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

Why do you host offensive content?

nearlyfreespeech.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 169 posts

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#41

Post by Nursie »

djsumdog wrote: post #26
Nursie wrote: post #7

> "Finally, censorship is always bad, for a variety of well understood reasons that we don't need to repeat here. But in the case of some types of content, it has special dangers. When you censor a web site based on the extreme or dangerous views of its creator(s), you haven't stopped those people from thinking that way. You haven't made them go away. You certainly haven't stopped the people who hold those views from…

There was a time when the cesspit were all the people promoting the debauchery of homosexuality, or the idea that blacks were somehow equal to whites in intelligence and genetic disposition. These were greatly offensive statements at one time. People were ridiculed and deplatformed for having them. Translate the Bible into a barbaric language like German or English? That caused great offense. People were excommunicat…

> "By banning speech is to say, "I agree people are too stupid to make their own decisions. Let's make the world 'safe' for them and ban ideas I don't agree with."

1. People are stupid. Really, really stupid. Especially when given the means to surround and reinforce themselves with other idiots. See for example - antivax and alt-med in general, chemtrails any number of ridiculous conspiracy theories that propagate through the web.

2. These people are not thinkers, they are not open to having their viewpoints challenged and reason will not move them from their course.

I agree, this whole area is massively subjective, I'm not saying I have a solution. But this black and white idea that censorship is always bad, and the notion that we have a functional marketplace of ideas which people re-evaluate based on reason is ... well it's a fantasy.

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#42

Post by chipotle_coyote »

captainredbeard wrote: post #21
Nursie wrote: post #7

> "Finally, censorship is always bad, for a variety of well understood reasons that we don't need to repeat here. But in the case of some types of content, it has special dangers. When you censor a web site based on the extreme or dangerous views of its creator(s), you haven't stopped those people from thinking that way. You haven't made them go away. You certainly haven't stopped the people who hold those views from…

“The idea that good ideas will win, and that common sense and rationality will take the day, are not really supported by what we see around the net.” Maybe you’re wrong?

And maybe they aren't. It's going to be hard to look around the net and draw a conclusion either way that everyone -- or possibly even most people -- will accept as definitive. There's an increasing number of studies that show exposure to fringe and extreme views consistently is more likely to foster extremism rather than inoculate against it, and as much as I wish that weren't so, I reluctantly find them rather convincing.

I find NearlyFreeSpeech.Net's position on hosting "really offensive content" to be well-reasoned and thoughtful. I'm just not convinced it's ultimately true. The web has brought unparalleled good to the world in the mere quarter century it's been with us. It's also arguably been the prime mover in bringing back flat earthers, Nazis, and measles. When you ask "don't the anti-vaxxers, climate change denialists, and white supremacists deserve great web hosting, too?", maybe the answer is "no, not really."

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#43

Post by UnFleshedOne »

homonculus1 wrote: post #35
jakelazaroff wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> P.S. This doesn't mean that everything offensive must be posted -- there is stuff that should be illegal to post because of the harm it can cause. What stuff? Using this logic, why should anything be off-limits to the "public market of ideas"? e.g. libel should be perfectly acceptable speech — that way it can be exposed and refuted! This is a particularly insidious point of view because it frames its own line betwe…

Yes, even libel should be legal. If something damaging is a lie then it should be subject to civil penalties--but the government in no way should have the power to silence ideas by declaring them lies.

How would collecting a fine from all parties publishing a libel be different from silencing that particular idea?

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#44

Post by xgulfie »

waynecochran wrote: post #10

If it is offensive because it stems from "bad ideas" then it is imperative that it is posted in the "public market of ideas" so it can be exposed and refuted. If it is not posted then folks will not know how to refute it when it crops up again -- and it will. Free Speech for bad ideas is as important as free speech for good ideas. Don't be offended. That's your choice. P.S. This doesn't mean that everything offensive…

This attitude that "to be offended you have to allow it" is ridiculous.

You can't simply turn your emotions on and off unless you are a sociopath.

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#45

Post by djsumdog »

Nursie wrote: post #30
captainredbeard wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The idea that good ideas will win, and that common sense and rationality will take the day, are not really supported by what we see around the net.” Maybe you’re wrong?

