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

Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

netblocks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 600 posts

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#361

Post by anigbrowl »

geysersam wrote: post #254
PurpleRamen wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DDOSing humans rarely benefits the truth. In case of cognitive overload, humans tend to favor the simple answers, not the correct one.

I really don't think that's the case. What makes you think so? In my experience exposure to more viewpoints, even flawed ones, increases understanding and helps critical thinking.

Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. A lot of social media dynamics are not reasoned arguments, they are the product emotional outbursts which can be manufactured and herded.

The world is not made up of Spock-like rationalists, and although most people are capable of rationality, many social settings are not conducive to it. Look at stampede disasters: every year people die because panic breaks out among a crowd in a constricted space and people start to operate on instinct instead of thought.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#363

Post by kristiandupont »

dvt wrote: post #347
kibwen wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit like saying "the darkness is bad, so the solution is light, and if the light ever becomes blinding, the solution is more light ". Speech is not the point, it's just a medium for useful information. More speech is only good to the extent that it proliferates useful information. If useless spam speech is used to overwhelm useful speech, then that undermines the whole point of the principle of free speech.…

> This is a bit like saying "the darkness is bad, so the solution is light, and if the light ever becomes blinding, the solution is more light" Completely untenable analogy. Why people say is that the solution is more speech is due to the antecedent concept of the marketplace of ideas and that, by and large, ideas are sifted via free speech and the good ones last while the bad ones die. You cannot have this sorting p…

>while the bad ones die.

I am really not seeing this.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#364

Post by nradov »

Uehreka wrote: post #169
NotYourLawyer wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution to bad speech is more speech. Not less.

I see your “The solution to bad speech is more speech” and raise you a “A lie can spread around the world before the truth can get its pants on”. Call or fold?

Call.

How do you define a lie? Please be precise. What source of truth is used to evaluate possible lies, and who gets to make the final determination? What level of confidence is required? Does intent matter? Does a statement count as a lie if it is factually correct, or at least not provably incorrect, but still potentially misleading or lacking relevant context?

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#365

Post by anigbrowl »

alphanullmeric wrote: post #142
beefield wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you propose western countries and social media companies fight disinformation?

Force is only justified in response to force.

So true! Now please step into the boxcar. If you resist, you're the one at fault.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#366

Post by archagon »

alphanullmeric wrote: post #146
golergka wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of many, many reasons why western countries and social media companies should not normalise censorship re-branded like "fighting disinformation".

Curiously, all the people that support such censorship in western countries are actually against it in this instance. Almost like whether or not they choose to support a policy depends not on what it does but instead on who it’s being done to.

Government censorship (and arrests!!) are in no way comparable to the “censorship” happening in western countries. (Namely, ToC violators getting banned, and government figures suggesting misinformation to look into.) The comparison is just obnoxious.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#367

Post by anigbrowl »

atlantic wrote: post #301
andybak wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except you can start your own subreddit and choose your own moderation policies. The inaccurately named /r/conservative has a lot of traffic and there are many more.

Being able to start a subreddit is meaningless, when right-leaning subreddits are systematically shut down, or restricted to the point of becoming inoperative, as soon as they pass a certain threshold popularity.

In practice, the threshold of popularity seems to be that where the members of the subreddit feel comfortable raiding others.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#368

Post by mylidlpony »

geysersam wrote: post #260
Uehreka wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your “The solution to bad speech is more speech” and raise you a “A lie can spread around the world before the truth can get its pants on”. Call or fold?

Call. It's not about who's fastest, it's about who stays in the end. Despite us humans being a lying, cheating bunch, knowledge and access to education continues to grow all over the world. That's certainly not thanks to censorship!

> It's not about who's fastest, it's about who stays in the end

And that's where authoritarian regimes get you. People usually aren't that invested in a conversation, or in disproving firehose of falsehoods style comments placed by people incentivized monetarily to make sure the correct opinion stays in the end. If the platform has rating system they also generate accounts to manipulate it for the same purpose.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#370

Post by PartiallyTyped »

vkou wrote: post #354
alphanullmeric wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your scenario is not equivalent. A buyer and seller shake on an implicit contract when a purchase is made, and enforcement of a contract you agreed to is not censorship. A more accurate comparison would be me posting a picture of a 3 watt bulb online, claiming it is a 5 watt bulb. I don’t believe that should be illegal, and you would if you were consistent.

No, his scenario is not equivalent, but here's a few more: "Hello, this is just a reminder that your voting station will be open between 5 pm and 9 pm in (somewhere where it's not actually located), please remember to vote!" "Hello, if you would like a free ride to your voting station, please text us 'YES', and wait at (location) between X and Y pm (Nobody will show up)." "Hello, we have a great offer for auto insura…

“Hello, X is hosting strip shows with men dressed in women’s clothes and are grooming your children!”
Post reply on HN