TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor • Hacker News Board

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#111

Post by protomyth » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:29 PM UTC

mwfunk wrote: post #64

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

Because TikTok isn't a nightclub, it's a place for people to put their own content out on the Internet. Not just people, but primarily people living in a pathologically authoritarian state that doesn't allow them to access other places on the Internet that they could put their content on. But even ignoring the authoritarian state angle, surely you'd think it'd be weird and counterproductive for user content from YouT…

Because TikTok isn't a nightclub, it's a place for people to put their own content out on the Internet

No, TikTok is a place for a company to sell ads on views of creator content and they, much like those nightclubs, believe having "desireable" creators will get them those views.

Other sites have different strategies (much like the local bar in comparison to that nightclub). Their strategy seems to work for a variety of industries.

I am not supporting it, as being on the other side of the good looking line does tend to make life a pain in the butt around the "pretty" people.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#112

Post by gbear605 » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

whoisjuan wrote: post #107

leereeves wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in this hypothetical protected class are placed there by others. They're already segregated and marginalized, and generally no one asks them if they want that. We have an example of that right here from TikTok.

That's exactly my original argument. "I determine you're ugly but you can still come into my nightclub" is not that much better than "I determine you're ugly and you can't come into my nightclub"

How about “I’m not allowed to use attractiveness to determine if you can come into my nightclub”

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#113

Post by simias » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

mwfunk wrote: post #64

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

Because TikTok isn't a nightclub, it's a place for people to put their own content out on the Internet. Not just people, but primarily people living in a pathologically authoritarian state that doesn't allow them to access other places on the Internet that they could put their content on. But even ignoring the authoritarian state angle, surely you'd think it'd be weird and counterproductive for user content from YouT…

That's a slippery argument, if we consider that letting people post to these social networks is somehow a right, then doesn't that effectively mean that the alt-right folks who complain about deplatforming being a free-speech violation have a point?

Or maybe there's a case to be made that censoring people for being homosexual or looking different is a form of harassment by censorship?

It's not like these platforms offer any kind of critical service. They come and go every couple of years it seems. TikTok seems pretty crap, just tell people to stop supporting it.

Some people feel socially obligated to go to nightclub, others feel socially obligated to use some social networking app. They're probably both wrong.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#114

Post by cma » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

dependenttypes wrote: post #80

finnh wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

unattractive people are not a protected class

I am unsure how this is relevant. "protected class" is a legal term, it has nothing to do with morality. In addition to that I doubt that refusing to sell a cake to someone because they are ugly would be considered an acceptable thing in a court of law.

It is allowed for by courts for hiring decisions when hiring sales people. And things like commission based pay means it happens even if not explicit.

Aside from beauty, if you do things to signal you are poor as a luxury sales person, I’m not sure the company is required to keep you on, right or wrong.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#115

Post by dependenttypes » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

whoisjuan wrote: post #107

leereeves wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in this hypothetical protected class are placed there by others. They're already segregated and marginalized, and generally no one asks them if they want that. We have an example of that right here from TikTok.

That's exactly my original argument. "I determine you're ugly but you can still come into my nightclub" is not that much better than "I determine you're ugly and you can't come into my nightclub"

Which is why rather than protected classes there must be protected characteristics.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#116

Post by tedk-42 » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

mwfunk wrote: post #64

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

Because TikTok isn't a nightclub, it's a place for people to put their own content out on the Internet. Not just people, but primarily people living in a pathologically authoritarian state that doesn't allow them to access other places on the Internet that they could put their content on. But even ignoring the authoritarian state angle, surely you'd think it'd be weird and counterproductive for user content from YouT…

The entitlement is too real here.

Their platform, their choice for what goes on. You want something better? Go build in yourself. I have no problem with platforms self moderating. At the end of the day consumers speak with their actions.

How many TV shows feature dwarfs or people with who are abnormal? Don't blame a platform for the inherit flaws in most of us. It really only serves as a black mirror to the truth.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#117

Post by gbear605 » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

microcolonel wrote: post #67

afterburner wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, why give them a free pass for asshole behaviour? You can shame them and leave them alone.

Who are they being assholes to? You don't have a right to invade people's private spaces. I don't have to invite you into my home. Provided it's not a matter of a protected characteristic, the idea that you can push your way through the door by law is silly. They go there to meet people who titilate them, and who don't remind them of how life can go wrong; that's their business in my view. I know that I'm not attract…

A night club is your private home?

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#118

Post by cocktailpeanuts » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:32 PM UTC

mwfunk wrote: post #64

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

Because TikTok isn't a nightclub, it's a place for people to put their own content out on the Internet. Not just people, but primarily people living in a pathologically authoritarian state that doesn't allow them to access other places on the Internet that they could put their content on. But even ignoring the authoritarian state angle, surely you'd think it'd be weird and counterproductive for user content from YouT…

Except, it IS a night club. The Web is not what it used to be decades ago. There is no elusive concept as "The Web", it's now just a different way for people to connect, just like going to a nightclub. It's been like that ever since the majority of the world got on it.

You say "it's a place for people to put their content out on the internet", but you don't ask WHY they would do that. And I don't know if you have used TikTok at all, but if you ask anyone who "put their content out on" TikTok, they would agree TikTok is like a giant nightclub.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#119

Post by tenebrisalietum » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:33 PM UTC

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

My standard of ugly may not match yours. I can refuse to patronize a nightclub that bars people I like.

Privately-run-and-owned social networks like TikTok tend to attain a critical mass where they're considered a utility when they're really not. So boycotts don't work because it becomes literally where everyone is after a while, and alternatives become difficult because the barrier to entry gets so high.

That's the real problem, and the problem of a centralized Internet. I should be able to broadcast video from my house and participate in a peer-to-peer CDN of my choice.

Tiktok is not a CDN, it's a presentation layer on top of their own CDN or one they rent through cloud providers.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#120

Post by leereeves » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 11:37 PM UTC

whoisjuan wrote: post #110

def8cefe wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Unattractive people, whatever that means, don't want to be part of that group. Neither do the elderly, the disabled, etc, but still they are legally protected from descrimination.

I guess I wasn't clear enough about that. Disabled people certainly don't want to be part of that classification but there's no subjectiveness when it comes to their disablement. Unattractive people don't want to be part of that classification and their belonging to that class is 100% subjective in any direction. Even them leveraging their status to get some sort of benefit. Also, where's the line? Does that mean tha…

> Does that mean that rhinoplasty should be covered by insurance under the same merits of sex reassignment surgery?

If someone's nose is causing as much distress as gender dysphoria, why not?

Sex reassignment surgery isn't easy to get, and presumably coverage for "corrective" cosmetic surgery would also take some evidence. Patients couldn't just make an appointment on a whim.