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

An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#51

Post by Vicinity9635 »

archagon wrote: post #43
Vicinity9635 wrote: post #22

Meanwhile, this censored post: How strange they focus on Russia or China, rather than the censorship and propaganda being done by the US, given they are a US university. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39121693 HN is ridiculous sometimes.

“Censored”? It’s still visible, and also, maybe most people just think it’s a silly assertion.

>maybe most people just think it’s a silly assertion.

Those people are somewhere between naive and shockingly ignorant: https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/new-report-...

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#52

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

331c8c71 wrote: post #29
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions I remember an informative presentation about Russian history and culture which seems to go along with this, in particular the bit about "two words for the truth and three for the lie". https://youtu.be/kF9KretXqJw?t=2257 (time-stamped at the relevant portion but the whole talk is good)

Well I don't know about Finns but in Western Europe Russians are often considered to be a bit too direct or even blunt. Kinda contradicts the "lying culture" hypothesis. EDIT. I watched the video a bit more and I could not take it seriously after seeing the part about "technological backwardness" that apparently always was there. That's just charged propaganda and there is nothing to discuss.

Not going to disagree that the person is coming from a certain bias but the information I'm referring to is factual about words that are understood by Russians. I don't consider that all Russians are part of a lying culture but there are words which Russians use to distinguish the nuances of lying, and even the nuances of telling truths; that says something about the messages they tend to hear.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#53

Post by archagon »

Vicinity9635 wrote: post #51
archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Censored”? It’s still visible, and also, maybe most people just think it’s a silly assertion.

>maybe most people just think it’s a silly assertion. Those people are somewhere between naive and shockingly ignorant: https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/new-report-...

As someone born in Russia, I find the comparison between the "censorship" described here, and the totalitarian censorship wrought by Russia and China, to be downright offensive. Nobody gets black-bagged in the middle of the night for talking smack about the ruling powers in the US. The fact that I hear constant whining about "censorship" by the very people being "censored" on mainstream social media just points to how little of it there actually is.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#54

Post by dudul »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #31
enterprise_cog wrote: post #8

[flagged]

Yep, same for EU... we literally banned RT to not hear the other side. And let's not forget covid... how the "truth" changed overnight and everyone else was literally censored on pretty much all social networks and comment sections. Somehow we always point the fingers at others, china, russia, etc., whoever is not "our friend" at the moment, and forget the stuff that happens in our own countries.

What do you mean "not our friend at the moment"??

We've always been at war with Eurasia :)

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#55

Post by dudul »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #19

I think the biggest danger for censorship in the US is public/private censorship cooperation. The government is prohibited by the First Amendment from censoring. However, due to the centralization of the Internet, most communication passes through just a few gatekeepers. Congress holds hearing decrying content that they do not have the right to officially censor, but nevertheless use this to make their wishes crystal…

> The government is prohibited by the First Amendment from censoring.

And if there's one thing we know for an absolute fact it's that the government never does anything forbidden by the constitution.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#56

Post by mtizim »

rainworld wrote: post #48
331c8c71 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I don't know about Finns but in Western Europe Russians are often considered to be a bit too direct or even blunt. Kinda contradicts the "lying culture" hypothesis. EDIT. I watched the video a bit more and I could not take it seriously after seeing the part about "technological backwardness" that apparently always was there. That's just charged propaganda and there is nothing to discuss.

Finns still sore about losing the Winter War. Which they lost. They were defeated. They had to tap out. It’s just that they were smart enough to concede and trade a good chunk of their territory for continued statehood. A lesson lost in time.

> a lesson lost in time

What exactly are you implying?

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#57

Post by rainworld »

mtizim wrote: post #56
rainworld wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finns still sore about losing the Winter War. Which they lost. They were defeated. They had to tap out. It’s just that they were smart enough to concede and trade a good chunk of their territory for continued statehood. A lesson lost in time.

> a lesson lost in time What exactly are you implying?

HN’s supposed to be a well-informed crowd but somehow the last half-year of Ukraine-related doom and gloom in Western mainstream media simply hasn’t registered. Since you’re asking.

Knowing when to quit—it’s a lesson for everyone, of course. Knowing that when you take a gamble you could lose it all.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#58

Post by kmeisthax »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #14
kmeisthax wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of what the Church of Scientology did to USENET's alt.religion.scientology newsgroup[0]. More generally, I think the Internet is unusually useful for this kind of attack. The netheads that built it had a very specific political view - namely, that censorship is network interference with a political motive. "The Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it", and all that. Ergo, all we have to do…

Usenet was useful for this kind of attack, the internet allows you to create moderated forums that can withstand it.

USENET had moderated newsgroups, too - and there's web forums that are wholly unmoderated (or not meaningfully moderated).

Doesn't matter, though. This isn't an attack that can be solved with moderators, because the attack is not the content of the message. It's who's sending it. Our Russian dictators assume thousands if not millions of identities in order to spam the world - you as a moderator only see a randomly-generated humanoid and an unusually common sentiment. Yes, you could just ban the sentiment, but now you're accidentally censoring legitimate speech by unrelated parties.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#59

Post by mtizim »

rainworld wrote: post #57
mtizim wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a lesson lost in time What exactly are you implying?

HN’s supposed to be a well-informed crowd but somehow the last half-year of Ukraine-related doom and gloom in Western mainstream media simply hasn’t registered. Since you’re asking. Knowing when to quit—it’s a lesson for everyone, of course. Knowing that when you take a gamble you could lose it all.

I knew what you were implying of course, I just wanted to see it written explicitely.

It's funny to see a russian sockpuppet under an article about propaganda.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#60

Post by rainworld »

mtizim wrote: post #59
rainworld wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN’s supposed to be a well-informed crowd but somehow the last half-year of Ukraine-related doom and gloom in Western mainstream media simply hasn’t registered. Since you’re asking. Knowing when to quit—it’s a lesson for everyone, of course. Knowing that when you take a gamble you could lose it all.

I knew what you were implying of course, I just wanted to see it written explicitely. It's funny to see a russian sockpuppet under an article about propaganda.

Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

PS: https://twitter.com/CatSmarterThanU/status/16631726141167616...

Can’t say I know any Poles irl but that certainly matches the impression one gets on-line.

Post reply on HN