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

Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

mstdn.chrisalemany.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 188 posts

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#171

Post by hulitu »

AnonHP wrote: post #64

I understand that this post is flagged because it can start flame wars and “not curious conversations”, but I’m curious about what people here from different parts of the world are seeing for these search terms. If censorship is indeed happening either due to manual flags or “AI” algorithms, people need to know what’s happening and if this is just anecdotal or geography specific or could be spreading to other countri…

> If censorship is indeed happening either due to manual flags or “AI” algorithms, people need to know what’s happening and if this is just anecdotal or geography specific or could be spreading to other countries in other forms for other search words and terms.

Not only it is happening. It is also influenced by the biggest bidder.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#172

Post by andrepd »

ffsm8 wrote: post #59
mjbale116 wrote: post #14

- "It violates freedom of speech!" - "This is a free market; if you do not like it use another platform!" - "I thought $conglomerate" had our back! They had rainbows and all; is that all it took them to fold"? - "No, this is not a systemic issue; conversation needs to be steered away from attacking the system and rather its a few bad apples! Go after them and stop asking for systemic changes!" - "Any attempt at regul…

I am against almost all kinds of censorship, the only times I personally believe things should be censored if it's inciting violence/death threats to people. And even then I feel like censorship is probably the wrong way to do it. And from that perspective, these quotes you're currently touting are ripped out of their context, making them sound asinine despite being mostly on point, fundamentally. Twitter, Facebook,…

> Twitter, Facebook, Google etc are private companies. They should be free to censor whatever they decide to censor.

Why? Private companies can't dump waste onto a river, can't build buildings not up to code, can't discriminate based on religion or sex, can't prevent their employees from joining a union, can't evade taxes (well these last 2 only in theory I admit)... Meta owns platforms with 3B, 2B, 2B users (fb, insta, whatsapp); why the hell wouldn't it be possible, in principle, to regulate them as public utilities and forbid them by law from censorship or other nefarious practices?

Your phone company can't spy on your conversations and your power company can't shut you off if you are black. Only on a society completely far off the deep end of neoliberal philosophy would people even think to invoke "but it's a private company" like some sort of holy taboo.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#173

Post by r00fus »

osmsucks wrote: post #16
tmountain wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't need explanations. America signed up for this. Now, everyone is just along for the ride.

"Everyone" worldwide? The rest of the world didn't sign up for this.

Apparently ROW = America's colonies (in the eyes of Meta), so maybe kind of yeah.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#174

Post by r00fus »

andrepd wrote: post #172
ffsm8 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am against almost all kinds of censorship, the only times I personally believe things should be censored if it's inciting violence/death threats to people. And even then I feel like censorship is probably the wrong way to do it. And from that perspective, these quotes you're currently touting are ripped out of their context, making them sound asinine despite being mostly on point, fundamentally. Twitter, Facebook,…

> Twitter, Facebook, Google etc are private companies. They should be free to censor whatever they decide to censor. Why? Private companies can't dump waste onto a river, can't build buildings not up to code, can't discriminate based on religion or sex, can't prevent their employees from joining a union, can't evade taxes (well these last 2 only in theory I admit)... Meta owns platforms with 3B, 2B, 2B users (fb, ins…

> Private companies can't dump waste onto a river, can't build buildings not up to code, can't discriminate based on religion or sex, can't prevent their employees from joining a union, can't evade taxes

I think all of those are "fair game" now (if the price is right). I only wish I were kidding.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#175

Post by formerly_proven »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #147
Aeolun wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That can’t possibly be a bug…

They created two segregated lists on purpose. They implemented a change that only affected one list. They accidentally had a bug that exposed that they were trying to do something. They question now is what were they originally trying to accomplish?

Someone fat-fingered the "reach factor penalty for dem terms" and typed 01 instead of 0.1

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#176

Post by mardifoufs »

piva00 wrote: post #159
mardifoufs wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, precedent is actually important. Using "whataboutism" because it's a trendy buzzword doesn't make precedent any less important.

It's not a buzzword, using the precedent to actually expose how it applies is valid, using whataboutism to deflect from the main point as a red herring is just a fallacy. It creates the false equivalence that because there was censorship against actual harmful speech then it's valid to censor a neutral term like "Democrats", without ever trying to differentiate how the level and degree of what was censored before is…

Well, it's a matter of what's actually harmful speech. Like I'd agree if it was just hate speech that was getting removed (I agree that there's no equivalence between this and say, removing someone that's spamming the n-word). But that's not the case really.

I know it's a dead horse but you had hashtags related to hunter Biden's laptop getting completely hidden, to the point where articles were blacklisted from getting shared. And I'm not even arguing about if the story is true or not, it's just that it objectively wasn't harmful speech in any sense of the word (it was harmful to Democrats but that's it), yet the precedent has been set, with very strong support from the side that's now crying about censorship.

