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

Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 333 posts

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#151

Post by gruez »

kipchak wrote: post #80
paxys wrote: post #13

It's ridiculous to assume that "I hate my neighbor and am going to kill him" and "there's a Russian army invading my city, we should set up an ambush" should be held to the same standard of speech. Of course, a larger question is whether Facebook should be the arbiter for this in the first place, but then the content is posted on their own private platform, and unlike a lot of people here I still think they should ha…

If I'm reading it correctly "violence against Russians and Russian soldiers" seems like it would apply to both civilians and soldiers.

I'm not sure when this was edited in, but they seem to have added a line saying that attacks against russian civilians are still not allowed.

>We still won’t allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#152

Post by causality0 »

gruez wrote: post #124
causality0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said the calls for violence against Russian soldiers were allowed because this was being used as a proxy for the Russian military, and said it would not apply to prisoners of war. Again, this is deliberate obtuseness. If a pack of grizzly bears break into my house and I scream "Kill the bears!" I'm obviously not calling for genocide against ursus arctos horribilis.

I find it strange that you accuse me of being "obtuse", but you respond with the most softball examples. What about calls of violence against "russians"? Is "let's find russian nationals in ukraine and lynch them" okay? What about "let's invade russia and kill women children as payback"? I would hope not, but based on a permissive reading of the article it certainly seems allowed.

This was directly addressed.

They said the calls for violence against Russian soldiers were allowed because this was being used as a proxy for the Russian military, and said it would not apply to prisoners of war.

It's not permissible when referring to anyone but Russian soldiers actively involved in the invasion, not even ones who were involved but are no longer. I don't know how the meaning could be any more explicit.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#154

Post by oversocialized »

IAmWorried wrote: post #58

What the actual fuck is wrong with these people? Calling for literal violence against Russians is less dangerous than claiming masks aren't helpful? Is there something here I'm not getting?

No post body was provided.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#155

Post by mech422 »

FpUser wrote: post #134
mech422 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends if you violate the no fly zone... No one would be forcing Putin to violate it.

I do not think he would give a flying fuck about zone. And if planes will be downed he will have to answer and the war starts. Russia's army can not hope to win conventional conflict with NATO and is ruled by a rabid man at the top. the only thing it can do in response is to use nukes. After that say goodbye to a world.

I think it stands a better chance of keeping us OUT of a NATO conflict then starting one.. Violating a no-fly zone requires authorization, and hopefully thought..

Whereas, right now, we're simply waiting for a bomb to mistakenly land on the wrong side of a border. No thought, no intention, no authorization...just one of those things that happen during war. I think this is a much more likely outcome.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#157

Post by pmalynin »

vetinari wrote: post #112
pmalynin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a good reason

"not starting the ww3" is not a good reason?

We need to get rid of the illusion that WW3 isn’t happening already. I would rather die standing up for my freedom so that me, my family, my children — you — can live in a free world with no warmongering dictators, than cower and live in fear, which the West is collectively doing.

So yes, it is not a good reason.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#158

Post by mardifoufs »

delusional wrote: post #94
barbacoa wrote: post #21

It's going to be really awkward when this is all over and big tech has to pivot back to when nationalism, strong borders, private firearm ownership, and armed neo-nazi militias[0] were all bad things. [0] https://theintercept.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-facebook-azov-ba...

War makes unlikely alliances. If you're fighting for the existence of your country you're not going to say no to the help of nazis. And if you're using the biggest social media platform on the planet to organize that war, you're going to want your allies on it. What you've just discovered is that a unified policy across the entire world isn't actually the right policy. In one country you may want to ban some stuff yo…

I just hope no one ever uses the catchy rule of thumb that"if 9 people sit around a table with 1 nazi, there are 10 nazis around that table" again seriously after this haha. It's that not even 1 month ago if one person at a protest had a nazi flag everyone protesting there was also labeled a nazi. But you got NATO publicly glorifying soldiers with literal nazi insignia (the black sun) and that's just being the good guys now.

https://www.newsweek.com/nato-says-it-didnt-notice-ukraine-s...

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#159

Post by awb »

Invictus0 wrote: post #81
beebmam wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No

What about "Let's give all the Russians wet willies?"

There’s no clear line on free speech so we could do endless hypotheticals, but the line has never been at 0% or 100% of all possible speech.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_ex...

> Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising.

Your hypothetical isn’t included in any of the current exemptions to free speech protection.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#160

Post by daenz »

>Emails also showed that Meta would allow praise of the right-wing Azov battalion, which is normally prohibited, in a change first reported by The Intercept.

So it's ok to praise literal neo-Nazis now, as long as it lines up with business and political interests? Someone less cynical than me, please explain.

Post reply on HN