Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship • Hacker News Board

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#491

Post by naasking » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 12:21 PM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #297

version_five wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ironic (or maybe appropriate) that this, talking about how better ideas don't rise to the top, is the top comment. The most abhorrent idea of all to me is that there are stupid, weak people that are worse than "us" that we need to shield from bad ideas because they are not smart enough (like we are) to handle them. Lots of support for this view in downstream comments (we're just intelligent apes etc). The strawm…

>The most abhorrent idea of all to me is that there are stupid, weak people that are worse than "us" that we need to shield from bad ideas because they are not smart enough (like we are) to handle them This is the basic hierarchical nature of any complex society. In a well functioning society those people, called elites (today already considered a derogatory term), are being funneled to the top where they're put into…

> Choices exist downstream from culture and culture itself is produced by elites

You have it backwards. People who produce or shape culture become elites, it's not that people who are already elites are the only ones producing culture (or rather, influencing it). That has very different implications from what you're describing.

In fact, elites who intentionally try to shape culture often get laughed at (cue the "Imagine" video).

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#492

Post by Cyberthal » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 12:22 PM UTC

Imagine if Mao and Sun Yat Sen were duking it out, and nerds blamed Facebook for the resulting social polarization.

Yeah man, and the printing press too. Those Protestant Reformation wars were no joke!

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#493

Post by SyzygistSix » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 12:22 PM UTC

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #481

root_axis wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook has opinions about the type of content they'd prefer not to facilitate on the Facebook platform, that doesn't make them "arbiters of morality", it just makes them curators of their product identity.

So they might say "we don't want $X type of content on our platform, as it would negatively affect our product identity". But that's in fact a moral judgement! It's saying "some people think $X is bad, and we agree with them (or at least choose to pretend to so as not to soil our image)".

I would disagree that it is a judgement based on morality. It is a judgement made by the logic of corporations, which are machines made up of people that take on a life of their own.

While the actions of organizations like this have moral consequences, and the people that are part of it have their own morals, the machinery itself does not use morality to make decisions, except in hindsight as justification.

The moral consequences may be beneficial or harmful; it is all the same to a profit machine that acts in its own interests, which transcend the people who it is made of in the form of workers and users.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#494

Post by markoman » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 12:27 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #367

markoman wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of making a snarky smear upon the faculty of what is probably the most coveted university in the world, why don't you just come out and make an informed argument on what you find so wrong with them? “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the…

They are >90% very left leaning, which is common in elite academic institutes, but such groups are typically contemptuous of average Americans and their religious views. This would set up a likely conflict, such as what we got a hint of when the masses elected Trump as a big middle finger.

Why is it that the politics of academics is found to be so distasteful, when we accept the politics of businessmen such as Peter Thiel and Rupert Murdoch as a matter of course? In a country that had always worshiped technological innovation, why are academics who provide the very seeds of this innovation, disrespected so easily?

Look where your governance-by-middle-finger got us. It got us an egomaniacal dotard, drunk on power, who shifted his politics when the opportunism suited him. His TV show got him just enough notoriety to move the needle among the masses. When he found that his toxic personality, based on name-calling and blustery bufoonery found a reception from Right-wing voters, there was nothing that could stop him from winning their side. But this was a man who could work with no one who wasn't willing to serve him without question, be they judges or legislators, and certainly a deal-breaker for our allies.

His world-view was an American centric one entirely, at a time when China had earned and demanded a role he couldn't conceive of or negotiate. Behind the scenes, he ruled a chaotic White House that was fortunately tested little. Still, the stories that escaped from this White House show that he was not to be contained by any legal constraints, and that he fostered an atmosphere where staff worked at cross-purposes to one another. Their singular focus was on the media, yet they couldn't even manage this successfully, despite the allegiance and sycophancy from Fox.

Finally, COVID-19 was the test they would not pass. Although Trump was due to receive some sympathy from his two impeachments, once America saw the reckless way he managed this pandemic and the huge toll it bore on us, there was little chance he could win the 2020 election. What we saw after the election was an unheard of nothing-to-lose strategy of trying to steal the election by any falsehood necessary, whether within the courts or in the streets. The books are coming out on the market now, but they show that our wildest dreams of what could have been happening in that White House paled when compared to horrid reality of what did.

