251–260 of 486 posts
It's pretty simple really: prove that you've resisted CCP censorship instead of rolling over. Not hard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would need to explain how TicTok brainwashes americans to vote(or not vote) but Facebook and Twitter categorically does not do the same thing. If "brainwashing" on social media exists then all should be made illegal not only the a small subset.
As a US citizen, I would absolutely like domestic social media companies to be held similarly accountable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The part where you can speak your mind without consequence from the government.
Freedom of speech is not the same in the rest of the world outside of America. Lots of European countries have hate speech laws in place where you can be convicted of crimes for speaking your mind if it's hateful. The EU has been pressuring large tech companies into self complying https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/28/16380526/eu-hate-speech-l... But just the other day, there was a huge post with lots of uproar about ho…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should fix... how? Companies should be compelled to provide a platform for free expression, and forbidden from removing any content, no matter how objectionable? It's unclear to me what you're suggesting.
I think it's clear what parent commenter is suggesting. And that no medium if privately owned has the right to moderate itself and must carry any and all speech and productions. Just because it's unreasonable and makes no sense doesn't mean people don't want it or widely support it on HN.
What's happening is people conflate "not suppressing speech" with "supporting hate speech." They don't support anything. They're nothing more at this point than a public space maintained by a private entity. Private entities I'll add that are essentially subsidized by taxpayers due to not meeting their obligations of paying their taxes, and no I'm not talking about minimizing tax obligations[0].
[0] - https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/19/21144291/facebook-irs-law...
And nobody ever said "no matter how objectionable." We still have limits on obscenity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't know the details of this before lol. That sounds like a nightmare it's a wonder anything gets done...
It’s a feature really. It can be frustrating but the idea is that big changes can be made but not on a whim. There generally has to be compromise. I wouldn’t want to live under a system that can make drastic changes on a whim. The USA is a very multicultural place with many different people with different priorities. We need to find common ground before certain types of things change. This is good even if frustrating…
Oops.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hate to say it, but the terrific first amendment in the US only applies to the government. Companies and individuals can kick you out for saying things they dont like. There are laws against certain kinds of discrimination by companies, but those are not the first amendment. Just wanted to clarify that so we dont pretend companies are upholding constitutional rights on a regional basis. They are not accountable to it…
This. The writers of the constitution understood that if you didn't like doing business with a company you could just take your business to their competitor. If you don't like your bridge club or church, pick a different one. But if your government is infringing your rights, it's very difficult for most people to pick a different government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A bit of context would surely help to put this comment into perspective.
The catalonian government, which is an autonomous community of Spain, held a referendum to secede. The Spanish shut down polling stations, but they declared independence anyways, so the central government implemented direct rule and arrested the separatist politicians responsible for it.
I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship, here we are not talking about something like explicit content, or violence censorship which belong to cultural differences, here we are talking about not being put in jail because you say publicly that tibet should be free. or because you try to report abuse and suppression of the ruling class this type of free speech should be guaran…
My opinion is that the only realistic solution is a broad offering of many many social media apps, so that people can choose between them.
Radio Free Asia (unsure of legitimacy of this site) has stated China used TikTok data out of the Houston consulate (remember it was shut down by the State Department out of the blue and neighbors were filming the consulate burning documents in the courtyard) to manipulate the BLM protest narrative: https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3876672/posts “The purpose was to “weaponize” big data technology. It delivere…
I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship, here we are not talking about something like explicit content, or violence censorship which belong to cultural differences, here we are talking about not being put in jail because you say publicly that tibet should be free. or because you try to report abuse and suppression of the ruling class this type of free speech should be guaran…
Hate to say it, but the terrific first amendment in the US only applies to the government. Companies and individuals can kick you out for saying things they dont like. There are laws against certain kinds of discrimination by companies, but those are not the first amendment. Just wanted to clarify that so we dont pretend companies are upholding constitutional rights on a regional basis. They are not accountable to it…
They are saying that people outside of China should take a stand against China’s lack of respect for speech rights, rather than playing along with it for profit.