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

421–430 of 600 posts

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#421

Post by rayiner »

bbor wrote: post #43
rayiner wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you use quotes around “Democratic” do you mean the elections are rigged? I’m not familiar with the legitimacy or lack thereof of Turkish elections.

It’s not quite Russia levels of vote fakery, but rather similar to many other backsliding democracies - the incumbent is credibly accused of using their influence to insure victory. See “controversies” on this page, which describes the election where they modified the constitution to give erdogan completely unchecked power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Turkish_presidential_elec...

The subject of that referendum—abolishing indirect election of the president and moving to direct election—is something that people want in America. And the close result on the referendum seems to match opinion polling.

Maybe the referendum was rigged, I don’t know. But centralizing more power in the executive, if that’s what the people want, isn’t necessarily anti democratic.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#422

Post by oivey »

pmichaud wrote: post #251
alphanullmeric wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have seen the same thing, but I think the cause is more that maybe the overwhelming majority of people can’t meaningfully do abstraction? Like they blow a gasket between conceiving of individual actions and beliefs vs policies related to actions and beliefs? So people like this will say sentences like “censorship is wrong” but implicit in the sentence for them is “censorship of correct and/or my information is wron…

I agree, probably almost no one truly believes censorship is wrong in the abstract. Similarly, very few people believe in absolute freedom. I’m not sure there are really any belief systems where those two things can be really consistent. There is a real issue with people wrap themselves up as absolutist ideologues while spouting “illegal for thee, but not for me.”

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#423

Post by alphanullmeric »

VanTheBrand wrote: post #385
alphanullmeric wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, your comparison is just not equivalent. A sale is a transfer of property. We enforce the implicit contract that goes along with that. The buyer will pay, the seller will deliver, the product is accurate, etc. This discussion is about speech, for which no such contract exists. If you disagree, then you should have no problem arresting people for showing off a 3 watt bulb they claim to be 5 watts.

You are getting lost in the weeds of an imperfect metaphor.

But I have a perfect metaphor. Should it be illegal to post a picture of a 3 watt bulb, captioned as 5 watts?

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#424

Post by quanticle »

beefield wrote: post #87
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".

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

The same way they ought to fight drugs.

Don't.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#425

Post by dvt »

kibwen wrote: post #416
dvt wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with alternatives to the "free marketplace of ideas" is that they are all (by definition) authoritative. And who's the best "authority" here? The government? Me? You? Who decides what ideas get to be censored? Imo, there's more problems with the authoritative model than the marketplace model. Kind of like Churchill's famous quote about democracy: "it's the worst form of government, except from all the oth…

This was true in practice before technology made communication and synthesized speech trivial. Unfortunately for us all, we no longer live in a world where "more speech is unambiguously better" is true. Technology has ruined the meme of free speech. I'm not saying there are any unambiguously good alternatives; we are all diminished by its loss. But clinging to its corpse isn't doing anyone any good. As for the Church…

> As for the Churchill quote, the reason that democracy has those qualities is because it inherently involves compromise.

But it's the same with free speech: you said it yourself, there's a lot of noise, that's the compromise. You don't know what the "one true Good Opinion is" until you hear from everyone, and that might include racists or nazis or whatever. I don't really think technology has anything to do with it. In fact, the printing press probably made a much larger impact on speech than the internet did (and we got through that just fine).

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#426

Post by triceratops »

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.

You've been exposed to alternative viewpoints about free speech right here in this thread and it hasn't changed your thinking one iota.

Most people aren't interested in changing their minds.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#427

Post by quanticle »

beefield wrote: post #248
EricE wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it up to companies and "western countries" to fight disinformation? Especially when it often turns out they are the biggest propagators of it?

Because their customers/voters want it? Me, I very much prefer censored HN to free speech 4chan. The question is, what are you doing here if you prefer 4chan where the "truth" is not censored?

As someone who visits both HN and 4Chan, I like having the choice. I definitely don't want the government deciding that 4Chan is illegal and wiping it off the 'Net because it contains disinformation.

When you ask, "How should governments fight disinformation," what you're really asking is, "How can governments deny their citizens the right to choose what information they read, watch or listen to." When it's phrased like that, it's not so appealing, is it?

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#428

Post by smcn »

slg wrote: post #417
smcn wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the root cause, no. I'd say the root cause is reliance on advertising for income because that means that you now need to draw as many viewers/users as possible, and that's why they start to create content which maximizes reactions or engagement.

But advertising still isn't the root cause. Why does this type of content draw more viewers?

Are you trying to say that biology is the root cause? The content is successful as it emits a reaction from us. Whether a good reaction or a bad one, we still engage with it. Whether you're binge watching a TV show you love or hate scrolling a subreddit that makes you angry, the content is designed to elicit some form of reaction that keeps you coming back or memetically passing it on.

However that is not a new development in our biology, we've always been that way. It's just that we're exploiting those aspects of ourselves more and more. Weaponising it to extract as much profit as possible.

You could go another way, I guess, and say that capitalism is the root cause as "profit at any cost" allows the justification of these actions.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#429

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

alphanullmeric wrote: post #402
NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy false equivalent, Batman! The poster's point was pretty simple: there is some speech which doesn't deserve to be fully protected to the highest possible level. Untrue commercial speech like false advertising is pretty much in that category. This is why we allow attorneys-general to bring cases against false advertisers, for example. Usually the remedy is monetary damages, but injunctive relief is also available.…

Is there a sale or not? If there's not a sale it's not advertising. If it's not advertising it should be allowed, false or not. If it is advertising it's not just speech. You lack the consistency to make your argument work. So again, I guess you're fine with arresting people over light bulbs.

> If there's not a sale it's not advertising.

This is a really strange perspective. Advertising is only advertising once the advertised product is sold? A billboard is simultaneously an advertisement and not an advertisement depending on whether the observer has purchased the advertised item?

Not the GP but no, I'm not fine with arresting people over light bulbs. I am totally cool with arresting them for fraud if it meets that standard. I am also cool with the business being fined or otherwise sanctioned for false advertisement. The product is beside the point. The deception is what the punishment is intended to address.

Re: Twitter restricted in Turkey in aftermath of earthquake

#430

Post by Sunspark »

jim_inont wrote: post #394
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".

[flagged]

If you are unhappy living in the West, there is no reason whatsoever why you cannot move to a country with more compatible values. Russia is accepting new immigrants and that is certainly an option available to you.
Post reply on HN