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

Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 903 posts

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#441

Post by dotnet00 »

verse wrote: post #396
dang wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users are flagging them. I don't think it's hard to understand why: it's a divisive and flameprone topic. Two positions that people urge us to take (different people, obviously) are (1) treat it as off topic and flag everything; or (2) have no limits, which means letting it dominate the front page. Neither of these positions are viable for HN. For reasons why I say that, see past explanations at https://hn.algolia.co…

> posting in the flamewar style What is the flamewar style?

Presumably aggrssively calling people names, spamming the replies with insults and trying to provoke others into an argument without actually expressing any ideas.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#443

Post by rayiner »

slim wrote: post #415
rayiner wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many The phrase has its origins in Arab nationalism. It was coined in 1960 by the PLO to refer to the goal of an Arab state that occupies the entirety of what was Mandatory Palestine. If you ignore the subtext of “what happens to the Jews in that situation” I suppose you can make a case for it. It’s like the confederate flag. In the 20th c…

[flagged]

Peacefully: https://www.wsj.com/articles/many-israelis-are-refugees-from...

Name one Arab-majority country where Jews live openly as equal citizens. The suggestion that “freeing Palestine from the river to the sea” would just mean a secular multi-ethnic state where Jews life peacefully among an Arab majority is willful blindness.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#444

Post by anigbrowl »

dlubarov wrote: post #428
sudosysgen wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would guidance systems increase the destruction? If anything, history has shown that precision weapons tend to reduce civilian casualties - there isn't much of a point building a single precision guided missile, instead of 100 imprecise dumb rockets, when your goal is terror bombing (the calculus is slightly different for bombs, however). > Even if Israel could limit the damage in the long term, it doesn't seem p…

> precision weapons tend to reduce civilian casualties Yes, but normally the user is targeting military assets and trying to minimize collateral damage. I think it's clear that Hamas has the opposite goal, since they typically lob unguided rockets in the general direction of population centers.

If all you have are unguided rockets, you're going to point them wherever they're most likely to hit something. If/when you have guidance systems, you can afford to be selective and concentrate on high value targets. That's how it goes in asymmetric warfare.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#445

Post by wolverine876 »

rayiner wrote: post #380
mgraczyk wrote: post #336

Interestingly if you read the actual report from HRW, it sounds like most of the material they are referring too was legitimately taken down because it supported violence, according to Meta's policies. For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many, so it was taken down. In other cases the content praised attacks by Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organization by the US go…

> For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many The phrase has its origins in Arab nationalism. It was coined in 1960 by the PLO to refer to the goal of an Arab state that occupies the entirety of what was Mandatory Palestine. If you ignore the subtext of “what happens to the Jews in that situation” I suppose you can make a case for it. It’s like the confederate flag. In the 20th c…

[flagged]

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#446

Post by cscurmudgeon »

anigbrowl wrote: post #438
trhway wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The "from the river to the sea" is a call for genocide of Israelis. No it isn't. Expressing a desire for freedom and regaining ownership of land may make occupiers uncomfortable, but that doesn't constitute genocide.

Are you okay with Israel saying 'from the river Israel will prosper'?

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/ha...

Where will Jews live if there is a Palestinian state from river to sea?

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#447

Post by anigbrowl »

rottencupcakes wrote: post #31
UrineSqueegee wrote: post #12

Eh this is really tricky, for exampe if I open instagram, Threads or tiktok 9/10 posts will be pro-palestinian with 1 being pro-israeli. Then some of the propalestinian post will be calling for genocide or celebrating the massacre of oct 7. IMO you shouldn't censor anything. That's the only solution. When something is propaganda or false just quickly tag it as such with why it is false like Xitter does.

Twitter has surprisingly become much better since Elon purchased it. The community tags are great and non-partisan, they fairly report on all inaccuracy. Even advertisers aren’t immune, I’ve seen community tags on paid ads calling them out for being drop shippers.

Pointing out yet again that Community Notes long precedes Musk's purchase of Twitter. It got going in early 2021; I was one of the first batch to sign up for it, although I think it had been in developments for a year or so before that. January 6 rattled a lot of people at Twitter so I suspect that influenced the timing of the rollout.

Perhaps the confusion is that CN was originally called 'Birdwatch' and people don't realize they're the same thing.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#448

Post by anigbrowl »

londons_explore wrote: post #168

One day, there will be a bigish war, and comms between the sides will be cut off, either by law, or all comms links severed. At that point, every global business will have to figure out how to split their business in two, their database in two, their server infrastructure in two, etc. and have both halves work. I suspect that few businesses have prepared for such an eventuality, and I suspect severe disruption can be…

In such dire straits as you describe, companies and individuals will likely be forbidden to provide any sort of commercial services to the opposing side.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#449

Post by anigbrowl »

dekhn wrote: post #274
NikolaNovak wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love, in honestly both somewhat sarcastic but mostly very real sense, that hacker news discussion of global thermonuclear war...is how to prepare your database unique ID scheme for unforeseen sharding :->

"The great EU/US Spanner schism of 2032"

METRIC WILL WIN

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#450

Post by wvenable »

UrineSqueegee wrote: post #12

Eh this is really tricky, for exampe if I open instagram, Threads or tiktok 9/10 posts will be pro-palestinian with 1 being pro-israeli. Then some of the propalestinian post will be calling for genocide or celebrating the massacre of oct 7. IMO you shouldn't censor anything. That's the only solution. When something is propaganda or false just quickly tag it as such with why it is false like Xitter does.

> IMO you shouldn't censor anything.

What is the platform for? Checking out pictures of your grandchildren and keeping up on with the knitting group or is it for an international propaganda war? If you censor nothing then it's no longer a platform, it's a war zone. You can argue that the censorship is unfair, politically skewed, etc but you can't argue that it shouldn't be done at all or there won't be one inch of the Internet not dedicated to this and every other conflict everywhere.

If HN itself went completely uncensored it would become useless to us almost immediately. Who ever posts most, wins.

Post reply on HN