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

Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

restofworld.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 208 posts

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#101

Post by strictnein »

cobraetor wrote: post #76
BitwiseFool wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The classic problem is, how do you define hate speech and what counts as inciting violence? Who are the people deciding such things? If you're a foreign government you do not want some committee of Bay Area Twitter employees deciding that for your national affairs.

These are great questions, and here's my attempt at answering or elaborating on them. > how do you define hate speech Ira Glasser explains it precisely: "When people say they want to ban hate speech, what they mean is they want to ban speech that they hate ... But if you allowed something called ‘hate speech’ to be banned, then the only important question would be ‘who decides? ... If the government is going to be th…

Splitting hairs a little bit. The only recourse to an election that was actually stolen is violence.

By stating again and again that the election was stolen what, exactly, was Trump wanting his followers to do about it? What, exactly, did he want for the people marching on the Capitol to do to stop the election from being stolen? Stand outside? Come on...

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#102

Post by foolinaround »

While the Koo founder sounds idealistic in his interview, it is clear that he is willing to be bound by Indian laws - which a large segment of the country feels that it is being applied selectively.

so, Koo will be patronized orimarily by the followers of the ruling party, and will be seen as such, even if it was not his intent.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#103

Post by diebeforei485 »

Twitter used to be the free-speech wing of the free-speech party, so they were generally tolerated in most countries (China a notable exception).

They have obviously changed course, gradually and subtly, over the years. But these changes went largely unnoticed because only very fringe people were affected by this. When Trump was banned, people realized how vulnerable their dependence on Twitter was, and sought out new platforms.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#104

Post by phailhaus »

ceilingcorner wrote: post #11

The actions of Twitter regarding the last election have almost certainly guaranteed the rise of foreign social media sites. If they have no qualms restricting the speech of the president of America, clearly they’ll have no issue manipulating other governments. American social media sites really have no one to blame but themselves. I say this from a realpolitik perspective. This was clearly the obvious outcome.

> If they have no qualms restricting the speech of the president of America, clearly they’ll have no issue manipulating other governments.

This never did make sense to me. Trump's speech was not curtailed. At any point in time he could issue a press conference and speak freely to the US, and it would be heavily attended by the press. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Trump that he decided to make twitter.com the _only_ way he communicated with the country?

There was literally nothing stopping him from speaking to the country after his account was banned; he _chose_ to stop talking.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#105

Post by orwin »

sremani wrote: post #54
sgift wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, there is a state in Europe which had exactly the same position: We are all individual states, we fight with each other, we are weak, we should be together under strong nationalism, so we aren't victims of others anymore and so on. That country was Germany, which unified in 1871. Two world wars later and we've decided that maybe Nationalism isn't such a great thing. But you do you. Have fun.

Is Europe a country? Europe and India are different in many ways. Because Indian Nationalism dates back to 323 BC and with Mauryan Empire.

Nationalism as in nation-state dates back to 323 BC? I would be surprised. I think historian debate if nationalism was born in the 17th or the 18th century, so maybe they are all wrong, but considering how many new, interesting debate are indroduced by Chinese historians (== academics), i doubt the debate wouldn't already have fired if this was a question.

At the time, ruling over different culture and languages was a sign of power. Chandragupta's empire included Bengali and people from Deccan, and i think it extended beyond the hindus (Sorry if it the the english term, i'm not fluent enough to read history books in english). I would be VERY surprised if any of those considered themselves as Indian before anything else.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#106

Post by naruvimama »

as300 wrote: post #37

I get the impression reading articles like this that the farm bills would certainly negatively impact farmer. See this quote from the article: >The country’s capital city has seen over four months of protest after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government enacted agricultural laws that would adversely affect farmers across India. However, from speaking to people and watching interviews where people discuss *the actua…

My impression is just fear mongering for political gain.

India had a power transfer from the British to the elite who used to work for the British as intermediaries.

India has mostly been and is still dominated by these elites in most sectors outside of the free markets.

They are worried about Modi taking away all these privileges that they have enjoyed for 70 years.

