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

Kanye West is buying Parler

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 939 posts

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#51

Post by easrng »

rvz wrote: post #24
guerrilla wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at least we can hold them responsible when they don't deliver it. This is in contrast with the pure fascist where they cannot be held responsible for anything because they don't claim virtue in first place. What's the plan to do that when they censor all dissent on the platforms they just bought?

Then do what Gab, Gettr and Truth Social did and 'build your own platform'. If not that, then use a Mastodon instance like mastodon.social as an alternative? The only thing these networks censor is anything that is illegal in their hosted jurisdiction i.e the US.

The fediverse (network of activitypub servers, including mastodon) itself doesn't censor anything at all, but if you don't moderate your instance then other instances might decide to stop federating with you to protect their users.

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#52

Post by SilverBirch »

I think this makes sense from a business perspective. Social media is actually a surprisingly hard business to make money at - look at Twitter. It's only the superscale businesses that make good money - Facebook, Youtube, Tiktok. And the dynamic is that because these businesses are primarily making money through marketing they need to keep a fairly neutral brand in order to retain an advertiser friendly platform. So what's the alternative? The WashPo business model - find a wealthy benefactor who believes in the mission to fund it.

It doesn't necessarily have to be super expensive to run what is essentially a forum, especially if it's not going to hit massive scale. The only problem is that I don't think owning these platforms will give the kind of cultural relevance that these wealthy far-right types are chasing. So at some point they're going to lose interest and then you're back to the business model problem.

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#53

Post by mrtksn »

tgv wrote: post #34
mrtksn wrote: post #11

Musk and everyone else is right that we do need a platform with free speech. The only problem is that all those free speech advocates are actually NIMBY's when it comes to free speech. I have been following self proclaimed free speech absolutists(because I too, believe in free speech but don't believe it exists) and they are totally not the kind of people that say "I hate what you say but I will die defending your ri…

Why do we need an absolute free speech platform? What good does it do? > The only somewhat free place I've seen is 4Chan but it contains so much toxicity, that's its barely bearable. Sounds like a hint to me. There are more free speech sites, e.g. saidit.net. I would wholeheartedly recommend staying away from it: it's a cesspool, like the other reddit wannabes. Voat also comes to mind. Freedom of speech on such sites…

I think the problem lies in the impunity, not in the free speech itself. IMHO people should be allowed to say everything but they must accumulate the reputation for saying it.

If someone is a racist bigot, they shouldn't be physically restrained(deleting posts is like physically covering someones' mouth) from being bigots but they should definitely be known for it. Then it's up to the community to decide how to interact with those people. That's how we do it in real life and works pretty well.

Another thing is the amplification: people pretending to be multiple people. This is also an issue, giving wrong impression about the state of the society and must be solved.

Lastly, we need some kind of spread management. We have the problem of BS getting huge traction and the correction getting no traction. Maybe everyone exposed to something should be re-exposed to the theme once there's a new development. For example, when people share someone's photo as a suspect and it turns out that the person in the photo is not the suspect, the platform can say "remember this Tweet? Yeah, there are some doubts about it. Just letting you know". The implementation of it wouldn't need a ministry of truth but an algo to track theme developments.

IMHO if Musk manages to solve these few problems, which I think he can, a free speech social media is possible.

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#54

Post by guerrilla »

europeanguy wrote: post #27
hunglee2 wrote: post #3

makes sense to own the means of communication, to shape the narrative. Ye on Parler will present a pretty clear challenge to US norms of freedom of speech - he is a vocal anti-semite (whilst at the same time claiming to be Jewish)and I doubt very much that ownership of any platform will moderate his views.

> he is a vocal anti-semite (whilst at the same time claiming to be Jewish) You know, there's a name for this. It's called a black Israelite. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hebrew_Israelites

> According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), "Some, but not all [Black Hebrew Israelites], are outspoken anti-Semites and racists." As of December 2019, the Southern Poverty Law Center "lists 144 Black Hebrew Israelite organizations as black separatist hate groups because of their antisemitic and anti-white beliefs". Tom Metzger, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, once remarked to the Southern Poverty Law Center, "They're the black counterparts of us."

Interesting...

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#55

Post by madeofpalk »

mrtksn wrote: post #53
tgv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need an absolute free speech platform? What good does it do? > The only somewhat free place I've seen is 4Chan but it contains so much toxicity, that's its barely bearable. Sounds like a hint to me. There are more free speech sites, e.g. saidit.net. I would wholeheartedly recommend staying away from it: it's a cesspool, like the other reddit wannabes. Voat also comes to mind. Freedom of speech on such sites…

I think the problem lies in the impunity, not in the free speech itself. IMHO people should be allowed to say everything but they must accumulate the reputation for saying it. If someone is a racist bigot, they shouldn't be physically restrained(deleting posts is like physically covering someones' mouth) from being bigots but they should definitely be known for it. Then it's up to the community to decide how to inter…

Please, deleting a tweet is hardly being 'physically restrained'

> Than it's up to the community to decide how t interact with those people.

