171–180 of 789 posts
> Why are we giving companies and people the right to silence vast amounts of voices and opinions on random whims? This is not a new situation. But all of a sudden it’s a problem because it’s conservative white guys instead of women, LGBTQ people and people of color?
[flagged]
I don't understand why commenters in these threads keep noting that free speech only protects people from government censorship. This is a common, distracting, and empty statement. Proponents of free speech are pro free speech as a general concept and principle, beyond what protections are afforded under American law today. The idea of free speech predates the existence of the United States. Free speech is hugely val…
A business, Patreon, buys a building and sets up shop. They open booths for people to setup shop in and solicit funding for their projects. The general public can walk through the booths and choose who to support. This being a privately-owned business, and in their private property (building -> website or webserver), they reserve the right to deny entry to whomever they wish.
If I were a business owner, I would not want one of those booths to be occupied by someone reciting hate speech and scaring off other patrons (pun not intended, patron in the traditional sense) from other booths and from my business as a whole.
It is entirely possible, and in this day and age fairly easy, for those who got banned from Patreon to set up their own website hosted on their own servers in order to spread their message. I wouldn't say 'go to another platform' because the same thing would happen again. I would say 'make your own platform/website/blog'. You can set up agreements with Paypal or many other places to solicit funds. At this point, with Net Neutrality and ISPs not being able to ban you because they should be a public utility, you can not be removed from speaking how you wish. You can setup your own server easily to do this.
Caveats: net neutrality is an ideal in this scenario, since the FCC removed it. I am not 100% sure on payment providers, but I am sure there is a way to solicit funds without them in some way.
I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…
> On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The government, soapboxes, homes and places of business that are happy to have them. Freedom of Speech is not the right to be heard. If people don't like what you have to say, or how you are saying it, they are free to walk away. If you don't like what someone is doing in your place of business, you can also throw…
Plenty of times throughout history, oligopolists and monopolists have been forced to follow common-carriage rules, whether by actual regulation or the threat thereof.
Also, you are conflating the First Amendment, a legal instrument, with the ideas of freedom of speech and open discourse. The First Amendment bars the government from itself censoring people. It does not say that the government cannot require non-discrimination on the part of private companies.
I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…
> On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The government, soapboxes, homes and places of business that are happy to have them. Freedom of Speech is not the right to be heard. If people don't like what you have to say, or how you are saying it, they are free to walk away. If you don't like what someone is doing in your place of business, you can also throw…
That's very clearly not true at all. Just a dozen or so major companies or orgs can work together to shut you out of having nearly any reach at all. For practical purposes, you'll have zero reach. Any combined small group of them can easily be enough to make your life online dramatically more difficult.
They can get you at the domain registration (oligopoly + mixture of cartel behavior). Oh, well, you have no right to a domain registration.
They can get you at the ISP level (oligopoly). Oh, well, you have no right to Internet access.
They can get you at the discovery level. Oh, well, Google (monopoly), Facebook (monopoly), Twitter, Reddit, et al. don't owe you any discovery access.
They can get you at the hosting level. Oh, well, nobody owes you access to any sort of hosting, from Azure or AWS to Wordpress or Tumblr.
They can get you at the network transit level. If just a few ISPs or large backbone operators in the US blacklist your site from their customers, few will be able to see you. Again for practical purposes, you're dead in that market.
Google as one example has openly bragged about their potential to conspire with other malevolent entities to tightly control expression/speech. They know their position and exactly how they can abuse it to their political or ideological bias.
In the age of inherently subjective 'hate speech' as The Devil that must be stopped at any and all costs, none of this is far fetched in the least. It's going to get a lot worse yet; the topics covered by 'hate speech' blockades will get far more extensive in the coming years. The enemies of free speech have been wildly emboldened by their successes and the lack of push-back. The entire West is going to end up with the equivalent of a less restrictive Chinese firewall, and that's where liberal Democracy is guaranteed to die.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personification makes sense to me, at least in regards to Patreon. But then you get to Youtube...a stroll through the comment section of any video makes you realize you're in the digital version of Mos Eisley. There is no brand to protect, yet they wave their censorship wand quite often, including just this last week ( https://www.businessinsider.com/r-youtube-under-pressure-for... ). It seems a lot of these videos w…
Not really worrying. Just different individuals and organizations taking different positions on different subjects. Most importantly, all of it happening on private property. I have an unpopular opinion. I believe people should be able to fly nazi and confederate flags on their private property. (Even if their private property overlooks yours.) I believe football players should be able to kneel during the national an…
No, you have two totally different opinions here.
