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

181–188 of 188 posts

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#181

Post by SamBam »

rofo1 wrote: post #42
gigatexal wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s especially offputting is the media not covering Elon’s Nazi salute

Do you really believe this? Sincerely and honestly? You believe Elon Musk is somehow showing support for the National-Socialist party of the German working class? How is it possible to get to this level? Truly amazing.

For starters, the Sieg Heil salute that Elon did was exactly the same as Hitler did it [1] and modern-day white nationalists do it [2].

Secondly, anyone who refers to Nazism as the "the National-Socialist party of the German working class" is clearly attempting to make an utterly specious claim that Nazism is really about Socialism and not about Fascism.

1. https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/1i6par1/elon_musk_vs_...

2. https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/1i6v521/for_those_not...

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#182

Post by ffsm8 »

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…

> 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?

You're arguing with a strawman, I never said it's impossible in principle. I said it isn't currently categorized as a utility, hence they are free to censor as they see fit.

It's entirely possible for the courts of the USA to deem it a utility, and it'd be interested to see the long term effects of such ruling.

The ruling would only apply to citizens of the USA, so it'd be very interesting to see how the companies in question implemented the changes to stay compliant.

It'd be an interesting case study, but it's impossible to speculate on its fallout until a clear plan has been drafted. I.e. It could potentially make it impossible for newcomers to create platforms, depending on the angle for such a regulation. Or it could make changes to the algorithm borderline impossible etc.

basically countless pitfalls and without a clear draft, nothing of value can be discussed

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#183

Post by ffsm8 »

dist-epoch wrote: post #160
ffsm8 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While youre touching on a real issue, your phrasing doesn't really convey you've understood the issue you're touching on, honestly. What you're actually putting forth is wherever large social media platforms should be treated as utilities. (Which ISPs are). If the legislative decided to categorize it as a utility, then any censorship the company decided to do could potentially infringe on your free speech, yes. Howev…

> your phrasing doesn't really convey you've understood the issue you're touching on, honestly. I've understood it very well, I find it very funny that people which say stuff like Google is a private company and should do what it wants are the same people which say Google should respect net-neutrality (peering agreements, ...) and not do what it wants when it's about core networking and not social media.

How is that funny?

A utility is something that is regulated, it comes with a lot of caveats and challenges. It's not just a label you can put on anything, you need to actually define and set boundaries etc to what the utility provider is required to do etc.

This has happened for ISPs, but none of that has happened for Twitter, Facebook etc... thus it's not a utility, thus it's not bound to the free speech amendment.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#184

Post by Aeolun »

kccoder wrote: post #129
Aeolun wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not concerning. This is the expected end result of a man like that being re-elected after all he did.

Expected behavior can be concerning when it occurs.

Fair point. I was really looking for ‘surprising’.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#185

Post by mongol »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #178
mongol wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. B…

I see it as Nov 6 was when he crossed a border without return. He showed his cards. He lost that day, but he wins now, so prevailed in the end.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#186

Post by ric2b »

mardifoufs wrote: post #138
argsnd wrote: post #5

#fuckbiden works, #fucktrump gets censored. They better have a good explanation for why this is a bug.

It's not censoring, it's a private corporation and they can do whatever they want with their platform. They just want that type of speech on their platform, but you can build your own social media if you want to :)

It is censorship but it's not widespread or a violation of the first amendment.

Re: Meta Censoring '#Democrat' on Instagram

#187

Post by smsm42 »

mardifoufs wrote: post #138
argsnd wrote: post #5

#fuckbiden works, #fucktrump gets censored. They better have a good explanation for why this is a bug.

It's not censoring, it's a private corporation and they can do whatever they want with their platform. They just want that type of speech on their platform, but you can build your own social media if you want to :)

Now witness how people suddenly realize what is the problem iwth this argument when it happens to them. It's free private action when we do it, but fascism when the other guys do it. Always so.
Post reply on HN