Should all forms of speech be defended and accessible in a public domain? Should instructions on how to make explosives be accessible and defended?
Should strong encryption software be accessible and defended? Do not forget the fight for PGP.
Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
41–50 of 204 posts
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#42The takeaway from this for me is not, "Don't get rid of Nazis", but rather, "Have a clear criteria and process for when you will remove content. Follow that process." Great, 100% agreed with that. Be clear and up front about terms of service, and be clear and open when they are violated. That said, I'm not 100% agreed that "Whatever you use against Neo-Nazis will be used 'against the ones you love'." That's a slipper…
And that's fine. You get to draw that line in the sand, but you have to do two things: 1) Don't say you are for freedom of expression. you aren't. 2) Be consistent. ISIS propaganda websites must be wholly refused to be hosted. Many (not as fringe as you'd like to think) websites in the Middle East, Eastern Bloc and Russia must also be taken down when discussing the Jews, as well. Any website that blatantly talks abou…
There's a lot to unpack in your comment. I do want to address a few things:
> People told me that I was using a slippery slope argument when I said using the wartime powers act against "terrorism" was a quick sink to unjust presidential powers.
Is it different to you that the actions here were taken by companies, not by the government? To the best of my knowledge, there was no mandate to take these sites down.
> Be consistent
Sure, this is my original takeaway from the article -- establish clear boundaries, openly follow those rules when someone violates those boundaries. It causes confusion and uncertainty when you don't follow your published rules.
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#43"[W]e strongly believe that what GoDaddy, Google, and Cloudflare did here was dangerous. That’s because, even when the facts are the most vile, we must remain vigilant when platforms exercise these rights. Because Internet intermediaries, especially those with few competitors, control so much online speech, the consequences of their decisions have far-reaching impacts on speech around the world." Well said. I'm glad…
It was dangerous, but also their right to do. The CEO of Cloudflare called out his own action as capricious and not good practice, but he still did it. Because hey, they're literally nazis. And anyways, one of Cloudflare's major services is filtering out spam, noise, and malicious traffic...
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#44"[W]e strongly believe that what GoDaddy, Google, and Cloudflare did here was dangerous. That’s because, even when the facts are the most vile, we must remain vigilant when platforms exercise these rights. Because Internet intermediaries, especially those with few competitors, control so much online speech, the consequences of their decisions have far-reaching impacts on speech around the world." Well said. I'm glad…
Can't agree more. Today it's Nazis, tomorrow it's not showing enough support for the chosen candidate. This is the one slippery slope. It's evident in PC-speech. Today's PC speech is not the PC speech from the 90s.
And it's not that I don't like Pc speech. I prefer it. But I also don't want it to be the only kind of speech one can use for discussion. Try and have any good philosophical argument without breaking PC boundaries.
It's a scary thing when one group controls the narrative of what is acceptable and unacceptable speech.
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#45The takeaway from this for me is not, "Don't get rid of Nazis", but rather, "Have a clear criteria and process for when you will remove content. Follow that process." Great, 100% agreed with that. Be clear and up front about terms of service, and be clear and open when they are violated. That said, I'm not 100% agreed that "Whatever you use against Neo-Nazis will be used 'against the ones you love'." That's a slipper…
Ok then, lets give Trump, the DOJ and Jeff Sessions the impetus to start drafting legislation to fight 'internet hate speech' and see what they come up with. edit: > That's a slippery slope argument Its not. These discussions will be taken over by the political establishment and the courts very quickly with very real consequences.
This seems like a false equivalence to me, given that Google (et al) are not the government nor acting due to pressure from the government. I do understand and value the concern around legislating free speech, but I think different rules apply for governments and corporations.
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#46This fetishization of "free speech" has to stop.
These people do not respect free speech. They do not respect an open society. They do not respect freedom. They wish to destroy all of these things and they are entirely upfront about it. And yet all I've read the past few days is hand wringing about the "rights" of those who wish to destroy that of which open societies have built.
At least the citizens of the early 1930's didn't have a historical reference for their passivity. What's your excuse?
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
as unfortunate as it may be, you not only have to fight against the nazis ideals, but also for their right to hold them and speak them in a public forum, like any other citizen. That's from the history books about the country's founding.
Nope. Nazi speech is banned in Germany cause they learned their lesson.
I thought we were talking about America, here. I might have been mistaken. Nazi speech, as well as a great number of things are illegal in Germany that aren't in America. We have completely different foinding documents, government policies and laws.
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#48"[W]e strongly believe that what GoDaddy, Google, and Cloudflare did here was dangerous. That’s because, even when the facts are the most vile, we must remain vigilant when platforms exercise these rights. Because Internet intermediaries, especially those with few competitors, control so much online speech, the consequences of their decisions have far-reaching impacts on speech around the world." Well said. I'm glad…
Can't agree more. Today it's Nazis, tomorrow it's not showing enough support for the chosen candidate. This is the one slippery slope. It's evident in PC-speech. Today's PC speech is not the PC speech from the 90s. And it's not that I don't like Pc speech. I prefer it. But I also don't want it to be the only kind of speech one can use for discussion. Try and have any good philosophical argument without breaking PC bo…
No, there is no slippery slope. This is a group that advocates an ideology that, when it was put in place, resulted in catastrophe for mankind.
In other words, what they advocate is what exists at the bottom of the slope. You know, Godwin's Law and all that?
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't agree more. Today it's Nazis, tomorrow it's not showing enough support for the chosen candidate. This is the one slippery slope. It's evident in PC-speech. Today's PC speech is not the PC speech from the 90s. And it's not that I don't like Pc speech. I prefer it. But I also don't want it to be the only kind of speech one can use for discussion. Try and have any good philosophical argument without breaking PC bo…
No, there is no slippery slope. This is a group that advocates an ideology that, when it was put in place, resulted in catastrophe for mankind. In other words, what they advocate is what exists at the bottom of the slope. You know, Godwin's Law and all that?
So, what next, the communists or Marxists because the ideology they espouse caused even more deaths?
I agree they are a hateful group. An odious group of people possibly only superseded in their vileness by extremist religious fanatics who won't hesitate to kill, but we're not shutting their speech down, are we?
In my view, this is one of those things that is binary. Either you have free speech, or you don't. There is no in between, finessing it. You end up with lese majeste and other nonsense bullshit.
Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok then, lets give Trump, the DOJ and Jeff Sessions the impetus to start drafting legislation to fight 'internet hate speech' and see what they come up with. edit: > That's a slippery slope argument Its not. These discussions will be taken over by the political establishment and the courts very quickly with very real consequences.
This seems like a false equivalence to me, given that Google (et al) are not the government nor acting due to pressure from the government. I do understand and value the concern around legislating free speech, but I think different rules apply for governments and corporations.
It only takes one lawsuit that goes to the supreme court to turn this whole debate into a federal legislative debate about civil rights or some other expansive constitutional issue.
When your in a situation where domain registrars and other core infrastructure are making judgements about what political speech they will allow on the internet then I would imagine your very close to a whole host of issues that cut the core of fundamental rights. That's why CloudFlare is so skittish, they know where this could go.
Eventually this rough shot approach is going to hit someone with the resources to fight back. Lets imagine Breitbart gets nuked what then? It's only a matter of time before there is an incident like that. And when it happens its already to late to turn back.