So all these elements are ganged up against the BJP and Modi.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#107

Post by manishsharan »

nonamechicken wrote: post #64
as300 wrote: post #37

I get the impression reading articles like this that the farm bills would certainly negatively impact farmer. See this quote from the article: >The country’s capital city has seen over four months of protest after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government enacted agricultural laws that would adversely affect farmers across India. However, from speaking to people and watching interviews where people discuss *the actua…

I share the same fear farmers have in regards to corporations taking over things. I have seen documentaries that talks about how chicken farmers are at the mercy of 3-5 corporate monopolies in USA. So I don't know if the Indian farmers fear about corporations are entirely wrong. Having said that, I think the new laws are good for India. These are the arguments I have heard in favor of the new laws: One of the main ar…

>>Also, some of these MSP crops like rice require lot of water for cultivation, and considering the shortage of water in most places in India, govt wants to reduce the farming of such crops.

This is very a important point. Most farmers who are protesting are from the province of Punjab . However, their choice of crops and farming methods is leading to depletion of undergroup water and not sustainable in the long run.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/paddy-tu...

Also, historically speaking -- Punjab farmers never grew rice as paddy cultivation uses a lot of water. Thanks to government subsidies, Punjab is now a prolific producer of rice and this has had a major impact on water table.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#108

Post by diebeforei485 »

foolinaround wrote: post #102

While the Koo founder sounds idealistic in his interview, it is clear that he is willing to be bound by Indian laws - which a large segment of the country feels that it is being applied selectively. so, Koo will be patronized orimarily by the followers of the ruling party, and will be seen as such, even if it was not his intent.

Worth noting: Under Indian law, truth is not necessarily a defense to defamation.

But perhaps having being black-and-white democratically enacted rules (such as they are) is better than having opaque rules set by unelected San Francisco employees.

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#109

Post by polar »

sremani wrote: post #84
lordleft wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is one thing to argue for an Indian National identity -- I think that's immensely useful and agree that it acts as a thread that can unify diverse polities and cultures. The problem is that the BJP is advancing a conception of Indian National Identity that flattens distinctions and is predicated on a caricature of Indian minorities. Hindutva sees Muslims, Christians and others as second-class citizens -- it is a n…

I get what you are saying - but Hindutva in spite of a ham fisted approach is also effective at least in political sense that it is Simple and simplistic. India is layered with fragments like caste, region, etc. In some cases Hindutva replaces the more devious kinds of fragmentation. In spite of the rhetoric India under BJP has less communal strife than 80s or 90s. I hate to say it but I will say it anyway, you need…

> I am surprised to even hear Thomasites who are one of the socio-econmic mores facing persecution in a state where BJP has no footprint.

Perhaps you are surprised because he didn't say that!

Re: Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

#110

Post by danans »

rayiner wrote: post #56
danans wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of narrative can realistically serve as a foundation for a "healthy nationalism"? Abstract inclusive concepts like "Unity in Diversity", and "human rights" seem to have less ability to unify people than exclusionary identities like religion, race, language, or tribe. Arguably, the things that have kept those exclusionary narratives somewhat at bay in the last half century have been (1) the memories of the p…

You need to cultivate tribal ties that are real, concrete, and meaningful and to some degree exclusionary. In the United States, we venerate the Constitution. We have a pantheon that includes founding fathers, Neil Armstrong, MLK, etc. We teach our children their stories. We have shared rituals, such as being conspicuously patriotic on the Fourth of July. We have shared objects of derision, such as French “surrender…

> You need to cultivate tribal ties that are real, concrete, and meaningful and to some degree exclusionary

A somewhat exclusionary tribe that extends across an entire diverse country? Not likely. The only thing more tribalism will do is strengthen the existing stark tribal groups we have (which are primarily racial, religious, and class).

> In the United States, we venerate the Constitution. We have a pantheon that includes founding fathers, Neil Armstrong, MLK, etc.

As important those famous figures are, you (correctly) describe it as a pantheon, AKA the idolization of these individuals more for their surface appearance than what they represent. The amount of lip service paid to MLK in particular is astounding, especially by politicians who actively undermine his movement for racial and economic justice.

I agree that having such a pantheon is part of a national identity, but at best it is set of symbols that matter only because of an underlying broadly shared sense of economic well being.

> We have shared objects of derision, such as French “surrender monkeys.”

I think this is the example you are presenting as "exclusionary", but I'm not sure what makes it redeeming as a basis of national identity, nor is it as widely shared an object derision as you suggest.

Post reply on HN