Protocols, Not Platforms: A Technological Approach to Free Speech (2019)

Post by cgrealy » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 8:11 PM UTC

mbostleman wrote: post #132

cgrealy wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't even remotely a representative sentiment of the 70+ million people that are not on the "left". Probably not, but it’s a pretty accurate summary of their leadership. The facts are the 45 and the Republicans attempted to throw out the results of an election. You can argue that most people on the right do not agree with this, but they should really stop voting for these people then.

"...45 and the Republicans attempted to throw out the results of an election." Do you mean that 45 Republicans voted against ratifying the electoral college votes? My understanding is that that vote is largely procedural and that the losing side voting against it as a protest is common in every election. If you take away that context it makes for a great narrative in this election (the whole histrionic overthrow them…

Post by kixiQu » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 8:20 PM UTC

deadbunny wrote: post #94

cousin_it wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. Recommendation systems, like HN, are attractive to people and difficult to replace with open protocols.

I don't know, HN isn't much more than a focused subreddit (no offense meant!). I could imagine some kind of federated Reddit where HN could be a community fully managed by dang et al. according to their own needs/wants. Then you just subscribe to each community as you like. Much like you can unsubscribe to all the default subreddits and only subscribe to the subreddits that interest you, only this time you don't have…

Post by unishark » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 8:29 PM UTC

pfraze wrote: post #142

fareesh wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember watching a very strange segment on American news about a man who owns a mattress and pillow company who was banned from Twitter because he continuously expressed his disbelief in the legitimacy of the election result of 2020, and was organizing various events along this theme. From what I recall the 2016 election was frequently attributed to some vague accusation of hacking from Russia but the same standar…

This is a pretty biased take on what's been happening. The 2020 election's fraud claims were thrown out by courts. They were entirely evidence-free. Even Lindsey Graham gave a concise speech on the night of 1/6 explaining precisely how false those fraud claims were. The 2016 election involved Russia hacking the DNC and leaking their emails, which became a centerpiece of the election debate ("Hillary's emails!"). It a…

Post by lallysingh » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 8:36 PM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #136

lallysingh wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well there was the attempt at violent overthrow of a government... That's one difference.

Personally I think it's a security problem that Pillow Man's LARPer mob constituted a credible threat to our National Security. This doesn't seem like cause to restrict speech. (Of course, Twitter is technically a private platform, but it's also the de facto public square as I discussed elsewhere in this thread, and the property we ought to care about is that free speech is protected in the public square).

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 8:38 PM UTC

mcguire wrote: post #125

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reason nobody uses Usenet is that unmoderated newsgroups were taken over by nazis and trolls Some of the sci.* hierachy was taken over by the mentally ill and crackpots. They aren't hateful or intentionally trolling with their insistent claims that they have discovered free energy, come up with new insights into the evolution of human language, etc., but the effect on fruitful discussion was much the same.

At some point, trolling becomes indistinguishable from mental illness and crackpottery.