Tell that to the people gunned down in NZ with a rifle covered in 'chan slogans ... ? I'm not saying censorship is good, let's go full-on NewSpeak here, or even that I have any sort of solution to propose. I just don't think this ideal, that censorship is necessarily always bad and that the best, only way to fight evil ideas is with discussion and better ideas ... I don't think holds up to scrutiny in the face of rea…

Do you blame 4chan? Really? An emotionally disturbed person may have more input today in the Internet age, but the majority of 4chan users don't go out shooting mosques.

This was one fucked up Australian, from a country of over 30 million; and the first Aussie to commit a mass shooting since 1996.

I do not think it's right to place the blame on a bunch of random people saying things. They didn't murder all those people. Speech is not violence. Violence is violence, and that one guy decided to take it off the computer, hop across the pond, somehow get a ton of firearms in a country where they are heavily restricted, and then shoot up a bunch of innocent civilians.

There are millions of other Aussies and Kiwis who probably chat on the same networks he was on, and never take up violence. They may speak up against things they think are wrong or that they don't like, either online or in public spaces, but there is a big difference between speech/saying things and murder.

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#46

Post by lucideer »

falcolas wrote: post #4

Honest, but leading, question in return: Offensive to whom? 90% of the population? Wouldn't that block out the Church of Satan's distributed materials (that is, coloring books)? To 80% of the population? Wouldn't that be the Book of Mormon? To 60%? The Quran? I think this part of their answer is a great response: "Of course, the simplest reason is that it's not up to us to decide what the rest of the world should or…

Slightly more pragmatic reframing of the question:

> "Why do you host harmful content?"

To which your returned question would be similarly open-ended: Harmful to whom? Define harmless content. Etc.

... but probably a little more "down to earth" in terms of discussing the bounds of such definitions.

The root of being "offended" may often be grounded in an agenda to silence and control, but it's typically defended by referencing potential harm. So that's usually a good place to start overturning such arguments.

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#47

Post by root_axis »

> censorship is always bad

This isn't true. A few examples.

If I post your naked photos online and they are censored, that isn't bad.

If I post your address online next to a photo of your house and it is censored, that isn't bad.

If I post the source code of your personal project online and it is censored, that isn't bad.

If I post the contents of your diary online and it is censored, that isn't bad.

If I post the contents of a heated argument between you and your spouse online and it is censored, that isn't bad.

If I post a photoshopped picture of your kid online and it is censored, that isn't bad.

Not everything deserves to see the light of day and actually, we do get to make that decision. This idea that "free speech" means everyone has to agree to let everything appear on the internet is false. "Free speech" also means "I have the freedom not to support someone else's speech".

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#48

Post by traderjane »

djsumdog wrote: post #39
josteink wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would typically be privileged people, non-ironically complaining about other people’s privilege.

People don't have privilege. People toss around that word a lot and it's used incorrectly, as it is here. Say you walk into a store and are followed or stopped quite often for a receipt check. If you're black in certain parts of the world, this is quite common, but much more rare if you're not black. The privilege is a result of a system. You cannot say x people have privilege, and likewise people get offended when p…

That sounds like silly word play. It'd be like if I said "Tom has power." To which I guess you might reply, "People don't have power. Societies have power, structures have power, and positions have power... but people don't have power." Okay, sure. But Tom still has power.

We are all responsible for the debts of our fathers, except the bill comes in the form of the physical world we inhabit. Who thinks they exist away from the past, except as rhetorical play about conquering old challenges?

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#49

Post by dmitrygr »

duxup wrote: post #31

Do they have a policy where they deal with threats of violence / organizing something like that? I couldn't find any, but I'm also not familiar with the site. There's "offensive" as in thinks I don't like, or even hateful statements ... but to me threats of violence and etc fall into another area.

At least in the United States, threats of violence are also protected speech. "Fighting words" are not, but that is generally taken to mean words intending to cause immediate direct and specific harm to a specific person. A generic sort of "I wish $person was dead" is protected.

This sort of thing came up a long time ago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_Am...

Re: Why do you host offensive content?

#50

Post by stcredzero »

falcolas wrote: post #4

Honest, but leading, question in return: Offensive to whom? 90% of the population? Wouldn't that block out the Church of Satan's distributed materials (that is, coloring books)? To 80% of the population? Wouldn't that be the Book of Mormon? To 60%? The Quran? I think this part of their answer is a great response: "Of course, the simplest reason is that it's not up to us to decide what the rest of the world should or…

Check out their MFFAM policy. Search for, "What is the "MFFAM" policy?"
Post reply on HN