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

Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

scribd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 304 posts

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#231

Post by berbec »

chaosite wrote: post #218
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't a hole, it's an iterative process. Parents didn't know there was snuff on YouTube Kids. As soon as they find out, their kids are not allowed to use it anymore and with declining viewership, whatever garbage feedback loop allowed that to happen is destroyed.

... and Google is supposed to stand by while their platform is not fit for its stated purpose?

Google had no problem supporting a product useless for its stated purpose for years until finally shutting it down entirely after a data breach.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#232

Post by berbec »

chrisco255 wrote: post #52

Here in 2018, I'm not that worried about Google's position as world's information arbiter and how it chooses to censor content. But I do worry a bit, as the path to hell is paved with good intentions. How will this evolve over the decades to come? Where does the line between "hate speech" and legitimate criticism get drawn? Criticism is often crude. Humor is often crude. Sometimes humor, even crude humor, cuts to the…

I could see Anthony Jeselnik ending up on the wrong side of a humor line pretty quickly.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#233

Post by rataata_jr »

fzeroracer wrote: post #185
gnarbarian wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the supremely ironic thing in this case is they are calling us the fascists while silencing us with a straight face.

Who is this 'they' you're referring to, exactly? And what opinions do you hold that would warrant this 'they' calling you fascist?

The left, they refers to left. If you are that clueless.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#234

Post by vkou »

sanxiyn wrote: post #159
vkou wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans express their right to free speech through bots. It's no different from expressing your right to free speech through paid advertisements.

I think I am okay with contents from bots if they are marked like advertisements ("sponsored contents", etc.). For example, "post from ABC" could instead say "post from ABC, a bot account of XYZ".

Are you OK with dishonest speech?

If so, then not marking bot speech as such is mere dishonesty.

Not to mention that, in the general case of speech, I do not have to disclose if I am being paid to express my viewpoint.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#235

Post by raxxorrax »

chaosite wrote: post #166
fapjacks wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Think of the children" as a justification for censorship is still "think of the children" as a justification for censorship, regardless of the context. Dressing it up in an attempt to make it more palatable and reasonable-sounding doesn't change what is at its core. And that's a nice touch, painting me as an outsider by pointing at the sign with the rules.

The document is a showcase of trends, as well as pressures being applied to Google from various groups. Like it or not, Elsagate is a well-documented phenomenon, and this document is treating it like the problem that it is. This is not a generic "think of the children" reasoning to ban things that adults enjoy -- Elsagate videos are targeted at children, they exploit various mechanisms to make children watch them (so…

But the actions of tech giants talk a different language. Alex Jones, crazy as he may be and scamming people with his "man-pills", didn't address children. There were others that have been excluded that were less crazy, just pointing out a prominent example.

In consequence I doubt the intentions are as clear cut and restricted to these cases.

Children are easily distracted and are easy target for clickbait, that is true. They are also more affine to access information their parents want to restrict. I think that is true even for people here. And you did that too.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#236

Post by burfog »

hef19898 wrote: post #221
raxxorrax wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European I have to admit that the American model is vastly superior. Europe had laws to protect "civilty" even before the great wars. American democracy is also more successful in general. Europe just had the "luck" that censorship didn't become very necessary. In some places it was used extensively and those places are no more today. And lastly, stripping someones voice implicates directly stripping someones di…

As a fellow European I have to disagree. Hiostorically speaking, pernal freedoms have been alot higher in Europe than the US (since the time something like personal freedom became athing), slavery was abolished by Great Britain and France way before the War of Independance for example. Also, where exactly is the US democracy more successfull overall? We do have free election in Europe, don't we? And we don't have suc…

I disagree with most of that.

You can pick and choose freedoms that you value or don't, and say Europe has more freedom. I can go the other way. Here is one: In much of Europe, you have nothing resembling the protection that Americans have under the 2nd amendment.

You have "free election" of approved parties. The other ones are subject to arrest for their political expression. Right now in the UK, Britain First is facing trial for what would be protected political speech in the USA. LePen got charged in France, also for what would be protected political speech in the USA. Geert Wilders, a member of the House of Representatives of the Netherlands, was likewise put on trial.

If you have a parliament that chooses a prime minister, then you have an electoral college. The members happen to be the same as those of congress; that is what a parliament is. It's actually worse, because you don't have a solid understanding of who they might choose.

In your last paragraph you admit that you don't really have free speech, but you don't care because your own views happen to be in favor with the current government. It's all fine to censor people you dislike, and to label them as radicals speaking hate speech. You're in a rather privileged position there, quite lucky to not be under a government that labels YOU in that way.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#237

Post by raxxorrax »

hef19898 wrote: post #198
zaroth wrote: post #30

Underpinning the whole question of censorship; “Under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, tech firms have legal immunity from the majority of the content posted on their platforms (unlike ‘traditional’ media publications). This protection has empowered YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Reddit to create spaces for free speech without the fear of legal action or its financial consequence.” Censoring content is…

This is a very lazy way to view things, considering oneself as a plattform instead of a publisher I mean. We all agree that the press by itself is free in the Western world, including the US. Sovthere is, as a direct consequence, nothing wrong with editing. By being a platform you can basically have it both ways, compete with journalism without being journalism. And once that is causing issues you say freedom of spee…

We have a problem with spins in many articles that mostly results from writers instead of editors, but the overall conclusion that editing cannot be detrimental to freedom of information is wrong or insufficient at least.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#238

Post by growlist »

I think there is a massive market opportunity here, and all the competitor has to do is build Google from 5-10 years ago - when you could actually still get decent results for your search, warts and all - as opposed to the wildly unrepresentative kindergarten/pollyanna picture of the internet they currently return.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#239

Post by hef19898 »

burfog wrote: post #236
hef19898 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow European I have to disagree. Hiostorically speaking, pernal freedoms have been alot higher in Europe than the US (since the time something like personal freedom became athing), slavery was abolished by Great Britain and France way before the War of Independance for example. Also, where exactly is the US democracy more successfull overall? We do have free election in Europe, don't we? And we don't have suc…

I disagree with most of that. You can pick and choose freedoms that you value or don't, and say Europe has more freedom. I can go the other way. Here is one: In much of Europe, you have nothing resembling the protection that Americans have under the 2nd amendment. You have "free election" of approved parties. The other ones are subject to arrest for their political expression. Right now in the UK, Britain First is fa…

Just one thing, is the electoral college part of Congress and / or the Senate? If not, the systems are not comparable. And I have the impression that you seriously missunderstood my last paragraph which referred to radical elements thoroughly within their communities. Which, obviously, has nothing to do with constitutional free speech.

In the end, we agree that we don't agree. And for the sake of the discussion it is better than we stop now and don't go towards the 2nd.

Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”

#240

Post by SSLy »

chaosite wrote: post #158
paganel wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kids' click patterns reward more video themes like "Elsa tied up on train tracks kissing Spiderman", so the content industry crams more of that stuff into its new content. To be fair many of the Tex Avery and Tom and Jerry cartoons with which almost everyone grew up with were a lot more wild than that, thankfully they weren’t censored back when we were kids.

Tex Avery and Tom & Jerry were wild and a product of their respective era, sure, but they're definitely not as bad as some of the Elsagate videos. Did you watch them? Some of them are literally snuff, with tons of gore. The stuff of nightmares.

Which channels should I check out for examples?
Post reply on HN