Twitter is a private company, and it chooses to run it's service how it wants. The government avoids actually physically restraining racist bigots, and lets the community decide how to deal and interact with those people. Some may chose to harbor them (Parlor, 4chan, etc), and others (like twitter) may opt to not host them.

It's not a huge social injustice if you're not allowed to tweet. Feel free to go to one of the millions of other websites, or your start your own (it's easier to do this than ever!) and see who's interested in what you have to say.

> Maybe everyone exposed to something should be re-exposed to the theme once there's a new development.

You're just reinventing content moderation!

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#57

Post by guerrilla »

brutusborn wrote: post #35
dd36 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know my left wing friends would claim the media still is right wing and truly left wing ideas are disallowed. It may be that the left wing was censored and vilified for so long that it ceased existing in the US.

What kind of ideas? I guess if you go far enough left then everything is to your right.

I mean they were literally persecuted by the United States itself, which the right has never been. McArthyism, blacklisting, banning, COINTELPRO and the most enormous propaganda campaigns in history since WWII. The US went to war with leftists and eradicated them, which is why European (and generally global) politics looks so different as many of those places didn't have such direct oppression.

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#58

Post by dd36 »

mrtksn wrote: post #53
tgv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need an absolute free speech platform? What good does it do? > The only somewhat free place I've seen is 4Chan but it contains so much toxicity, that's its barely bearable. Sounds like a hint to me. There are more free speech sites, e.g. saidit.net. I would wholeheartedly recommend staying away from it: it's a cesspool, like the other reddit wannabes. Voat also comes to mind. Freedom of speech on such sites…

I think the problem lies in the impunity, not in the free speech itself. IMHO people should be allowed to say everything but they must accumulate the reputation for saying it. If someone is a racist bigot, they shouldn't be physically restrained(deleting posts is like physically covering someones' mouth) from being bigots but they should definitely be known for it. Then it's up to the community to decide how to inter…

Agree. The big one you missed is identity. Most hate is anonymous. Being able to filter by tags like “known racist” or whatever, and seeing someone’s history of sharing misinformation is useful but most people would self-censor if their identity was known or other users would filter out those that won’t identify.

What I wonder is what Musk will do if he finds out the scales are artificially weighted towards conservative content. Like if conservative content is artificially boosted by bots and algorithms. Facebook was much more liberal before thumbs were put on the scale. I don’t remember when but I think it was Mother Jones that saw huge traffic movement changes after algo changes like a decade ago?

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/17/21520634/facebook-report...

Like what if the natural state of humanity is much more liberal than the American media and social media allow for? Will Musk allow that or will he see anything that doesn’t align with his views as error or manipulation?

What if a truly free and transparent self-moderating platform naturally promotes leftism more than a moderated but manipulated feed does?

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#59

Post by mrtksn »

madeofpalk wrote: post #55
mrtksn wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem lies in the impunity, not in the free speech itself. IMHO people should be allowed to say everything but they must accumulate the reputation for saying it. If someone is a racist bigot, they shouldn't be physically restrained(deleting posts is like physically covering someones' mouth) from being bigots but they should definitely be known for it. Then it's up to the community to decide how to inter…

Please, deleting a tweet is hardly being 'physically restrained' > Than it's up to the community to decide how t interact with those people. Twitter is a private company, and it chooses to run it's service how it wants. The government avoids actually physically restraining racist bigots, and lets the community decide how to deal and interact with those people. Some may chose to harbor them (Parlor, 4chan, etc), and o…

I don't accept that content deletion is a way to go. When an offensive content is deleted we lose the ability to jude it for urselves. The content must remain but be strictly attached to a persona so the persona can be "judged" rightfully. In real life, when we deal with these people we want to know what they did. It gives fidelity, unlike "the person said something that violates rule 4 section 3". We should stop pretending that we are not humans and embrace the human ways of dealing with human problems. There's nothing human in undoing speech.

And no, attaching follow up to organic content is not moderation.

Re: Kanye West is buying Parler

#60

Post by vikaveri »

mrtksn wrote: post #11

Musk and everyone else is right that we do need a platform with free speech. The only problem is that all those free speech advocates are actually NIMBY's when it comes to free speech. I have been following self proclaimed free speech absolutists(because I too, believe in free speech but don't believe it exists) and they are totally not the kind of people that say "I hate what you say but I will die defending your ri…

Interesting how often "free speech" seems to equate with "free to be offensive jerk". If your best argument is presented in s way that makes it sound like "You're ruining my life! I hate you forever!" then maybe you should go for a timeout and come back when you can discuss things calmly and rationally. I listen to arguments, not tantrums and swearing

Edit: typo

Post reply on HN