Football players are not private individuals on their own private land. They're basically employees of a sort, so they're subject to the whims of those who employ them. I happen to agree with you, but I don't own a football team, so my opinion isn't important here. If I work at a company where I'd get fired for kneeling during the national anthem, I'm either going to not kneel, or start looking for a new job.
I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…
>The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened policies that aren't selectively enforced, I think it becomes worrisome. In fairness, that was actually DS's fault. They went and said "everyone else has banned us, but cloudflare hasn't. Cloudflare agree with wh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really worrying. Just different individuals and organizations taking different positions on different subjects. Most importantly, all of it happening on private property. I have an unpopular opinion. I believe people should be able to fly nazi and confederate flags on their private property. (Even if their private property overlooks yours.) I believe football players should be able to kneel during the national an…
I have an unpopular opinion. Do you think this is actually an unpopular opinion, or just one not well represented by the two dominant national political parties in America? You mention elsewhere that you are from small-town Wisconsin. I grew up there also (Ladysmith) and now live in a small town in Vermont. I feel like this attitude is still quite common in rural America. The downside of this framework is that it's h…
Bingo!
You're free not to allow blacks into your night club. And a lot of night clubs and country clubs do just that. A large number of my friends and I won't be patronizing your establishment either, but you're free to do as you like with your business.
I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…
When society gets to a point that it decides internet access is a basic necessity, and not a luxury that can be shut off by a company when a random middle manager decides.
To use your example, DS is a terrible thing. But its electric provider will never shut off its juice for being too controversial.
Its water will not be cut off because of its views.
Its heating oil fuel will keep being delivered, because the oil distributor hasn't decided to impose its leaders' morals on others, and punish those it disagrees with by withholding its service.
As long as the internet is "optional," then the vast majority and chattering masses won't complain about a small group of people cutting off smaller groups of people.
I can't wrap my brain around the notion of the water company shutting off an extremist group's taps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, he agrees with white supremacists, and is happy to repeat their talking points, up until public advocacy of genocide. He's happy to say things like this[1]: > it's about gaining attention and it seems like k*kes are ruining everything The reason I'm posting this is because you mentioned that Sargon was arguing with, and insulting, white supremacists. Which, to those who are unfamiliar with Sargon, is not a cla…
As I've said numerous times elsewhere in this discussion, I find him to be an offensive and unlikable person. In this immediate thread of conversation, I was responding to the suggestion that a line should be drawn at the advocacy of genocide by pointing out that he doesn't seem to cross that line, at least as far as I've seen. I fear people are getting the wrong idea by not noticing the full context of my above comm…
Truthfully, I believe people might take issue with the fact that the distinction you're trying to make is near-meaningless.
He's 90% of the way there. He just isn't using his highly-monetized platform to advocate for genocide. However, he's happy to rub shoulders with, and repeat the talking points of, people who do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really worrying. Just different individuals and organizations taking different positions on different subjects. Most importantly, all of it happening on private property. I have an unpopular opinion. I believe people should be able to fly nazi and confederate flags on their private property. (Even if their private property overlooks yours.) I believe football players should be able to kneel during the national an…
I have an unpopular opinion. Do you think this is actually an unpopular opinion, or just one not well represented by the two dominant national political parties in America? You mention elsewhere that you are from small-town Wisconsin. I grew up there also (Ladysmith) and now live in a small town in Vermont. I feel like this attitude is still quite common in rural America. The downside of this framework is that it's h…
I believe the key difference is skin color is innate and being an asshole is not, you don't get to choose to be black, you do choose to be an asshole though.
I think that the shift in popularity for gay rights mirrors the shift in acceptance that homosexual feelings are more innate than chosen.