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

Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 233 posts

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#201

Post by F6F6FA »

shkkmo wrote: post #195
F6F6FA wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you have integrity of the justice system if you don't have integrity of facts? What you call torture, is the isolation and lack-of-stimulus we put all prisoners through. This treatment is not specific to harass Assange, but Assange and his team wants special treatment specific to Assange. Assange is different in many ways. A journalist normally does not convince a suicidal army recruit in Iraq to search the l…

> What you call torture It has been called torture by a large number of people, including Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. You can dispute the definition, but it has a strong basis in international law. > A journalist normally does not convince a suicidal army recruit in Iraq to search the local network for more encrypted files he and his team can crack themselves. Journalists do a wide variety of t…

If torture, then you should defend that the UK is torturing prisoners. I thought that was going to be a hard sell, but then I checked the most recent thing that Nils wrote and it seems to be selling exactly that:

> #Assange’s stroke is no surprise.

> As we warned after examining him, unless relieved of the constant pressure of isolation, arbitrariness & persecution, his health would enter a downward spiral endangering his life.

> #UK is literally torturing him to death.

Prisoners face undue pressure of isolation making strokes unsurprising? Not buying it. Instead, accepting that Assange was a journalist, who was acting in a different manner than usual journalists, and now up to the courts to decide if this manner was against their laws or not. Activism as a motive may actually be a better defense, but not a defense lawyer.

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#202

Post by dang »

mantaraygun wrote: post #4
echelon wrote: post #2

This issue is so complicated. Yellow journalism existed in the 1920s. It's nothing new. There will always be people that want to consume these materials and believe them. The alarming thing are the calls for censorship. Look at how bad the media and platforms have been about Covid. Early advice on masking, lab leak, adipose inflammation, and other fairly innocuous lines of research were censored. Imagine centrally pu…

> Soon they'll censor women's health issues. Surely you mean "people who menstruate"

Please don't post flamebait here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#203

Post by [deleted] »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #143
pvaldes wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would questioning the validity of an election be an example of it? If you can show solid evidence, or any evidence, supporting your claim, not. If all the proofs of foul play that you show is a model of a smoking firegun made with cheetos and a lot of proven lies. Yes, Probably.

> If you can show solid evidence, or any evidence, supporting your claim, not. There was no evidence suggesting Trump's election win was not valid. The wild delusional conspiracy theories about how Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election under Obama's nose were not evidence, mind you. So all those people, politicians, corporations, celebrities, and "journalists" peddling the Trump Russia conspiracy theories an…

[deleted]

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#204

Post by nverno »

pvaldes wrote: post #124
throwawaylinux wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's anti-democratic, pro-authoritarian content? Would questioning the validity of an election be an example of it?

> Would questioning the validity of an election be an example of it? If you can show solid evidence, or any evidence, supporting your claim, not. If all the proofs of foul play that you show is a model of a smoking firegun made with cheetos and a lot of proven lies. Yes, Probably.

By this metric, everyone's personal opinions/worries/etc. are anti-democratic. The only pro-democratic material, with all the 'facts' and data, would be that put forth by the people with access to said information, which in this case is people working in the government.

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#205

Post by philjohn »

chroem- wrote: post #80
philjohn wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't answer the question ... what are some examples of posts, or viewpoints that are, according to you, verboten? And didn't the GOP helmed investigation find that there was a concerted disinformation campaign waged by Russia, as well as numerous links between people in the Trump campaign and Russian operatives? Edit: and there are plenty of people on one side of the spectrum claiming that Biden is "in bed with…

You're attempting to change the subject and I'm not going to take the bait. Mass censorship is far bigger than any one political issue. As per your second paragraph, no, that is false. They made a small ad buy to sow bipartisan political division. Please stop promoting misinformation.

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu...

Page 16: "High Volume and Multiple Channels"

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#206

Post by whitepaint »

yesenadam wrote: post #148
whitepaint wrote: post #6

Aren't governments (especially Germany and Australia for what they are doing at the moment) way more scarier than big tech? I am not scared of Google or Facebook at all. I am, however, scared of governments. Especially seeing how the pandemic was handled and how little resistance the handling got from the citizens.

So uh, why do you put Australia in your two-especially-scary-governments-in-the-world list? That seems extremely odd to me. Sydney here. I've seen oblique mentions like this a couple of times on here recently and asked about it, as I've no idea what would inspire such a comment, but no-one answered until now. Well, for one thing, we don't have nuclear weapons pointed at anyone...

I oppose putting people in camps.

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#207

Post by nickpp »

8note wrote: post #136
jakear wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more powerful than any local government I’ll believe that when I see FB agents smashing down doors to imprison (/kill) activists.

Why do that when they can push the activist down a depressive spiral into suicide?

You mean like what they did to Aaron Swartz?

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#208

Post by pvaldes »

nverno wrote: post #204
pvaldes wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would questioning the validity of an election be an example of it? If you can show solid evidence, or any evidence, supporting your claim, not. If all the proofs of foul play that you show is a model of a smoking firegun made with cheetos and a lot of proven lies. Yes, Probably.

By this metric, everyone's personal opinions/worries/etc. are anti-democratic. The only pro-democratic material, with all the 'facts' and data, would be that put forth by the people with access to said information, which in this case is people working in the government.

I can think that somebody is a bad person, even suspect that is a criminal. This is a personal opinion. Not problem with it.

But If I say in a public media that a known public figure is a criminal or eats children alive for dinner, and I repeat this for months with a clear purpose of obtaining a personal benefit for me. If I do this while refusing to show any real proof of it and, when cornered by the truth, I claim that it was just my opinion and should be respected... well, this is a different issue.

We would be moving in the field of defamation. Libel can destroy lives and is not a thing to be taken lightly.

> You would say other thing if it was somebody from "your party"

Or maybe not. This is a perfect example of your opinion about a strange on internet. I really couldn't care less about if who says it is red, blue or multicolor.

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#209

Post by prohobo »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #198
prohobo wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As in stop pouring gasoline on pathological behavior (attention hijacking, emotional triggering, propaganda, etc.) through dark patterns/algorithms? Or censor everyone who has heterodox opinions? You should make a distinction here, because I think most people assume you mean censorship.

Both. If you don't like the way these platforms moderate then don't use them. I don't.

Your opinion is naive, this isn't about using a website it's about centralisation of the internet.

Re: Nobel Peace laureates blast tech giants and warn against rising authoritarianism

#210

Post by krapp »

lostmsu wrote: post #197
krapp wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Then you theory is exceptionally hard to disprove, as someone would have to come up with a huge number of individual examples to have "statistical significance". It isn't my theory. The right claims the entirety of social media has been engaged in an orchestrated conspiracy to purge non-leftist speech from their platforms in favor of pushing a radical socialist agenda for years, and that this is so widespread that i…

> And I'd bet dollars to donuts something other than mere political speech was involved in each case. I can think of reasons why Facebook wouldn't want links to pirated software on its platform other than political bias, for instance. You chose to ignore the part about thedonald.win, that basically disproves your point.

>You chose to ignore the part about thedonald.win, that basically disproves your point.

thedonald.win was banned for supporting the violent overthrow of the government, and before, when it was t_d, for brigading, harassment and supporting political violence.

If you want to read more about this community's well documented bad behavior, it's on wikipedia[0], or literally anywhere else on the internet.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/The_Donald

Post reply on HN