Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims • Hacker News Board

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#181

Post by fwefqf » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:20 PM UTC

riku_iki wrote: post #140

davidguetta wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heres the vidéo where Netanyahou brags that his strategy is to hurt palestinian (civilians) as hard as possible Into submission, and that hé was negociating the peace accords in Bad faith : https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=8997844... Im not sure what better fits the définition of terrorism for you At thé end of the day most israelis would be fine with a two state solution. This guy and other relig…

> Heres the vidéo where Netanyahou brags that his strategy is to hurt palestinian (civilians) More context: per some video from 2001 according to translation from Turkish regime propaganda broadcaster. > At thé end of the day most israelis would be fine with a two state solution Is Hamas Ok with two states?

[flagged]

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#182

Post by dang » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:20 PM UTC

hutzlibu wrote: post #149

riku_iki wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

"I don't think we discussed this topic. What kind of restrain you are talking about now? " Well, it surely is possible you did not read it, but just look above in the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38746724 "Israel's defense minister said he has "released all restraints" on the Israel Defense Forces' troops in their fight " Militray restrain means watching where you are shooting - and not shooting if th…

Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style? You've done it repeatedly in this thread, and that's exactly what we're trying to avoid here.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#183

Post by krisoft » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:20 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #168

One day, there will be a bigish war, and comms between the sides will be cut off, either by law, or all comms links severed. At that point, every global business will have to figure out how to split their business in two, their database in two, their server infrastructure in two, etc. and have both halves work. I suspect that few businesses have prepared for such an eventuality, and I suspect severe disruption can be…

> At that point, every global business will have to figure out how to split their business in two, their database in two, their server infrastructure in two, etc. and have both halves work.

Or give up serving one side. Probably the one the executives of the company don't live in. Like how many companies stopped operating in Russia after their war in Ukraine got into high gear.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#184

Post by sudosysgen » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:21 PM UTC

dlubarov wrote: post #121

Are you saying that changes on Israel's part could cause Hamas to stop their aggression? That seems very unlikely - Hamas doesn't even pretend to be open to peaceful coexistence with Israel. Their best offer was a 10-year ceasefire in exchange for 1967 borders. Or that it could lead to Gazans overthrowing Hamas? It's possible, but it would take a violent rebellion since Hamas doesn't hold elections, and realistically…

This is greatly complicated by the fact that Israel materially supported Hamas and saw it as useful.

Ultimately Israelis don't have to suffer serious attacks from Hamas. Hamas doesn't have that power, militarily - only gross incompetence from the IDF allows that kind of attack.

On the other hand, Israel is not facing good geopolitical headwinds. As Yemen demonstrated, they are extremely vulnerable to a blockade. One day, in the not so distant future, the US won't be able to intercept all the missiles of Israel's enemies on its behalf, and Israel will have to contend with the threat of a total blockade.

So Israel desperately needs to make amends with its Arab neighbors, and it can stop any real attack from Hamas. That makes the situation pretty different and assymetrical.

It also bears note that, if you judge Gaza as a country, it would not be able to cause any act of agression, as the Israeli blockade alone constitutes an act of war and a casus belli. That of course doesn't justify Hamas's inhuman war crimes, but acting as if war is unprovoked is not consistent with reality - Israel has never, by the definitions in international law, stopped actively waging war against Gaza.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#185

Post by fwefqf » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:21 PM UTC

transformi wrote: post #176

mort96 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Countries are careful about calling other countries terror organisations. That's a weak argument. To convince me, you have to argue that their actions aren't terroristic. Usually, you can argue that a state's actions aren't "terrorism" because most definitions of "terrorism" involve the requirement that the action is illegal. But saying that the IDF is regularly committing war crimes isn't even controversial at this…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#186

Post by dang » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:21 PM UTC

riku_iki wrote: post #74

[flagged]

We detached this flamewar subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38745904.

All: please do not post in the flamewar style to HN. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. We want thoughtful, respectful, open communication here—not political battle, internet tropes, and all the rest of that. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#187

Post by cm2012 » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:23 PM UTC

UrineSqueegee wrote: post #12

Eh this is really tricky, for exampe if I open instagram, Threads or tiktok 9/10 posts will be pro-palestinian with 1 being pro-israeli. Then some of the propalestinian post will be calling for genocide or celebrating the massacre of oct 7. IMO you shouldn't censor anything. That's the only solution. When something is propaganda or false just quickly tag it as such with why it is false like Xitter does.

[flagged]

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#188

Post by nulld3v » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:23 PM UTC

riku_iki wrote: post #20

sschueller wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People have somehow been convinced a small amount of civilians being killed relative to the whole population is somehow a “genocide”" Per UN definition[1]: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: - Killing members of the group; - Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members…

IDF doesn't have intent to destroy palestinian group, they have intent to destroy Hamas, so probably you only can call it genocide against Hamas. Genocide was in Ukraine for example, when Russia targeted powerplants during winter, which didn't have any military value.

I have supported Ukraine in the war for a long time but this claim I do not understand.

Surely a power plant has military value right? If you destroy the power plant, you impact the country's economic and manufacturing ability which would definitely impact the country's ability to wage war.

Obviously it also severely impacts civilians but many other "acceptable" actions in war do the same.

In my head I imagine a war between a military run off of portable gas generators and a military run off of power plants. The difference in capability between the two would be huge!

Is there something I'm missing here?

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#189

Post by bitwize » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:24 PM UTC

whats_a_quasar wrote: post #78

This post was flagged, but I don't think it should have been and I hope it stays up. I have been grateful that HN hasn't had the same level of animosity about the conflict in Gaza as other places on the internet. But this news article is about a core issue in tech, and should be discussed on HN. The whole world now uses social media to communicate, which means that when there's a war, partisans of both sides will be…

> My engineer brain wants to solve this by giving users more visibility into moderation decisions.

Visibility into moderation decisions makes them more gameable/exploitable/circumventable. The whole purpose of moderation is to remove unwanted speech; justifying the fairness of such removal is only secondary, and can be elided if it interferes with the primary goal.

Hence "You have been banned because your posts violate our Terms of Service" messages with no further explanation, and things like shadowbanning. It sucks to be on the receiving end of these things but they make online communities much more pleasant.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#190

Post by dehrmann » Sat, Dec 23, 2023, 11:24 PM UTC

UrineSqueegee wrote: post #12

Eh this is really tricky, for exampe if I open instagram, Threads or tiktok 9/10 posts will be pro-palestinian with 1 being pro-israeli. Then some of the propalestinian post will be calling for genocide or celebrating the massacre of oct 7. IMO you shouldn't censor anything. That's the only solution. When something is propaganda or false just quickly tag it as such with why it is false like Xitter does.

> IMO you shouldn't censor anything. That's the only solution.

Full disclosure: I work for Meta, but not on ranking, and my opinions are my own. Edit: this isn't specific to Meta; it's common to all content platforms.

This is really hard. There's universally objectionable material like CSAM. That's (politically) easy to exclude. There are leaked state secrets the public should know. There's hate speech (laws vary by country). Sexual material (laws vary). Nudity (laws and customs vary). Then there's libel (which is hard and slow to prove). That's just on the legal side. That's what you're calling for, but that's hard enough. I have no idea how Kiwi Farms and 4chan do it.

Then there's ranking. Maybe the posts are there if you know where to look, but realistically, you'll never see them. People say "just show the posts in chronological order," but this doesn't scale for humans reading it, especially as you follow more people.