Again, this is just an example but that's why setting precedents is dangerous, especially when the tables turn. This isn't coming from a position of support for Trump, quite the opposite.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#177

Post by mardifoufs »

mardifoufs wrote: post #139
jampekka wrote: post #32

Good that China has caught up US in tech, so at least us Europeans can escape the US oligarchical censorship. Not looking great for those left behind the great firewall of Muskerberg. When will PG fall in line?

Yes, you can escape the US oligarchical censorship, and have the European form of it instead. The funny part is that DNS "great firewall" types of censorship and blocks are much more common in Europe, but European nationalists will always say that it's somehow different when they do it.

I can't reply to the sibling comment but yes, yes it is:

>In France, a new law dubbed "CREN" has already made its way through the upper house. It allows the French government to force DNS blocking of sites it deem to be non-compliant of the new law.

>In Spain, websites belonging to the Catalonian independence movement were all DNS blocked, back in 2017.

>Denmark has censored a wide-swath of content since at least 2011, including file sharing, mp3 converters and illegal gambling sites.

>As reported back in 2021, The EU itself is actively developing its own DNS, with the project named "DNS4EU". Its goal is to wrest control away from US based companies, and to gain greater control over access to online content.

https://vocal.media/01/norway-introduces-dns-blocking-of-ill...

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#178

Post by AnimalMuppet »

mongol wrote: post #157
gigatexal wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly half a trillion dollars of net worth must make him feel untouchable. The SEC can’t touch him when he says “funding secured” (it wasn’t). Nor can they do anything to him when he secretly bought Twitter shares. Because he’s so engrained with the government he’s untouchable. SpaceX is doing stuff NASA only dreams of. Nobody built out starlink to the volume that he did and so now he can play king maker in war zone…

Regarding Rome. I am thinking the same and what comes to my mind is Caesar. Trump crossed the Rubicon on January 6 and prevailed. Now history will tell how far this analogy will hold but what makes me think of it as fitting is that it marked the end of the Republic and from then on Rome was ruled by emperors and family clans.

That doesn't quite work. Trump lost on January 6th - the vote went against him.

I think the Rubicon was more this election. Caesar was in a position where, if he didn't bring his army to Rome, his political enemies were going to destroy him. Trump was in a position where, if he didn't win the election, his political enemies (and the legal cases arising from his various unusual activities) were going to destroy him.

But I wonder if that's really where we are. I wonder if we're not more at the time of Marius and Sulla, and the real Caesar is still 40 years away.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#179

Post by xoa »

philistine wrote: post #125
93po wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

moderation to keep things on-topic is not the same as censorship. spaces are allowed to, and should, exist for certain topic areas.

Ultimately, it is the same as censorship. That's why it's so tough to find the right balance between fostering a community and extinguishing it. We call it differently because its purpose is different, not its actions.

>Ultimately, it is the same as censorship.

No, freedom of speech is not censorship, no matter how hard so many try to push the idea. Censorship involves the use of force, be it direct or implied, not others choosing not to give you support. Inherent in the right to express an opinion is the right to not express an opinion, both yourself and on your own private forum. Hacker News (or any other private site) are not public forums, the public forum is the internet. If HN wishes not to allow certain things, that's literally freedom of speech. Of course, those choices can in turn be criticized (both here within rules at HN's choice but also on other forums entirely or by creating your own), and the criticism criticized in turn and so on. Depending on the arguments made and social and economic pressure it creates some involved may change their stances, or not.

But none of that is censorship. Censorship is the death of that process, force being used to put an end to the circle of social/economic discussion.

>That's why it's so tough to find the right balance between fostering a community and extinguishing it.

It's hard to do so sure, but not because of some "censorship" thing but just because managing human relationships and networks and community is hard.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#180

Post by SamBam »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #100
addandsubtract wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

German media is doing the same, posing it as a question or posing it as "looks like" and it's baffling. Then there's also the Anti-Defamation League coming forward protecting Musk and saying it wasn't a nazi salut. I don't even know how anyone, much less an organization meant to protect jewish interests, can come to that conclusion.

I saw about the ADL's stance and just find it unbelievable. Are they just more interested in siding with Israel despite the atrocities? I don't see how Musk's two Nazi salutes can be defended when he deliberately did it twice and has a history of supporting extreme right-wing views.

ADL has been much more about pro-Israel than they have been about anti-antisemitism.

They know which way Israel's bread is buttered. Trump just removed all sanctions for the settlers, and allowed the sale of significantly bigger bombs to Israel on his first day.

Israel has a huge amount to gain from a Trump administration. ADL isn't going to blow that opportunity by calling out Elon's Nazi salute.

Post reply on HN