We likely have to thank a mere few individuals such as Gen. Mark Milley, Mike Pence and such for holding together our country in the moments when it was the most vulnerable to those whose only concern was for power.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#495

Post by naasking » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 12:29 PM UTC

suzzer99 wrote: post #294

version_five wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ironic (or maybe appropriate) that this, talking about how better ideas don't rise to the top, is the top comment. The most abhorrent idea of all to me is that there are stupid, weak people that are worse than "us" that we need to shield from bad ideas because they are not smart enough (like we are) to handle them. Lots of support for this view in downstream comments (we're just intelligent apes etc). The strawm…

IMO your stance basically amounts to "propaganda doesn't work". History would suggest otherwise.

Of course propaganda works. So use it to convince people of the truth instead of just muzzling them.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#496

Post by SantalBlush » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 12:48 PM UTC

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #483

SantalBlush wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Facebook should be forced I would consider this sentiment more absurd and dystopian than Facebook freely removing content from its own website.

All governments apply rules to corporations forcing them to do or not do things. Are you in principle against that?

Not at all. I am against arbitrarily forcing them to do or not do things, which is what some people are calling for here.

I think Facebook is a terrible site, and I don't even know why anyone would want to keep using it tbh.

edit: typo

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#497

Post by SyzygistSix » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 1:19 PM UTC

MrStonedOne wrote: post #138

jsnell wrote: post #30

This all sounds very nice, but there's a bit of sleight of hand here since the article goes out of its way to avoid details. That way everyone reads into exactly what they want, and it's totally non-obvious whether this is actually a workable proposal or not. But what's the concrete proposal here? How would things actually work? Will the services be forced to accept whatever unmoderated feed of filth the linked to se…

Why does a town square need moderation? You can't just ignore the fact that social networking has become the new town square because its inconvenient

I would say that social media sites are more akin to a bar/coffee shop/pub/public house.

While free speech is not protected there by the first amendment (as far as I know), it is still important to value it broadly to create an open atmosphere. I think of the role they played in the run-up to the American Revolution and in organizing workers, and until the dawn of the internet and the plasticized commercialization of my town, the role it played in my social and artistic life.

But what you say is an excellent point about where we are now engaging in public discourse; it has changed drastically, very quickly, and there are significant concerns about free speech now that we all hang out on websites mostly owned by large corporations.

It feels gross to me. Like meeting up at the food court of Wal Mart because every other place in town has put out of business. And the town square is almost dead and gone, both online and in real life.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#498

Post by SyzygistSix » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #203

Nursie wrote: post #26

>First of all, the internet’s “marketplace of ideas” is severely lopsided at the platform level The marketplace of ideas itself has been show to be a bust in recent years, IMHO. Better ideas, better models of truth and reality don't win out. People have not shown themselves interested in intellectual debate or argument. We do not see the 'best' ideas rise to the top. And before anyone asks who I am to judge the best…

It's ironic (or maybe appropriate) that this, talking about how better ideas don't rise to the top, is the top comment. The most abhorrent idea of all to me is that there are stupid, weak people that are worse than "us" that we need to shield from bad ideas because they are not smart enough (like we are) to handle them. Lots of support for this view in downstream comments (we're just intelligent apes etc). The strawm…

I did not interpret their comment that way. I see part of the problem being that the spaces we hang out in now are not conducive to productive conversation with a variety of people and instead nurture division due to perverse incentives and poor design.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#499

Post by Clubber » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

cratermoon wrote: post #398

Clubber wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Catholic Church felt the same way about Gutenberg's press.

Gutenberg's first mass-produced book was a Latin Vulgate bible. The 40 remaining copies are among the most valuable books in the world. Gutenberg also printed indulgences for the church. It's fair to say the Catholic Church absolutely loved Gutenberg. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07090a.htm

>It's fair to say the Catholic Church absolutely loved Gutenberg.

I wasn't talking about the man, I was talking about the machine. The Catholic Church certainly didn't love it anymore once The Reformation happened. See the Catholic Church could no longer control information when lay people could read the Bible, and Martin Luther's texts. Gutenberg's press completely transformed the church's control in Europe and it lasts to this day.

https://speccoll.library.arizona.edu/online-exhibits/exhibit...

This has parallels today. The government can no longer control information via traditional media channels because the internet, in its current form, exists. They want that control back. I believe this is an attempt to regain control. The government would never shut down big tech companies, they are a great source of information for data collection.

Re: Right or left, you should be worried about big tech censorship

#500

Post by the_gipsy » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 1:55 PM UTC

tekknik wrote: post #366

the_gipsy wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You believe in the narrative ?

There was quite a public display last election about news orgs agreeing to not cover Biden in negative light so as to not hurt his chances. What would you call this?

I don’t know, newspapers support one party or another. The narrative with emphasis makes you sound like a nutjob.