free speech environment. There is no guarantee you won't be offended.

That isn't the argument. Racism, bigotry, exploitation, bullying are all examples of speech that has no place in an enlightened society in my view. Freedom of speech is limited in America too, the rest of us think that if you're going to have limitations, then set limitations which promotes human cooperation and understanding, and excludes speech which only serves to promote violence and the insularization of arbitra…

It rather is the argument! The problem with your perspective is that it's completely undefined and the words you used are so pliable, they can be used to suppress more or less any kind of speech.

For example, in the UK recently there was a notorious case where a Muslim teenager posted on Facebook that he hated the soldiers who went to Muslim countries and killed women and children, and he hoped those soldiers would go straight to hell. That is 100% pure political speech .... so what happened?

Well, a woman who was the mother of a soldier saw the post and was of course terribly offended. She reported him to the police, on the grounds that nobody should be allowed to criticise her boy's choice of career. The police arrested him and he was tried in court. The plods said, "He didn't express himself very well and that's why he's now in a spot of bother". Sounds so pleasant, doesn't it, except he was found guilty and sentenced to community service. It would have been jail but he agreed to renounce his heresy in public.

The moment you say "I support free speech but not if it upsets someone" you don't have free speech. The entire purpose of protecting free speech is to ensure ideas that some people might find ugly or insulting can still get heard and debated, and thus to keep flexibility in the political system. It must be possible to enrage other people with your speech.

I'm not an absolutist, there can be some exceptions - for instance I don't consider publishing a list of people's passwords to be "free speech", but the definitions of what's not acceptable should be incredibly tightly defined. And no countries laws even try, really. Especially not in Europe.

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#117

Post by Karunamon »

koko775 wrote: post #103
Karunamon wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The language where "stalking and threatening and hurting" equates to "saying mean things on the internet", or at times "disagreeing with". I'm getting rather tired of seeing words like "harassment" being bandied about as shorthand for incivility.

But that doesn't hold up under scrutiny: reddit explicitly defined their language around harassment to mean: > Systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone in a way that would make a reasonable person (1) conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation, or (2) fear for their safety or the safety of those around them. http://www.redditblog.com/2…

Unfortunately, there's a difference between the "official policy" and the way shadowbans and recent community bans are actually handed out. It leads me to believe they're not sticking to that definition at all, and are using the definition of harassment that includes "saying things I don't like".

Lots of officious nonsense posted by bot accounts, but the entire admin staff over there refuses to answer direct questions, despite them being posted every time one of them shows up in a thread.

Not exactly the mark of people who are acting in good faith. If they were, I'd expect them to be falling over themselves to answer questions...

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#118

Post by frizbee »

lqdc13 wrote: post #102
na85 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Performance is awful on my i7. You should use less js. I should not be able to watch things being indented and layouts being modified as the page loads.

Yup can't even browse with JS turned off unlike HN/reddit.

On the other hand, Tumblr requires JavaScript... and the sites you listed require it for voting and commenting.

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#119

Post by octobyte »

zamalek wrote: post #105
minimaxir wrote: post #6

Let's look at what happened to Voat. After people claimed Reddit was censoring users by banning /r/fatpeoplehate, the more unsavory users flocked to Voat, a blatant Reddit clone. As you would expect, said unsavory people posted unsavory content. Said unsavory content, while free and uncensored, was not legal , and that causes problems: http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/3avyem/voat_... Said issues caused…

To be fair remember that Atko (the Voat founder) has always maintained that he would act when authorities told him to. This wasn't a buckling under pressure: it was following the law (albeit reactively and not proactively). However: The whole scenario is an utter joke: Reddit is thought-policed to the point of unbelievable absurdity. It's like a nursery school filled with Rachel Dolezals. Voat is filled with people w…

> It's like a nursery school filled with Rachel Dolezals.

I'm sorry, but what does that even mean??? Please, enlighten me on how a community openly filled with racist (chimpire) and sexist (candidfashionpolice, not even gonna list ones involving dead women or children) is "thought-policed."

If you mean there are groups of Redditors that openly oppose such subreddits, then yes, those do exist. That is a far cry from thought policing.

Re: Show HN: Reddit alternative – decentralized social news site, no censorship

#120

Post by keedot »

mike_hearn wrote: post #115
keedot wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't the argument. Racism, bigotry, exploitation, bullying are all examples of speech that has no place in an enlightened society in my view. Freedom of speech is limited in America too, the rest of us think that if you're going to have limitations, then set limitations which promotes human cooperation and understanding, and excludes speech which only serves to promote violence and the insularization of arbitra…

It rather is the argument! The problem with your perspective is that it's completely undefined and the words you used are so pliable, they can be used to suppress more or less any kind of speech. For example, in the UK recently there was a notorious case where a Muslim teenager posted on Facebook that he hated the soldiers who went to Muslim countries and killed women and children, and he hoped those soldiers would g…

I'm not concerned with upsetting someone. But there is a difference between being offensive (of which I have no qualms) and inciting hate. You and I just draw the line differently, am I'm okay with that.
Post reply on HN